I think you still have the opportunity to re upload the video.

@@jdaviddejesusadon3629 Interaction would nosedive.

@@PaPyRene Only in the ECR and ID youtube channels

You are wrong, there is a third choice: A Reformed EU.

In England we do the EU too, but yeah it’s not a huge module - at least for AQA A-Level politics. It’s part of the politics and government of the Uk module, 2.5 institutions and functioning of the EU - though, to be fair, even this is viewed through the lens of how EU politics affect national politics. i agree it would be far better to make the EU the comparative study module rather than the US

(Romanian here) We have a chapter about the EU in history class in 11th grade, it includes the history, institutions, representatives, and a bit about the politics of the EU, this was the thing that got me interested in the EU

Because we are not like the US. Comparing the EU to the US is the worst you could do. We are sovereign nations and this video is totally not taking this into to account. We agree to work together on certain issues not ALL thats why we have the VETO and why we should remain to have the VETO. This guy is practically saying throw away your sovereign powers for the greater EU without taking into account that each individual nation has its own cultural and historical roots that do not always align we should respect that first.

I don't know how it works in other countries but in Spain we now have an EU optional subject for 10th graders

I learned about EU and how it works in high school in Germany. I think Brits just don’t care about Europe or the EU😅😂

I wonder how long it will take us Europeans to figure that one out that it's going to be harder to protect our interest if we don't do more through the EU, after all, imagine how big the likes of the US or China will be in 30-50 years from now, without the EU, we Europeans would be irrelevant on the world stage and that would make it much harder to protect our political, economic and social interest. At the end of the day, I think we will continue to further integrate in the EU, not out of want, but out of need, with each passing decade, it's going to be harder for individual EU countries to compete with the likes of the US and China and they will take advantage of that to divide and weaken us, as well as get us fighting among ourselves, if you look closely, we already see this happening in the EU with how Russia and China are pitting us off each other, the US does it at times.

No thanks, I shan't be falling for the choices of woke western Europeans. I will stand, with or without you.

@@paul1979uk2000 How long will it take for western Europeans to realise they're the ones creating a wedge between Europeans by forcing mass migrations and woke politics on us? If they stuck to economic and security cooperation, it would've been a great relationship, but they're forcing woke ideology into the mix. No thanks.

No such thing as EU unity outside your head.

agree

was surprised that "The Left" party in the EU was kinda in a middle zone between pro-reform and anti-reform... I would have thought that they were very much for a extremely radical reform in the EU

This one and the ones where he presents the different European parties, so everybody can make a more informed decision

​no more EU

Have watched it, confirmed my choice to never vote on anything to do with the EU again, unless it's about leaving or ending the EU.

I'm not going to bother with voting. The most invisible and boring elections I can think of. Back in 2019 only under 43% of eligible Finns voted in EU elections. Heck, I'm almost willing to bet, that if you'd ask people on the street whom they're going to vote in the EU election, many would say they had no idea there was an election coming up.

@@mutkaluikkunen3926 So in other words, you let others make the choice for you (because election still happens if you personally go vote or not), and that may be a choice you don't want...

I agree. The EU is bureaucratic due to it's nature of having to find a compromise between many interests. Some years ago I was very EU-sceptic, but since then I have changed my mind, nowadays I am in favor of "more EU". One of my key concerns was, "then there's only once central government that big corporations need to lobby/bribe", but considering how much EU has done in favor of consumers, I'd say so far that has not manifested. Without EU, we and actually the whole world would be much more subject to malpractices of big US and international corporations.

@@ClemensKatzer you are very right, i'm studying what in my country is called the "consumer codex" wich was born due to a EU Directive and it is amazing how many people in my country don't know about its existence.

That's like saying conservatives want reform because they want change.

reforming EU is impossiable, even changing the uninimity to majority the tribalisation of EU will only need to germany and france exploiting everyone else due how majority and pop are allocated in these matters.

​​​@@cavalexI agree, going back is not reforming. In this video, and in general in politics, the difference between reformists and conservatives is that the conservatives want to go back to re-establish or keep certain things that were done in the past, while reformists want to propose brand new approaches and goals. So yeah, "reform" can be intended as just "changing the law", but in politics it means going forward, not moving backwards.

Conservatives assume that mistakes should be reverted by rolling back to previous state in which things were better. Such as Windows restore works on Windows by letting you restore to previous states of your data (or to undo a restore operation done in the **past**). And assuming that going back is always bad is just as much of an opinion as assuming that going forward is always bad. Though, yes, in the contect of this video, reforming means adding laws for more centralization towards the EU.

@@Hardcore_Remixer Were really that better though? That's also a pretty contentious point.

Norway being cucked as per usual 😊

Thanks for your contribution 😂

You mean until the oil runs out, then you will realize "Maybe for a country of only 5 million to try and go it alone wasn't such a good idea"

@@inwalters "Recently" a huge deposit of Phosphate was discovered in the south of Norway and the country is ready for the energy transition more than any other country in Europe. They will be fine.

@@CrownRider Well then I guess the future Emirate of Norway will be ok.

Explain

That's literally the purpose of reforms at a structural level, because unless those reforms pass through there is a zero percentage chance any law regarding bureaucracy and taxes will simply not pass through because it will be vetoed by countries like Italy.

You mean centralized. There, I fixed it for you.

@@giovannituber2827 YES

​@@giovannituber2827 That would be a good thing

I dont thing it will work.Yugoslavia worked when it was not democratic. Moment in had democratic election in 1990 tensions between parties raised because most people voted for parties from their own nation and off course how you get more votes ,by saying how you will defend you own people and cry they are out voted by larger nation .And little push from outside you have a war..

@@giovannituber2827 Couldnt have said it better friend

Damn. Pretty big mistake. Thank you. In the sticky.

Pretty much 👍🏻

The EU will collapse, I guess! The more they pressure it the sooner it is going to happen.

Why do you want MORE EU power? Are you insane? I guess living in different EU countries results in vastly different opinions...

@@andreaspatsalides1914 And i have a question for you before i answer yours. What is wrong with more EU?, and do you understand what i mean?.

to late EU from the beginning has been about removing power from the people to a small group of Globalists, control, centralization of not only power but money to big multinational corp. and creating a system that benefits the US

EU importing literally all of the hostile world and making us pay for it. Come, we need all of Africa in Europe, it was too European, they'll bring their scientists and engineers to build huts for us.

@@newtubevector I think they meant that they want more EU because the world is becoming more and more hostile.

@@N3XYF wait... Im a skizzo. Ur right im deleting that comment.

Well what's the option, be hostile to the USA? Or Russia or Chins which are ruled by dictators and who only works in their interest, stronger EU will definitely benefit the citizens of Europe, it will make us more competent on the world stage and we won't be dependent on others.

Why does the EU have such animosity to Australia though? It’s bordering on hostility. Australia has done nothing to deserve the punitive trade embargo the Europeans have inflicted on it for generations. A safer world is one where peaceful democracies co-operate, or is that too difficult for Europeans to comprehend?

Perhaps, but they also poll at 6% in the Netherlands (potential to get 2 seats), at 6% in Cyprus while also running in 15 other countries. So there is a chance they increase their seat share. Plus you have to remember they are less than 8 years old:)

Not necessarily. Smaller members would still have outsized weight like the US.

With veto are smaller countries those who block all decisions, for example Malta, if willing to do so, can paralize the whole Union. Without veto, bigger countries will have an advantage, but that would be more democratic as they represent more people (majority rule and minority rights). Moreover, we can establish a qualified majority that would need a certain amount of countries and a certain amount of population as parameters to pass a law. This way the majority of people would have the weight they deserve, but also, the big 3/4 wouldn't be able to decide by themselves. We can also go for superqualified majority

The point of vetos is to forbid any group of EU members, not matter how big, from being able to decide the politics and laws of other members no matter how small in order to maintain unity inside EU and avoid internal conflicts and grudges. Basically, vetos slow us down because we have different cultures and vetos are necesary because we have different cultures. As you said, getting rid of vetos is unfair towards smaller countries (because bigger ones basically get to virtually vote for their policies and we know the end result) and keeping vetos is unfair because small countries get to paralize EU if they feel like it (because none of the members are not allowed to decide their policies other than the country itself). So, in the end, as you said, it's complicated.

@@Byitn more democratic as they represent more people? & what if those "more people" just want to push a nonsensical law that just happens to be destructive for a smaller state? cuz thats whats happening right now & thats exactly why smaller countries use their veto.

@@andreamolnarova2185 yep, but I also said that with the appropriate qualified majority or suoer qualified majority sistem, we can find a good compromise. As for "nonsense" this is illogical. A decision that damages all smaller countries, with a high qualified majority, would be avoided if the smaller countries put themselves togheter to vote against. If a policy only damages one single country, small or big, well that would be negociated, but in any case no decision can be made that put any country in a difficoult positions, as that would make everyone else sink as well, because we are all interwined. If certain ideas damage southern countries, they'll join forces and block it, and the same goes for eastern countries etc... I live in Italy, some regions are more similar to Germany, others to Greece in terms of their economic situation. Therefore, certain laws do go in favour of a certain region or another: the whole point of the sovereign state is to balance this decision and to reduce the differences among the different areas as much as possible. Plus, the UE doesn't need to decide on every matter, just on the themes that are better dealt with at the EU level

That is the stupidest idea ever. All it would accomplish is paralysing all EU functions while polarising EU society even more. The Swiss system is in my opinion one of the worst possible democratic governing system out there.

Switzerland is an artifictial country that wouldnt exist if it werent up in the mountains. You can't copy any legislation from there.

@@BB-hx4mj Tell me you don't know how the Swiss system works without telling me you don't know how the Swiss system works.

@@wilkw3 It's no less artificial than any other country. That's a stupid take.

​​@@jascrandom9855 There's nothing in common between a Greek and an Islander, for example. The more of a country you make it look, the more people will fear it. The EU should become a normal international union under neutral policies (specially to finally avoid ideologies the way they're being embraced now).

It is a great idea. Give me 10 minutes and ill share a link on the sticky comment & description. We will also post this on insta and Twitter at some point :)

In the sticky and description. enjoy.

@@EUMadeSimple thank you very much !

It is a great video, but what if you think the liberal ideas on foreign policy and army are right, but you hate the laws on abortion, LGBT views and so on. I think people don’t understand that you can be conservative and federalist. This is not reflected by this survey. I take it for what it is.

@@7up-dp1kk I think you don't understand that you are not me and that I am not you! Sei un italiano un prevedibile piddiota!

@@7up-dp1kk Well, this video only focuses on which party supports or opposes EU integration. Since there aren't really parties that clearly support deeper European cooperation and are righ-wing at the same time, maybe only the EPP, you can't really vote accordingly sadly

@@kgeri6089 RE is right-wing though. Saying otherwise is having no idea of what right and left mean.

If you dont want to eat the same shit the americans do, yes we need those regulations, if you want to keep some negotiating power against the big techs for user privacy, you do.. and for almost every little things with great hidden impacts on our daily lives..

@dalim8226 I agree. It will be a superstate very much like the USA, eventually. Like, give it 75 more years. I believe if the EU had a tougher stance on immigration last 10 years, we wouldn't see that much right wing populism today. Regarding Ukraine, from what I hear there's little social problems with Ukrainians. They are refugees in the true meaning of the word, and many will go back when situation permits it, and their religion and culture is widely compatible with rest of Europe. Other than certain other regions of the world...

I want less UE too

They literally state their own personal opinion anyway? As long as the remainder of their message is neutral (enough), I don't see a problem. People who think they aren't neutral enough should just go elsewhere.

​@@MDP1702Yeah I know it's just that I think covering both sides would just be more interesting. If they say "no this party don't want that" they could tell why in more details. Just adding some retrospective on why there is a no and a yes answer at the first place. (The fact that both sides have arguments) They can bring personal arguments if they want but just go deeper.

Covering both sides would be more interesting, but this is not doable at the moment. EU made simple is pro-european, so anti-european or euro-sceptical groups probably wouldn't be so inclined to sponsor them or collaborate with them. They are more likely to participate in more euro-sceptical or non-aligned projects

Right wing convervative here. Honestly, I got used to EU made simple to almost always show a more pro left wing stance that I don't take them seriously when they criticise the right wing and praise the left wing. Afterall pure journalism is dead because at the end of the day the journalism nowadays is always tainted by at least a bit of personal opinions. So far they expose the information and I decide what words I interpret it for myself. Same for TLDR.

Hi, thanks for bringing this up. 1) I think we could definitely show some more reasons why parties are against this. And we have done this in previous videos (reform part 2) on the channel. There will be more videos on this so we will do more of this. 2) We are not a left channel and it confuses us sometimes why people think that. What we do advocate for is reforming the VETO. We are always very clear about this and why we think it needs to change. We Highlight in the video when it is our opinion. 3) we need sponsors to make this financially viable. These videos cost insane amounts of time. Therefore, we can't do without these sponsors but they do not influence our opinion. The veto challenge as mentioned above just aligns with UEF :) that's all Hope that clears some of this up

As a French, I can say we don't have a say in the EU. All is done by the Germans, our leaders have done the same policy of placating the Germans and whatever they proposed even to our own detriment in the 40 years.

France is submitted to Brussels

no nation has more than 15% representation in the EP, so saying some nations would just push through what they want is illogical. Also overall the idea is replaceing the veto with qualified (super)majority, which still essentially needs a broader consensus, but also prevents one nation to gridlock the entire EU. There is no way anyone can argue that one nation veto's are democratic, it just isn't. Even if you say you don't want just rule of a (tiny) majority, then you should be fine with something like a qualified (super) majority or clearly come out that you aren't in favour of democracy. One of the main weaknesses of the PLC in the past and which led to its stagnation and downfall was the veto power.

@@hugobernard9874 Yes fair enough, I use French and Germany because they’re the biggest populations so have the biggest say in the parliament but it is definitely more Germany. But imagine in my country in Ireland with 13 seats out of 705, how are uniquely Irish concerns going to get heard? And 70% of our legislation in Ireland comes from the EU which is alarming, we’re being ruled by Germans who have no idea of our issues and are culturally different that us. I agree with having an EU and we can all work together on certain issues but we need to spot centralising power away from the people in their countries. Irish economies and politics and Hungarian economics and politics are not the same as German Economies and Politics. We need the Veto!

@@MDP1702 Your forgetting that the EU is NOT A STATE! It’s an agreement of countries who should all be on equal playing field. They are separate countries and It’s a place they can collaborate on issues where they are in agreement. If the Germans want really aggressive green legislation go do it in Germany it’s not my issue I’m Irish not European. Also if we get rid of the Veto the first thing they will do is force my country to get rid of our competitive corporate tax rate, they’ve already expressed their interest in doing so, just because they can’t compete with us, it’s the only way we can be competitive as a small island, they would never introduce legislation that made it more expensive for Germany and France too to sell their cars.

Thank God the UK left, because that's the reason we now can discuss freely about this. Specially in regards to foreign policy.

The UK wasn't even fully using the immigration control powers at their disposal, it was mostly an excuse and most people probably didn't even knew/know that the UK government actually wasn't hard on European immigration.

honestly i'd be better if more of them left.there's nothing democratic about the veto,it just means that 1 person is more important than everyone else in the parliment.why even bother having a parliment if 1 person can decide whether we actually do sh*t or not ? hungary and all the other russian puppets can leave.maybe this way eu funds would stop misteriously dissappearing

​@@diogorodrigues747and now you have more immigrants than before. Good job guys 😄

@@thegreatdane3627 So has the UK. The Tories have done nothing to cope with the migration crisis. That's quite an hypocritical claim.

And lots of the viewers of this channel are nothing but imperialists. So many sickos out here, western Europeans at it again. This is why EU will collapse, extreme leftists demanding more and more authoritarianism, what else is new?

Read up on "Liberum veto" in Poland and see how that ended up for the Commonwealth...

@@user-zo5qw1pt2v Different period, different political unit, different challenges. For me the veto is the ultimate democratic tool in an union that that doesn't seem to care that much about political accountability. If the veto goes, I would vote for leaving the union. And I genuinely don't want that but that would be forcing our hand.

Election of EU President by every one would be a silly idea . Way to much too swallow by common folks who would vote for their country candidate only

@@MMerlyn91veto is a tool used to block everything from possibly moving forward. Majority vote is the ideal

We would love be to open more language channels. Please send us an email at social@eumadesimple.eu if you want to get involved :)

Great question ! In my opinion, it's Open Society NGO's and Fink of BlackRock power , they have corrupted the EU Parliament, in my opinion.

Because it's not democratic, because western Europeans force their woke ideology on everyone.

Seriously they should scrap that

Because (Citing a french classic, who happens to be president) they are braindead, and afraid to be called xenophobic

European Charter of Human Rights

Again that EUSSR nonsense? If you actually knew what the USSR was you wouldn't say that.

Imagine calling it the "EUSSR", holy fuck

@@rullvard8245 it might as well be its unelected undemocratic

Clown, Russia is not a threat to the EU and the EU does as its US masters tell it to.

Good question. I base my vote on assuming that it will go to that national party. That's how national elections in many EU countries work anyway, right?

Czechia?

@@xhinted690 im Polish so either i vote for my party Trzecia Droga or i vote for a european group through Konfederacja

You know that the EU has helped every single member country to boost their national culture across the world, right?

When people focus on their national identity, they focus on differences with other nations, which leads to more inter-state conflicts. Instead, people should focus on similarities and work towards common interests. Why is it so important for you to identify as a specific nation and separate yourself from other europeans? Doesn't our history teach us that it leads to bad consequences (such as wars)?

​@@victimizedbecause that ofcourse worked so well for yugaslavia and astria.

EU is NOT essentially a trade block, read the Treaty of Rome . This very idea of only trade block is still so much in the mind of most Brits who finally voted for Brexit. Oooops

@@victimizedexactly

they're strongly against it

I'm an American who used to live for a few years in the Netherlands. I think the big argument against the EU inherently (so ignoring the specific policies of given regimes) is that it adds another level for problems to happen which means while people are focused in trying to rectify those problems; making monetary union work without fiscal union during the 2008 crisis, worrying about who is going to leave the EU, dealing with oddball countries who can sabotage the ability of the EU to function in applying laws or dealing with foreign powers, etc, crowding out the ability to focus on problems that may actually be shared by all countries within the EU. The big one is having a welfare system that is so generous relative to underlying demographics that it is difficult to raise military spending to a rational level, and said demographics are deteriorating to the point that the current strategy that implicitly exists in most countries is to rely on immigration. For wealthy countries, they are to some extent able to rely on immigration from poorer countries within the EU. Since the poor countries are also in decline, the only place they can turn are even poorer countries for immigration which are generally hostile to things like feminism, gay rights, and minorities like jews.

There are many logical reasons for that. To begin with, there are some noticeable differences between west/east and north/south in terms of culture, mindset and worldview. The distribution is also not even. This may lead to situations, where smaller blocks have decisions imposed on them. Then, different countries have different local economical conditions. For example, a rich service-oriented country like Denmark could probably be fine and in support of climate policies, where as poorer manufacturing-oriented Slovakia could be against that. Then there are things like defence and unified army. Ukraine is an easy case right now, but not all conflicts are so clear cut. E.g., we see a difference in stances on Isreal actions rn. Lastly, it actual can make things more bureaucratic for local populations. Personally, I think right now the EU is in integration limbo and it's the worst of both worlds. EU should either federalize further or go a confederacy way.

This is the reason why i advocate more unified EU. None of us are strong enough alone to face USA, Russia or China economically, resource wise and militarily. Current Europe has a lot of problems that needed to fixed before this and close the gaps on the continent. Russia, Turkey, Georgia are only countries that i will never want to see in EU and france would need to give up on their overseas territory to make EU territory sustainable without gaps in migration.

​@madkoala2130 Would you like to see the Uk back.?

@@colinsmith1288 yes, just if they accept their hubris.

But unless the EU reforms that trust will not grow at all.

It's on the top left of the screen at 4:20 I think the video has been made before they were kicked out.

Agreed!

Nostalgia blinds people a lot, and you're clearly a big example of that.

I like not having to exchange currencies (mostly - Poland unfortunately hasn't got to it yet), free travel and standarisation.

Exactly what Brexiteers was thinking. "Less regulation, more freedom, stronger borders" they thought. Dingies hasn't stop being a business.

Exactly what Brexiteers was thinking. "Less regulation, more freedom, stronger borders" they thought. Dingies hasn't stop being a business.

Oh and something should pass if theres a large majority, Like 65-75 % We do not need brussels

Our pleasure!

United Europe ❤

And get rid of National States? I'm not a European, but if I was, I'd fight before that happened.

It should be a Semi-Direct Democracy like Switzerland.

No go away.

No! We need to be nation states in control of their own destinies. Greeks are not Germans, English isn't Italian, Hungarians aren't Portugal. Everyone nust live the way they want and what is good for Germany might not be good for Finland. EU must be abolished.

No. We need the formation of the EI. The glorious European Imperium. The very start of the Imperium of Man.

​@@georgedevries3992ahh yes, the fourth reich, i can get behind that

@@margaret-yr6uh Because disloyalty and distrust of our current EU goverments is TOTALLY absent, right? Keep thinking inside the box, fool. But that is why we need one leader that will only and truly desire the betterment of Humankind, everywhere on the planet!

No one's gonna enslave you, calm down

No to states, I want my subdivision to rule ourselves. We don't want burocrats from *capital city* to rule us

@@niku.. Sure, sure. People can't even afford housing anymore and we're forced to pay for illegal invaders, subsidize their stay, give them apartments while our own people have no place to make family. Then we say we have a demographic crisis, let's import all of Africa, that'll help.

Says the Brexiteer !! Enough with your silly sovereignty. You have sovereignty anyway in most cases.

Russian or Chinese bot, you frick yourself

Tens noção de que o desenvolvimento de Portugal nas últimas décadas se deve à UE e não aos políticos portugueses, certo?

I think a simple and effective start to that is making the EU more visible. We hear so much bad shit about the EU when they suck, but so many nice things around us are a result of the EU and they never get the credit for it.

I say it should be a Semi-Direct Democracy like Switzerland.

@@Sco10 yeah, a lot of countries governments blame the EU for all their problems. Even when the problems are the fact of intern bad policies.

@@jascrandom9855 yeah why not. The main problem of eu integration is the fact that some member states are afraid to leave some sovereignty to EU.

@@Sco10 Exactly. When I consider the benefits of the EU and how little practical negative impact it has to my personal life, it's a nobrainer. For me the consumer protection regulations alone make it worth it. I think those (the fact that EU is active on that front) are part of the treaties. Especially the younger generations, they take so much of it for granted, they would face a rude awakening if EU would be dissolved. Brexit showed that pretty drastically.

No thanks. You have more EU at your own home, you're encroaching enough.

@@joschmo4497 what kind of shit response is that? I will be voting federalist I don’t care about what you want

@@bfedezl2018 Federal all the way, baby!

Nah, ill pass

powerplay to reject proposals, and they know that very well.

Because the veto gives their nation more sovereignty inside the union, this is especially true for smaller nations with less influence.

Because then they can say the EU is undemocratic and promise that they'll change it and get voted

@@terminatora1249 "Sovereignty" you @ss. More like blackmail.

60% is usual

@@franciscouderq1100 60% is to low for the EU. 60% means Germany + France are already 150 million people, and thus 33% of the EU population. so they only need to "convince" a few other nations to get to 60% of the population. if you go with 90% you end up with almost the same as the EU has now with a the veto. but if a few countries try to hold up the whole EU it wouldn't work anymore. so something like needing the support of countries that represent 90% of the population is more democratic. but we need to have another rule that X amount of members have to support something. so we end up with requiring either 90% of the population or X amount of members that support something. because with only requiring 90% of the population either France or Germany are able to block everything if they are not happy with it. so if you make it into something like: to change stuff at least 90% of the represented population has to support it or 80%>90% of the members have to support it. (80% of the members is 0.8 x 27 = 22 and 0.9 x 27 = 24. so with those percentages you end up with either needing the support of 22 or 24 members) so even if the 3 biggest nations (population wise) would object, al other members would be able to pass the new EU law. but what the percentages should be is something the EU can figure out. and maybe let the EU citizens cast their vote about it, to figure out how much of the public is in support of it (an EU-wide referendum)

@@ChristiaanHW thank you for the calculations , i didn't had the numbers at hand and i truly appreciate the effort!

No they got expelled, probably a mistake

@@wtf_213 or recorded before it happened

Yes recorded before it happened. We made a note in the video though.

If I'm not mistaken it requires a supermajority.

Enough with Hungary !

Maybe you have been watching too much propaganda though and are projecting that into others.

Direct election of President sounds nice but is a silly idea and can only create chaos