Is the EU Democratic? Does Your Vote Matter?

Which is about the equal to the EU. Council of the EU [1] has similar function as the senate in the US. The council is made up of the heads of governments, as elected, by the member countries. The council proposes the commission, which is then left for the EU parliament to confirm. This very close, pretty much about equal to the election process of the US senate before the 17th amendment in 1912.[2] The difference being no popular vote for the president. As is the case for the "head of state" for pretty much all European countries. Exceptions are only France? The major difference is that only the commission has the right to legislative initiative. To balance this the EU parliament can dissolve the commission based on a vote of no confidence. So all in all, it's a truly democratic system with all the checks and balances. The major difference is the lack of cross European parties, thus your choice becomes collected together in the same basket as what your chosen party thinks is the right path. Completely through representative democracy, either from the head of government or European parliament. [1]: link [2]: link [3]: link [4]: Kurzgesagt - Is the EU Democratic? Does Your Vote Matter? ▶ this video

> > Ursula von der Leyen was not elected by EU citizens > But was she not elected by EU members of parliment, who were elected by EU citizens? This is a common argument when criticizing the EU, but in the end everybody is elected by the people of EU (directly or indirectly). Here is a quick video explaining how it works: ▶ this video

Thanks for taking the time to think about it. > Democracy itself always gives rights to the majority against the will of the minority. this is true and it has a name I believe; the "Tyranny of the Majority", I think. > The tyranny of the majority (or tyranny of the masses) is an inherent weakness to majority rule in which the majority of an electorate pursues exclusively its own objectives at the expense of those of the minority factions. Unfortunately, as you mentioned, being _more democratic_ ultimately lends itself to being this way. However one neat trick the EU has (and I promise I'm not trying to spin this as pro-EU, as it's only in one place): is that the direct votes are split proportionally. This means that lesser represented groups get a voice in the EU parliament. For the UK with their "First past the post" system, and winner take all government; where a party like UKIP can get 12.6% of all votes and win 0 representation in parliament.... well, lets say it's a stark contrast. explained very nicely; here: link The EU voting system (the way in which we elect MEPs to parliament) is detailed in this video by the BBC: link ; as you'll see it's much more representative. I know of other videos that speak pragmatically about the EU, its problems and if it's worth it (though with a slight pro-EU stance): ▶ this video I also found this video that asks the question if the EU is democratic, which I think makes good points and you can draw different conclusions from it: link I

I’ve thought about this since last year, and I can’t understand how this proposal has been able to survive this long. First of all, the EU is very pro-business, which means it should be pro-encryption. Second, the structures of its governing bodies does not make it very prone to populism. Based on what I know from this Kurzgesagt video: ▶ this video Is this all some hidden plot to turn the EU into a totalitarian state? I’m (half) joking, but I really can’t see the motivation.

All EU officials are elected directly or elected/assigned by the people that were elected. This will help you to get the facts straight: ▶ this video