Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "EU Made Simple" channel.

A higher turn out doesn't make the EU anymore democratic, does it?
14
Bye bye democracy.
9
If the EU wants to survive it must abolish policies that member states are not in favour of. The EU should limit itself to the common interest instead of the unelected wanting to govern the member states from Brussels.
8
@autumnjacaranda106 Only Dutch nationals can vote for these Dutch candidates for Dutch seats in the EP. You can try to slur nationalism to silence any alternative for globalism, but all our democracies are build on nationalism.
7
No, more democracy and therefore far less EU is the future.
7
@e.i.l.9584 Feelings over facts? The EU is undemocratic and antidemocratic by design, the EP elections are democratic facade. Democracy is about power, not about having a say or feeling represented.
6
@bionicle37 It has nothing to do with pride or other feelings. Nationalism is striving for or keeping a nation state. A nation state is a territory a govenment has jurisdiction on to serve the people who live there. The nation state has brought us democracy, worker rights, environmental protection, cycle lanes, international relations, education for all, health care for all etc. The world order is that of nation states, the product of natiionalism, some want to destroy that order for globalism and smear nationalism to advance that, but democracy, the rule of law and government serving the people can not exist without nation states and therefore nationalism.
4
@Bleilock1 Mass immigration is neoliberal.
4
Mr. No became Mr. Yes mein Führerin under Rutte of couse, as predicted. But keep regurgitating EU propaganda.
3
@e.i.l.9584 No, democracy is about real concrete powers of the elected so the voters can change the way they are governed. For it to be a democracy the elected should have full legeslative powers and appoint and sack the executive power. They should also be elected by the people they decide over. The nationalistic candidacy is a form of divide and rule on top of that. The fact is that I can't vote for or against the vast majority of the people who are going to decide little over me as they are in parliament, and not all for the ones with the real power, the EC. Going trough the motions of democracy, like voting at a polling station, does not make a democracy. Kim Jong IL, Stalin, Putin, Ceaucescu, they all knew that.
3
Bullshit EU propaganda. It wasn't a proper constitution because it didn't limit powers of the different institutions towards eachtother and the member states. They had done a terrible job to allow for an ever growing dynamic of integration, a continuous shift of power from the elected to the unelected. It was designed to make the people of the member states have less democracy, not more. The Dutch people didn't vote for the replacement treaty, that's a lie. The referendum was ignored with the treaty being different used an excuse. So what we have now is the constitution we voted against in a large majority, and we have lost our souvereignty and therefore our democracy, so the No voters are proven to be right. It was forced through by the political parties that supported the constitution. Corporate profits have soared, people pay more in taxes for less, social cohesion is down the drain and the people on food help have more than tenfolded.
3
@Bleilock1 Mass of course. People will always migrate for very individual and personal reasons. Mass immigration happens because of economics. But immigration describes a dynamic process, not at static state, so a country can't have keep the same mass immigration without changing massively. Either NL changes it's immigration policy radically, or it changes itself radically. The suggestion proponents of mass immigration often do is that it's something static and we can just stay the same with the same immigration policy. It is neoliberal because for the international corporatocracy an asylumseeker on Dutch welfare consumes more and generates more profit than being middle class in Africa or the Middle East. GDP has to increase for them, not GDP per capita, and not Dutch wealth but how much money is made off the Dutch and other people living in the Netherlands. Housing getting much more expensive is free money to those who own, and free money for the banks. And people can't say no to housing, everybody needs it, so you can make money without having to come up with something that people want, you only have to own what people need. Hardcore neoliberal. Mass immigration is not serving the Dutch, it makes them poorer, unsafer and less of a society, so who was the last government really serving?
3
Far right? The right won, the pro EU left ( a contradictio in terminis actually) lost but that is obscured by their fusion and the greater number of seats thanks to the mass immigration since the last EP elections. It is not the landslide as for the real democratic elections of november, but that's because of the low voter turnout for this democratic facade for the EU. We know exactly what the EU shills are trying to do here, but the shift to EU skeptic right has been confirmed.
3
@timurkuseli5100 I don't know. There is a huge income and cost of living gap, we already got Eastern-European criminal gangs here who know crime is more profitable here. Not all immigrants come to be part of society, there are the ones that fail, but also the ones that don't want to at all.
3
@lightworker2956 Why should the EU be in the kind of politics that member states would want to veto?
2
You can barely call it a democratic mandate because the EP hardly has a mandate. The democratic problem is within the EU, and it's by design.
1
@bionicle37 I'm on twitter, do so random opiniated posts there too but mostly in Dutch.
1
There is hardly any Volt outside the Netherlands. It's a so called European party that has one seat in one national election for the small national corner of the "European" parliament.
1
@Stormcloakvictory Stelt niks voor buiten Nederland, waar ze heel vaak op tv komen maar ook maar heel weinig voorstellen.
1
The EU is designed to circumvent democracy, not to be one. If you can't vote for the vast majority of the candidates, they don't represent you. It's divide and rule, and the EP isn't even a proper legaslative body while so much money is thrown at the members that they are for more EU minded than the people they claim to represent. Window dressing for a technocratic dictatorship serving corporate interests.
1
How is this even a possibility? She has illegally removed her texts with Pfizer, she is corrupt and there is a criminal prosecution pending against her.
1
@slavianalbanovich9025 There are several possible models of democracy but there has to be a chain of mandate between the voter and the ones exercising power over those voters. The EU is designed to not have the voters determine and change how they are governed by the EU.
1
@paul1979uk2000 Don't give me that ** , the EU has the habit of demanding referenda until there is one yes and then there is no way back. Not the mention the fact that the Dutch and the French referenda had to be overruled sneakily to get the current EU. A supranational organization like the EU should have much more popular support by earning it. Blocking trade with neighbouring countries is it's main offer though. The EU system is unique among democracies because it's antidemocratic by design. Has nothing to do with direct elected executive power but everything with the EP not having legaslative power and the divide and rule system that is the election set up.
1
@slavianalbanovich9025 No, you can't say it's democratic just because there is an assembly of elected people.
1
@paul1979uk2000 Mr. EU shill video maker is deleting my comment in true EU democratic fashion so I' m not going to bother again with an answer.
1
@slavianalbanovich9025 It's the cargo cult science of democracy what you are demonstrating here. Just going through the motions like those make democracy.
1
@nvelsen1975 The people that are governed over should elect that government or the representatives that control that government. That is not the case with the EP because we can't vote for the EP, only for a small national corner. I.E. lots of people I can't vote for at all decide over me and that is antidemocratic. On top of that, the elected aren't even legislator. That's also antidemocratic nonsense. The elected, how flawed their election is democratically, don't form the highest body, the highest power, but are only a secundary influence. The EC is not working for the EP and not working for the member states, but is enjoying the vacuum in between to do whatever these unelected want.
1
@nvelsen1975 An elected parliament is often a necessity to have democracy but doesn't guarantee democracy. You simply have no clue what democracy is. Putting on a white coat and stethoscope doesn't make you a doctor either.
1
@nvelsen1975 Sukkeltje.
1
And it lost an even bigger share because the Netherlands got more seats because of the mass immigration of the past 5 years.
1
The only real benefit of EU membership is not being excluded from free trade with neighbouring countries by the EU. That's not really a benefit but a punishment for leaving, and free trade was not brought by the EU but by the EEC. To have free trade with our neighbours we need to accept the political agenda of the unelected and the corrupt, that's where we after allowing creeping power grabs to happen. I am not opposed to European cooperation in global matters but the EU fails in that because it's busy taking over power in national matters. Van der Leyen and a whole lot of other EUans beloing in jail and I'm actually looking forward to the defenestrations of Brussels.
1
You can't tell the history of Belgium without telling how the Netherlands got split between North and South in the first place, in 1581 and it was not because of the rebellious Belgians. They were only together for 15 years and as the result of the British wanting a buffer kingdom in front of republican France, ending the Dutch Republic that had been the Northern Netherlands for over 2 centuries. The Northern Netherlands were 40% catholic too, but the Dutch Republic had religious tolerance and split off the Spanish Habsburg Empire for that reason while the catholics still wanted to annihilate protestantism and jews where ever they ruled. So the Dutch state was protestant to allow for multiple religions and did indeed refuse too much power for the catholic church in the South.
1
@silasmobhall9587 "geert wilder party" is not far right. Reform is not far right. Being opposed to the radical change of your country by mass immigration, always a policy of the economic hard right, is not extreme in any way. It's government serving foreigners and foreign interests rather than those of the people it's supposed to represent and people vote against that perversion of democracy. You accusing them of racism for that is just so you feel you don't have to defend the indefensible.
1
@felixgarcia9650 I'm not into Austrian specifics, but in general European countries can't stay more or less the same with the same mass immigration policy, because that is changing the countries and their societies quite fast and drastically. The left likes to pretend the immigration doesn't come on top of the already present immigrants, but that is of course false.
1
64% voted in a referendum against the current set up of EU.
1
You have to call a completely reasonable and moderate set of views far right for it to be shocking. Just say the conservatives that oppose the radical change of society have won and there is nothing shocking abou it.
1
Candidates you can't vote for becasue they are foreign don't represent you. Party politics don't change that, this is a travesty of democracy and no YT EU shill can change that.
1
People don't understand what the EU is designed to do. It's a continuous power grab from democracies to the unelected who serve the international corporate world and not the member states citizens. Mass immigration is not only the easiest way to increase GDP, at the expense of tax payers but that doesn't matter, it also undermines national identities and social cohesion, which leads to less power for the member states and their democracies.
1
@olliestudio45 The Netherlands doesn't benefit from the EU, but from the free trade with it's neighbours that is held hostage by the unelected of the EU. All that the EU does more than just facilitating free trade is detrimental to the Netherlands. And then there is the euro of course, it's corrupt policies in breach of it's treaty has hit the Dutch pensions and savings extremely hard. Only in the last 3 years the Dutch have lost a quarter of their money to the ECB's money printer to keep Italian banks on life support.
1