General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Luredreier
TLDR News EU
comments

Comments by "Luredreier" (@Luredreier) on "TLDR News EU" channel.

Previous
4
Next
...
All

@kawinfinityThe invasion sucked, but that was the actions of the state, not of civilians.
2
 @Leo-it1lo Exactly.
2
@jeroencrabbe Yeah, and sure, you are free to think that they demanding French is rude and it is. But you have no right to force them to use Flemish unless you are interacting with them in a setting where you are a customer or client and they are meant to serve your needs. Meaning in a government setting or a company. As far as politeness is concerned I'd expect the lingua franca to be French in southern Belgium and Flemish in the north. If a walloon moves north and still expect everyone to speak French to them and makes no effort to learn the local language then they are being rude. And you're under no obligation to humor them. If you're in the south and know French, then of course you should use the language. If you don't know the language and expect to live down there you should learn it. You are two ethnic groups sharing one country, and both of you have a right to respect for your own culture and language from the other.
2
@jakel8627 Yeah, that's just not how it works. Indeed the EU and the council of Europe is making a huge amount of effort to protect small languages. There's languages in Europe that had less then 100 speakers just a few years ago that's growing today. And many small languages are experiencing growth these days, with a increasing number of people using them as their first language at home. This is even the case within the UK with Cornish, a language that was essentially dead, but it's growing now.
2
 @Leo-it1lo Exactly. It's legitimate to promote a language with carrots if you want and you feel it needs protection. But you have no right to outright harm other languages.
2
@ion282 I live in Norway, most of us speak Norwegian. However I used to live in Sápmi, in a Sami speaking village for a while. Living there I of course had classes to learn northern Sami (the local language), but I had classes in Norwegian (in elementary school we had 3 classes at each level, one of them being Norwegian). We where just 3 students at my level speaking Norwegian however, so when one of them decided thy had learned enough Sami to want to take classes in Sami (and the municipality decided to cut the funding for translation services before my mother could learn Sami) we ended up being forced to move, within our own country. See why I'm a bit pissed at you guys right now? Every language and every minority has *rights*.
2
@RoninTF2011 Given that this is decades ago now and many of them are literally born there and that others lived there during previous periods under Russian rule, like under the Tzar... Yeah, you're still on the wrong side of ethics mate.
2
Also, for our minorities there is whole school education. When I went to school in Sápmi I couldn't have math classes or history etc with my Sami peers because I did not understand their minority language that was their language of instruction, so I had ro have separate classes in Norwegian.
2
@MantasJurkuvenas It is. You have every right to be pissed at Russia for landing so many Russians within your borders. But you don't have a right to be pissed at any of them that where *civilians*.
2
@sri33333 Yes, and that convention is something that a state has violated. You have every right to be pissed at Russia for that and indeed they're just as responsible as you with finding solutions. But said civilians are a different matter. Whatever that convention says they're living there now. Such conventions are about how states act towards each other. But other treaties govern how we treat *civilians*.
2
@titosyettos2689 You can't expect anyone to follow rules or norms that don't respect them in return. You started of without giving citizenship to the ethnic Russians. And treating them as second class citizens. It's not weird at all that they're reluctant to integrate with you. And that's your fault, not theirs at this point.
2
@RoninTF2011 The point is that someone (I've lost count by now) in this thread where arguing that Latvians etc has a right to the country because you've been there long term, while they're "new". We're pointing out that they're a diverse group, with people that arrived as traders while you where under western powers and people who arrived under the Tzar as well as people who arrived during the USSR. This is people who have lived in the country for generations as well as people who arrived in their own lifetimes. And even the ones who arrived in their own lifetimes have built up lives there. They're people, like your neighbors and friends. And in your mind you've reduced them to "other" strangers people who can't be trusted and that don't deserve rights. As for them, well, faced with this kind of distrust, why should they wish to integrate with people who don't respect them? Instead of proving the Russian propaganda wrong and earning their trust you're treating them as second class citizens. This is really quite simple. Is the rules they live by something you would want to live under if the rules where reversed? Would you give up Latvian if you found yourself not even treated as a citizen in a country you live in? Learning a language is hard to begin with. And learning it to deal with people treating you like that?
2
@sebe2255 You should be able to learn at school in your regional language. But I assume at least that you where fluent in the language of instruction? That's not the case here. We're talking about kids who haven't learned the language of instruction before they're expected to learn complicated concepts in it. That has been proven to reduce school performance. And it's that kind of behavior that we have had to apologize to our minority for here in Norway, because it was human rights violations.
2
@RoninTF2011 It has nothing to do with laziness or their arrogance. You don't learn a language if it's not useful to you. By excluding Russian speakers you created that bubble. Look at any country in the world with a ghetto. And compare it to countries without ghettos. You'll see that the difference is that the minority in question is subject to discrimination of some kind and does not feel respected by the majority population. It leads to crime and alienation. The ghettos in question often have their own dialects at a minimum if not full blown separate languages. And it's a result of faulty goverment policies, not the minority population itself, be that former slaves, immigrants, or indigenous populations. Anyone that's being excluded by society. And it's not just laws, it's peoples behavior too. Hostile language in the public debate, exclusionary behavior etc. We've all made similar mistakes at some point or other. And we're still paying for our actions. Because repairing this kind of damage takes time. As for throwing anyone out, trust me, if you do that you'll lose support in the west in moments. We might still be legally required to answer in case you get invaded, but I'm fairly sure that we're not actually technically required to have troops stationed in your country. If you want other countries to go past the bare minimum required like we have with Ukraine you need to actually stay sympathetic. And trust me, this is not a good look to those of us outside your country...
2
 @MegaBanne No, you wouldn't. You're pissed at Macron, not the French people...
2
@kenningtonrund282 As a European I totally get that sentiment, and partially share it. But please try to understand that the situation is difficult for Europe. Even if Europe threw its full support behind the US and Taiwan the military capabilities that far away from the continent would be limited. But we'd still be potential targets for Chinese nukes. Also when it comes to non-nuclear conflicts... Europe is mainly a economic powerhouse. This conflict with Russia has been quite damaging in that regard, we can't be in a economic conflict with Russia and China both at once, only one of them. Can you perhaps have a look at some of Peruns recent videos? Before the war in Ukraine I feel like he didn't really understand Europe. But he has improved greatly and seems to have a pretty solid grasp of our geopolitical situation now.
2
There's a lot of debate about this topic on the far left in Norway these days. It seems like the far left is starting to think that NATO is a necessary evil, at least short term, because of the behavior of the recent behavior of Russia. But that ideally better alternatives should be found. At the moment though they're leaning towards membership in solidarity with Ukraine. So the previous stance that we should leave the organization is losing strength in favour of remaining but criticizing it from the inside.
2
A federations just can't cover all the needs of all the nations in Europe. A confederate model is preferable I believe, and this drive towards federalisation is part of why my country has turned down membership twice. But an European army (that's not too big and that has proper confederate oversight) could be useful.
2
@kennethstople3969 MDG is only seen as a one issue party, far more issues that they're covering then just the climate. That said, the massive amounts of new voters and members are starting to have a impact on the policies of the party, changing them.
2
What does "based" mean in this context?
2
@processlayer1212 Actually, the electoral college isn't the issue at all, it's the first past the post system. Change how each state picks what representatives to send to the electoral college, the senate and the house and you'd no longer have a problem. Picking a president or prime minister indirectly isn't a problem at all, and this is infact how most of Europe pick our prime ministers...
2
@StoutProper Not really, I'm referring to the split of the Roman empire into a western Latin speaking and eastern Greek speaking part and everything that happened after that... The murder of the heir to the Austria-Hungarian throne (who was also someone who was against his fathers repression of minorities and democracy etc) is of course a part of that... But seriously we've been burned in the region for well over 2 000 years... Everything from Lydian pirates and Celts (and others) attacking the Greeks, to our time. The soldiers of European civilizations have been massacred in their tens of thousands in the Balkans for all of recorded history... The rugged terrain and its location between the Slavic speaking world, the Greek and Roman part of the Roman empire, the Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, the Catholic and Muslim world, and locals like the Albanians who have been there from ancient times... The Danube river... The region has just always been a nightmare to deal with for us... And for locals as well... The only sensible thing is to try to let each country be in peace with their own peoples and cultures and try to work on the ethnic tension, and maybe in 3-4 generations we can defuse the situation enough to make the region as semi-normal part of Europe... But just like us nordics it's always going to be populated by fiercely independence minded locals who will never kowtow to the major powers of Europe. It's going to be a slow processes to find solutions that works for everyone... And it will entail compromises that no one are happy with.
2
@hokton8555 H and FrP where in a coalition from 2013 to 2020. V was a part of the coalition from 2018. KrF from 2019, and FrP left the coalition last year. The two centrist parties doesn't want to be in a coalition with FrP at all, H want all four of them. FrP wants just H. On the left wing side SP doesn't want R, SV or MDG, just Ap. Ap wants SV and SP but not R or MDG. SV wants AP, R and MDG but not SP. MDG definitely does not want FrP, but the younger members also managed to push through a preference for the left wing in the party congress, so they want the same SV, R, Ap and MDG option that SV does. V and KrF wants a H, V, KrF cabinet, but I think they're open for including MDG, not that it matters much. SV, SP and AP looks like they're going to have enough seats themselves to get the cabinet. But SV still would like to get MDG and R included to weaken the bargaining power of SP. And both SV and SP knows that they'll need each other if they want a left wing cabinet. Theoretically AP or SP could of course enter a coalition with H. But a large part of the reason why SP has been growing is the centralization policies carried out by H. So I doubt that SP would go that way, their voters wouldn't like that this election. And AP would like to have the prime minister and to have the most power in a coalition as the biggest party in the country, and they're used to opposing H, so I doubt that they would accept a coalition with H.
2
@hokton8555 You're right. H has friendly relations with FrP. H thinks of FrP as irresponsible but they share some values and get along okey. But honestly everyone can work with FrP on a case by case basis, but only H actually wants to enter a coalition with them. V, KrF and/or SP can probably be convinced to do so after a coalition if they are offered huge concessions though. MDG is open to H, SP, V and KrF but not FrP (the only climate change sceptics in our parliament). FrP is similarly sceptical towards the smaller parties in our parliament and might be open to electoral reforms that harm them if other parties wants that, and we're probably going to have a review of our electoral system soon due to the centralisation steps taken by H in the last two terms that kind of messes with the electoral circles we have and therefore indirectly with the electoral circles we have.
2
In western European countries (outside the british islands) their political manifesto and what they actually do in parliament tends to align fairly well. Not always a 1:1 ratio, but you get a pretty decent idea about what's going on. In part because we have so many political parties here that have real power that you don't end up with the compromises within parties that you often see in political systems with fewer parties. Instead the compromises happens between parties leaving it to the voters to balance the relative power between the parties.
2
Right Wing Actually I think it might be important. And some European nations *do*. Look at Belgium, and indeed Switzerland. There's other ways of ensuring such seats though then making it entierly race based if different ethnic groups tend to live in different areas you can use that to ensure that everyone is represented. The thing about democracy is that an exact 1 to 1 seats to votes ratio isn't always desirable. That's one of the few things the Americans actually got right. I live in Norway. Here the electoral circles gets representation not just based on population but also based on land area. The effect of that is that urban areas, especially the capital gets less representation while rural areas, especially far north gets more representation. That was a conscious choice made by our politicans when creating our electoral circle. Yes, that means that my vote as a urban citizen is less valuable vote for vote then someone living further north. But the thing is, us urban voters are going to dominate the parliament either way. But it's there to represent all of us, and the more different views are represented and have real power to back up those views the better. We in the cities don't know how it is to work as a farmer or fisherman in rural parts of Norway. We don't know what it takes to make these rural industries work. By giving them more of a voice we ensure that they can't just be ignored by the larger parties as they could if the system was fully representative. In NZ the same is true for the Maori. The Non-Maori population is going to dominate the parliament either way, but by ensuring a certain amount of representation for the Maori you ensure that their issues are given a fair shake. That their traditions are valued and protected. That their culture won't just die away. Doesn't mean that they're suddenly going to run the country themselves. They'll still need support from non-Maori representatives in order to form a goverment. And their votes are outnumbered by the non-Maori population so in the end it's the non-Maori population that's going to end up deciding the balance of power anyway. It's not in the majoritis best interest to always get a 1 - 1 ratio of seats to votes either. So for instance back to Norways example. We in the cities still need the rural areas resources in order to survive. We need the grain, milk, meat, fish, wood etc, all of those rural resources. If no one lives out there and makes use of the resources our country simply can't effectively make use of one of our advantages, the large amount of land and sea that we have compared to our population size. So giving up some power to them is in our own best interest. The same applies to supernational organizations like the EU. People make such choices for a reason, giving up power in order to reach goals that are deemed desirable. In Norways case that's keeping our rural areas alive ensuring better use of our resources by giving up some of our political power to those areas. In New Zealand giving up power to a minority in order to keep them a proud culture that keeps existing into the future, and therefore can help for instance promote tourism through ensuring that New Zealand still have that side of itself remain unique in the world.
2
@ari54x Thank you for the explaination. =) I also read up more on the system and related systems. Quite a interesting read. =)
2
@astronicart I would suggest full proporsjonality like here in Norway. But with two tiers. Multiple smaller constituencies with no voter threshold where seats are distributed proportionally within the constituency, just merge some of your current constituencies for this. If there's any issues some constitutes can be given additional seats at this level. Then another level of proportional representation in a full country constituency where seats are awarded proportionally, but taking into account seats already awarded at a lower level. Since France is big you could also make that system three tiered if desired. The higher/bigger tiers can distribute seats between parties based on the whole constituency while also spreading the seats around said constituency. In Norway 150 of the seats are in 19 smaller constituencies, and 19 seats are at a higher level. Higher tier seats and include a voter threshold to encourage merging of smaller parties without discouraging splitting of smaller ones or stopping smaller parties from forming. So you could for instance have constituencies made up of 5-7 seats, 3-5 seats decided locally, 1 seat going together with the 1 from several others in the area to make up 3-5 in a region for the regional proportionality, then the last going to a national level, or you could have 4-6 seats pr constituency and just have a bit more constituencies at the mid tier so one of the mid tier seats is reserved for the national level? Something like that. Each region is then guaranteed a high level of representation while the relative power between the political parties is still governed by the total number of seats at a national level. It helps avoid places like Paris having all the power while the regions are ignored, while also giving high population areas a say. Small political parties can be represented but some seats can be excluded from the smaller parties making it easier for the larger ones to actually forming a government without needing every single small party on board, yet they may end up as king makers occasionally ensuring that a vote for them isn't wasted.
2
@dutchuncle3310 Look up the various nordic alphabets and you'll see that he's not the user of one of them.
2
 @chromenewt From what I understand "Rus" used to be a collective term for Slavs back in the day (after the whole Vikings thing) before Muscowy started claiming that inheritance.
2
2:24 Furthermore there's more then one definition of where Europe ends and Asia begins, and in some of them there's some Armenian territory within Europe (although the majority of the country is definitely outside, snd most definitions doesn't include Armenia at all)
2
@gammarayneutrino8413 He has great videos on a lot of electoral systems, not seen a good one for proportional systems though. At least not the one in my country.
2
Probably not, as the inflation is baked into peoples wage negotiations at this point... But perhaps the increase will slow down for a bit...
2
 @superspeederbooster Um, the Nazies where moderately right wing (compared to the political center of Germany at the time) while being socially conservative and very authoritarian.
2
@tancreddehauteville764 The Nazies where extremely authoritarian from the start. In terms of economic policy they had a mix however with both left wing and right wing policies leaning slightly right overall. They always focused on populism for the middle class with some elements of socialism and some of capitalism.
2
@Worldaffairslover It makes a lot of sense. For instance in my country we have a Christian Peoples Party, they're socially conservative (although definitely democrats), but they care about their fellow man (love thy neighbor etc) so they're in favour of support for the poor in both my country and abroad through developmental aid etc and have always cared about human dignity. Likewiseif you believe in all forms of libertarianism you can believe in both personal freedom and corporate freedom. Our Liberal Party holds that stance. Slightly less then half of my countrys voters actually vote for our labour party (social democrats) or the conservatives (economically liberal while slightly socially conservative)
2
@PetterssonRobin Nah, this was the center party and the left that shared had responsibility. Since the left knew S couldn't rule without the center party and that the center party wouldn't accept any budget with their influence demanding such a change was endangering the coalition, and the center party refusing any budget influenced by the left caused the goverment to fall. It's not like the Greens hadn't made their position on the SP clear a long time ago... It would have been better if S, C and V sat down to negotiate some kind of compromise instead of just posing ultimatums against eachother like that. Or alternatively if C isn't willing to cooperate with V at all then they shouldn't support either directly or indirectly a goverment that's ruling with their help.
2
@axl4r Lockdowns have been tested before and are known to work. If they're the best approach or not is of course debatable, but that they work isn't. As for Sweden having a holistic approach, no, not really... There are countries that like Sweden has remained fairly open like for instance Iceland where the main step taken against the disease is extensive testing and contact tracing and has managed to successfully fight the disease, statistics from countries like that seems to be more promising then the lock-down approach. But Sweden hasn't done either. Extensive testing or extensive contact tracing or extensive lock-down, one of the three has to be used to defeat the virus if high death tolls are to be avoided. Sweden hasn't done any of those. Some countries tries to do as much as they can of all three. But testing requires lab capacity and components. Contact tracing only works if the percentage of the population infected is low or if their privacy is invaded, and lock-down has significant penalties for both the economy and peoples personal freedom. The exact mix of the three that's ideal is of course yet to be determined and is being tested in countries around the world.
2
Yep, the Swiss model is one of the best ones out there. I still prefer ours here in Norway, and I think the MMP nations likes theirs too. But either way, these systems ensures that everyone gets their points of view represented in some way.
2
@laettaextrafit5607 If the Greens keeps growing that might split up the traditional rainbow coalitions of Germany in favor of more changing coalitions in the future. That might give left wing parties left of the labor party a new chance to come to power. Like they do in my own country, Norway.
2
Um, not really seeing why our government here in Norway would take part in anything like this? What would be their motivation? And our intelligence activities are monitored by representatives from multiple political parties, if Norway did this we'd have several parties likely aware of it... Including some that I suspect would not be all that happy about that kind of activities together with the US... While they'd obviously not say anything outright I'd expect some kind of hints at least that something was off around that time if this really happened...
2
@drzoidnilsson73 You're Swedish? A big part of Sweden's energy mix us from things like hydropower... If the gulf stream dies those hydropower plants won't do us much good. Neither in Sweden nor Norway. Solid ice can't drive turbines... It has to melt first. Also, glaciers and ocean currents both tends to matter quite a bit in terms of where you can expect rain. You need heat to evaporate water, without the gulf streams the airs above the Atlantic will end up becoming an awful lot drier. And Sweden is already east of the mountains, in their rain shadow... As for burning woods... The trees won't like the cold... Coal is not exactly popular given its consequences... Nuclear takes to long to build safely, especially while following the laws in most countries as everyone wants power, but no one wants a powerplant in their back yard, even when it isn't a nuclear one... Your kids might not enjoy sitting in front of their computers etc if that happens...
2
Supply and demand. Reduce supply and costs will go up, reducing usage till supply can catch up, a lot of the people financing industry is also quitting the oil industry, so there's less investment in new exploration and exploitation. And there's a lot of political and diplomatic pressure towards putting an end to oil too. It will happen, the question is just when, and how big the climate impact on the world will be. Green movements are attacking the fossile fuel industries on all fronts, not just the supply side.
2
Every generation rebels against the older ones at some point... Right wing populists are profiting from that... It's not about the old systems "not working" pr say, but people want something different. So the major parties of the past like labour and the conservatives are losing power in my country while smaller parties are growing, especially parties that hasn't ruled before on both the left and right.
2
@yusteryumeister4601 This is fundamentally a UK news channel. So it's natural that their coverage of the UK is more accurate then that of non-anglophone countries. They're doing a good job researching things. But unlike big news outlets they don't have people on the ground. Big outlets do have people on the ground, but have limited funding pr reported news compared to the cost of their total staff, so while they of course have individual news that's extremely well researched because it's deemed important there's also going to be lower priority news that's covered but where the news are reported without as high quality research as would have been required for a 100% accurate news story. Different outlets will have different prioritization of different topics, so you'll get the best coverage by using multiple sources. Ideally from multiple nations.
2
@Sungamton I don't believe that APs issue is corruption as much as just lack of experience. A lot of conservatives has a background from the corporate world and have more experience with dealing with possible legal liability and having lots of lawyers to remind them at every opportunity... So they're perhaps slightly better at building systems that picks up issues before they're created on average in that regard I think AP people have a slightly more varied background but often only have their leadership experience from running parts of the party, and nothing else... Or if they have it's local governments and regional ones etc... Meaning that if they've never been taught about things that can help avoid issues they don't do those things simply because they're blissfully unaware...
2
The issue isn't just sharing our waters with the EU (Norway is in a similar situation), but rather that EU fishery policy is a mess that's unsustainable. I don't know the details right now, but last time we here in Norway voted on joining the EU or not they only counted fish taken to shore in the quota and permitted dumping of fish in EU waters meaning that a lot of fish died without ever being taken ashore and counted against the quotas meant to stop overfishing. Obviously that's a big issue for nations like Norway and Iceland... It also doesn't help that the EU doesn't really take issues like uneven conditions into account for laws in a lot of cases. Post delivery has to be privatized even in nations where large parts of the nation lives in areas that's commercially unviable for such services as post delivery and railway services but where the profits from the profitable areas could help subsidize rural areas reducing the overall cost on the state. EU laws are often making assumptions that's only true in high population density areas, warmer climates or on flatter lands. Hence why Denmark and Sweden just about can justify joining but Norway and Iceland and Switzerland can't.
2
@minerva BE Hey, as a Belgian, how do you feel about the suggestion I made elsewhere in this comment field (not this thread) about how to solve the issue? It's based on the Norwegian model but leaving out our use of land area as a part of our system for defining how many seats a electoral circle is given. (So square km and number of citizens both counting towards how many seats we have in a electoral circle, but I don't think that part of our system would be useful in Belgium, but I think other aspects of it might be)
1
@JL-yi2tm 60 000? That's even less then the Sami population in Norway (80 000) who also got their own Parliament btw...
1
@no_rubbernecking It depends on the nation, in some nations it's enforcable, in others not so much. But in either case not holding up your end is generally not a good idea for a political party once you commit to such a contract...
1

Previous
4
Next
...
All