A 22-year-old German politician who secretly served in Ukraine’s army now faces expulsion from the pro-Russian Alternative for Germany party after calling his own leadership “Russia-kissers.”

  • Puddinghelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Trump hardliners want a power shift in the EU with the help of European allies. and this is one example.

    Translation:

    There are increasing indications that the Trump movement is actively interfering with the political future of the European Union. In March, the most influential conservative think tank in Washington, the Heritage Foundation, invited conservative thinkers from Vienna and Budapest to present their plans for the EU during a workshop.

    “It is right for the United States to be involved in the future of Europe,” Nile Gardiner of the Heritage Foundation told Nieuwsuur. According to the prominent conservative thinker, Donald Trump is America’s first eurosceptic president. “The United States has protected Europe for so long that European governments should respect America’s views.”

    Polish and Hungarian think tanks published an ambitious plan in March to fundamentally reform and dismantle the EU from within. A Hungarian investigative journalist uncovered the project, titled The Great Reset. The proposal was quickly adopted by the Heritage Foundation, the intellectual force behind Project 2025, the ideological blueprint for Trump’s agenda.

    Power Back to Nation States

    The now-public roadmap includes proposals to strip power from the European Commission and the European Court of Justice. It also calls for renaming the EU to the “European Community of Nations.” Power, according to the document, should return to the individual nation states of Europe.

    “These proposals essentially amount to the complete dismantling of the European Commission, which would be reduced to handling only trivial matters,” explains Szabolcs Panyi, the journalist who obtained the document.

    Nieuwsuur also spoke with one of the Polish authors of the plan, Zbigniew Przybyłowski of the conservative Ordo Iuris Institute: “We are calling for the restoration of democracy, freedom, and the sovereignty of nations. You could call that a power shift.”

    “It’s quite unusual for such an article to appear on the U.S. State Department’s website.”
    – Lobbying expert Kenneth Haar
    

    U.S. Government Statement on Europe

    In May of this year, a policy document appeared on the website of the U.S. State Department. In it, the American government raised alarm about the current state of Europe. The policy piece described Europe as having “degenerated into a hotbed of digital censorship, mass migration, and restrictions on religious freedom.” It criticized efforts to limit election participation, for example by labeling Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) as “extremist.”

    The document, titled The Need for Civilizational Allies in Europe, called for strengthening ties with far-right and ultraconservative allies in Europe, such as French politician Marine Le Pen, AfD leader Alice Weidel, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, and Dutch PVV leader Geert Wilders. It is unclear whether the U.S. policy statement was influenced by the Polish-Hungarian Great Reset project.

    “There has already been collaboration between the MAGA movement (Trump’s Make America Great Again campaign) and the European far-right,” says Danish lobby researcher Kenneth Haar. “But seeing such a document appear on the U.S. government’s official website is remarkable.”

    “The Pro-European Candidate is a Disaster”

    Haar points to the Conservative Political Action Conferences (CPAC) from the U.S., which have been held in Europe for the past three years. “These are very large conferences with hundreds of participants and prominent speakers, involving all major far-right parties in Europe.”

    This also occurred recently during a tight race between two Polish presidential candidates. At a special CPAC conference in Poland, Trump’s former Homeland Security Secretary publicly called for a vote in favor of the eurosceptic candidate Karol Nawrocki. She labeled his pro-European opponent “a disaster.” Members of the Trump camp also expressed explicit support this year for Germany’s far-right AfD.

    “The Heritage Foundation and the entire MAGA alliance appear to be succeeding in uniting Europe’s far-right parties in a way those parties haven’t been able to achieve on their own,” Haar adds.

    Nile Gardiner, Director of European Policy at the Heritage Foundation, sees signs of a shift already: “A wind of change is blowing through Europe, including the Netherlands. There’s growing distrust of the concentration of power among unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.”

    Brussels Silent

    The European Commission has yet to respond to the ambitions coming from Washington. But according to Hungarian journalist Panyi, Brussels should be paying close attention to the far-reaching American involvement in European politics.

    “We see that two EU member states—Hungary and Poland—are trying to shape the future of the EU outside of official decision-making procedures. They are enlisting the help of the U.S. in the hope that Trump will put pressure on the European Commission. That’s a threat.”

    Gardiner, on the other hand, sees it as an opportunity. “Europe works best when it is a collaboration between sovereign nation states. The EU, by contrast, is about concentrating political power in Brussels. In 20 to 30 years, the EU will look very different than it does today.”

    Disclosure

    For this report, Nieuwsuur investigated the plans of European and American think tanks regarding the political future of Europe. Nieuwsuur spoke with experts, MEPs, and journalists from France, the Netherlands, Czechia, Hungary, the UK, Germany, and Poland. We interviewed the following sources:

    The U.S. State Department declined to comment on Nieuwsuur’s questions. The European Commission has not yet responded. Any future statements will be added here.

    They should focus on their own political system… We like democracy, F*** off

    • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      When the fucking fascist and communist talk about protecting culture and traditions, I understand to a certain point, but those assholes always use those excuses to ignite violence. The 1930’s and WW II are classic examples. F that shit and never again.

    • Klimaschutz@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Fuck you Donald! You are immigrants from Europe and therefore we are the Grandparents of your country.

      Bitch.

    • plyth@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      2 days ago

      We like democracy, F*** off

      Would you say the EU is democratic? It’s the one thing they got right, that the EU is undermining democracy. The European Commission are representatives of representatives. Van der Leyen was a backroom deal.

      • iglou@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Your comment shows a lack of understanding of what democracy is.

        There is plenty of forms of democracy, and the appointment of the president of the European Commission is democratic.

        It’s a form of parliamentary democracy, where the European Council, a symbolic “head of state” of the EU made of heads of states/governments of EU members, nominates a candidate, which has to then be approved by the European Parliament.

        This is a democratic system very close to what is adopted in many democratic countries.

        So yes, this is democratic. There is no “backroom deal”, this is just literally how a parliamentary democracy works. You elect representatives who make decisions for you, including appointing the executive.

        • CorruptionIsBad@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Ah yes, is that why she also insisted in having a literal flat IN the commission’s building, where she enjoy extraterritoriality and the belgian police cannot search there?

          Very democratic lmao

          • iglou@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            I don’t give a shit about Von der Leyen. I’m talking about the EU, not someone specific.

        • plyth@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Do you remember that the parliament was supposed to select the candidate but they changed it back after everybody had voted? It was within the legal framework but against the spirit of democracy.

          • iglou@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            I actually don’t, could you point me to sources so that I can read about it? Can’t seem to find anything about it myself.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              In September 2018, Weber announced his candidacy (Spitzenkandidat) for the post of the President of the European Commission for the 2019 European election.[13] (Under the unofficial Spitzenkandidat system, the leader of the European party that commands the largest coalition in the European Parliament subsequent to an election to the European Parliament is likely to become the European Commission president.[5][6])

              Weber’s European People’s Party won a plurality of seats in the European Parliament in May 2019, thus making him the lead candidate to succeed Jean-Claude Juncker as President of the European Commission unless the Spitzenkandidat system was abandoned.[5] On 28 May, leaders of EU governments tasked European Council President Donald Tusk with leading the negotiations with members of the European Parliament and national leaders to pick a new European Commission President at an EU summit in late June 2019.[7] Tusk hinted that Weber was the “lead candidate.”[7] This did not materialise with Ursula von der Leyen, a fellow member of the European People’s Party, being appointed president.

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_Weber

              Haven’t found it mentioned on her page. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_von_der_Leyen

              • iglou@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                Oh that! I thought you meant that when they decided of how the appointment should be done, they had a vote and ignored it.

                I do see how that seems like it’s a non-democratic move, but it’s not. It is never up to the parliament to nominate the President of the Commission. The Parliament has a veto power, however. The Council nominates, “taking into account the result of the elections”, a candidate. The Parliament then approves them or vetoes them.

                Their is a lot of subtility to the “democraticness” of a system.

                While systematically picking the leader of the biggest coalition may seem like the most obviously democratic choice… It is actually not always the case. Especially in the European Parliament, where majorities are rare. So, if the leader of the largest group (let’s say, 30%) is impopular with the remaining 70%, who would all prefer another candidate, how is it democratic to go with the impopular candidate?

                That’s why the parliament has a right to veto. The Parliament voted with a majority to elect Von der Leyen, when they were all aware that Weber was the most likely candidate initially. That makes her election democratic.

                Just because Weber was the likely candidate due to the election results does not mean the Parliament would have elected him in the end, and that is also a consideration when the Council nominates a candidate. As a matter of fact, he was indeed impopular with a lot of coalitions, and Von der Leyen reveived 60% of the votes, with an informal coalition supporting her that consisted of the majority of the Parliament.

      • Puddinghelmet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Do you know Von Der Leyen is working on a new independent satellite system Eutelstat en IRIS to replace starlink and help ukraine? It was her proposal. Ursula von der Leyen doing a lot of great things for Europe make no mistake. I honestly don’t care about her pfizer gate, because thats how negotiations work in politics. It cant be all transparant because why show all your cards on first hand… Thats not how that business works. I think she handled it well. She’s also working to make Europe less dependent on oil and gas, but to rely more on green energy sources. Plus we have multiple parties representing different groups in the EU. Instead of having only 2 or 4 like in the US. Plus we investing in science and universities, climate, or own independent software and satellites… So yes we doing good under Von Der Leyen imo.

        Plus she is a woman on the top, which is such a good example for little girls to see how far they can go in life which I am here for.

        • plyth@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          If you argue like that then we only need a king because there were kings who did great for their country.

          It’s a great mistake to ignore the lack of democracy just because the wrong people point it out.

          You need an argument for why the commission is still democratic, not just a list of benefits, no matter how good. Otherwise you confirm that it is not democratic.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              2 days ago

              With just having read the summary, I would be happy with the limited role that the Heritage foundation suggests.

              The Europe of regions sounds also interesting.

              I think we need a debate that is expected to last years to come up with a good system. There are reasons for the current structure that are still valid. We can keep going for a while, but we should keep in mind that the influence of the public was minimized.

              A quick improvement could come from adopting the fediverse for the EU. It should be easy for citizens to participate in debates.

              • Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                With just having read the summary, I would be happy with the limited role that the Heritage foundation suggests. The Europe of regions sounds also interesting.

                This is exactly what right-wingers in Europe (and China and Russia) are aiming at. This is backward-oriented and has nothing to do with democracy.

                • plyth@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Why would a scaleback to national states not be democratic? They were democratic in the past.

                  • SpaceShort@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    18 hours ago

                    Too susceptible to outside influence. These would be American/Russian/corporate puppet states.

                  • Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    There are a lot of reasons, but as you refer to the Heritage Foundation as an institution to develop democracy, I’m afraid you either wouldn’t understand or you are arguing in bad faith.