Discussion in 'News and Current Affairs' started by Yellow Fang, 30 Jun 2019.
It's called the EU and Fidel Castro would have been more democratic.
Cuban human rights follow from teh Wiki.
Please elucidate examples of the EU being less democratic against each specific abuse.
Thanks in advance.
Cuban law limits freedom of expression, association, assembly, movement, and the press. Concerns have also been expressed about the operation of due process. According to Human Rights Watch, even though Cuba, officially atheist until 1992, now "permits greater opportunities for religious expression than it did in past years, and has allowed several religious-run humanitarian groups to operate, the government still maintains tight control on religious institutions, affiliated groups, and individual believers". Censorship in Cubahas also been at the center of complaints. According to the report of Human Rights Watch from 2017 the government continues to rely on arbitrary detention to harass and intimidate critics, independent activists, political opponents, and others.
No and only you said that.
You're even funnier to think that you would be able to point these things out as examples. There are not much examples of people going public but there is at least one blog where people share their experiences without being identified. Amd then there is Roelie Post who exposed child trafficking in Romania instead of bieng rewarderd and or stopping the practice the EU is using the full extent of laws made in EU's advantage to shut her down. Same with media exposing EU-officials signing an paper in eu paid taxi's and so on to receive €300 being banned from filming those officials instead of stopping misuse of funds. (as that €300 is not meant to be used that way.
If the eu tries to censor this relatively mild things on the larger scale it is very likely that it is much worse than we know, it just does'nt come out because of very eu convenient ''car accidents'' or something like that.
So, you've not a single example even comparable to Cuba. Thanks for clearing that one up.
Us and canada for example, there are tons of trade deals and lots of new ones being made. But we are made to believe all hell brakes loose without EU
Well you're previous response where i was in my turn responding too goes on all about, needing the block and blah blah i just summerised it into pan european goverment which is in my view exactly what you describe with your ''block''
Which is why the Greens have been working for years to change government at every level and make it more democratic, accountable and understandable - including the EU. But the Greens don't see this as a reason for leaving or destroying the European project, quite the contrary. Central to the Green way of thinking is something called 'subsidiarity', which means taking decisions at the level which is most appopriate, and the European level is pretty much the best current level we have for supranational, cross-border issues. Personally speaking, I'd like to see many of those things done at a global level but we don't have anything like a functioning global government.
And the EU is racist not because it's the EU or because of the structures of the EU, but because Europe and all its component nation-states are racist to begin with. The EU is trying to change this of course, but that's never going to happen top-down, even if it was 100% committed. Again, does this mean Britain would be less racist outside the EU? No, as you can see from the Brexit debate, it would be completely the opposite. This is what Magid Magid is doing - calling out racism everywhere he is involved, which is exactly what he should be doing.
Can you explain what you mean more clearly, so far you have suggested the UK can get a deal which breaches WTO rules and the EU's key principles.
I did not say that at all you seem to read that but it where not my words. I say in this case that the whole umbrella/orgy(nice warm and cosy with selected friends) is not needed to get around with trade. Like lots of non EU countries do or like EU countries did before there was a Eu. Certainly there are advantages of a trade block however i'm convinced the disadvantages are starting to outweigh the advantages for quite some time now. And the EU's response to any criticism is this kind is responding that we need more Eu more power to them and so on.
I give up.
Usual crap being spouted.
That is exactly what you suggested that the UK can get a deal which breaches WTO rules and breaks the EU’s core principles by simply negotiating it. As has also been explained to you many times the single market came into existence due to the non tariff barriers such as different regulations having a much more impact on trade than expected once tariffs were removed. Can you explain how leaving the EU provides an overall benefit to the UK manufacturing sector which provides 75% of UK r&d investment, as well as many skilled well paid jobs ?
Further to this, Magid has issued a statement saying he's really disappointed that people have tried to infer some sympathy for Brexit from what he said, and that this is partly due to the way in which his opinion piece for Politico (which was the basis for all the other stories), was edited and headlined. I quote:
"My choice of headline was "Let's make the EU cool again" and what I submitted was edited. Brexit is the worst. The EU needs reform. No institution is perfect. You can still be pro EU and be critical of it. The EU is still the most successful peace project on our continent. We must do everything we can to remain and reform the EU."
Yes, the statement by Majid which rebuts the Brexiter version is on Twitter - if I come across it I'll post it.
Separate names with a comma.