According to UN key principles, every citizen has the right, without any discrimination and without unreasonable restrictions, to take part in the conduct of public affairs, to vote and to be elected to government.

Around the world, some 70 countries held elections in 2024 with votes that directly affected almost half of the planet's population.

The EU is the world’s second largest economy, but that collective wealth doesn’t mean everyone has equal rights and opportunities.

Today the decline of democratic and electoral systems often goes unnoticed. For instance, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) highlighted issues in Hungary and Poland. They described elections as "free but not fair," citing problems like the close ties between state resources and the ruling party, which make it hard for opponents to compete fairly. They also pointed out how the ruling party's control over public media enhances their advantage. These issues exist in the European Union but receive minimal political attention.

International observation missions for elections in EU member states are mainly conducted by the OSCE. However, these missions have limited reach and often lack enough staff to monitor many polling stations on election day. This limitation arises from a shortage of resources for the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, which is the OSCE’s primary election observation group. Additionally, these missions are restricted by the belief that election-day issues in the EU are infrequent and not coordinated enough to significantly affect election outcomes.

Thus, the European Court of Justice ruled in November that the Czech Republic and Poland are violating the EU law by prohibiting EU nationals from joining their political parties. The European Commission filed complaints against both countries, claiming they limit the ability of foreigners to stand for local and European elections under the same conditions as Czech and Polish citizens.

vocal.media/critique/violations-during-elections-in-the-eu-become-common

Hungary and Poland's people may see the issue as existential and are unwilling to be destroyed in the name of a law that they had limited influence creating. These modern legalistic Pharasee's need to be stood up to. Any law that seeks to commit genocide and displace a people or ethnic group from their territory is invalid in my view

The EU is a totalitarian state.
They're worse than anywhere for misinfo and disnfo.
Look at what they do in Georgia and Romania.

http://x.com/RadioRadioWeb/status/1877765527831003566
>>Thierry #Breton vs Elon Musk:
"Let's keep calm and enforce our laws in Europe when there is a risk that they will be bypassed. We did that in #Romania and, if necessary, we will have to do it in #Germany as well"<<

Slovakia PM Robert Fico was offered a EU 500 million bribe to support Ukraines membership, refused and was shot.

Lying about Romania and Tik Tok, turns out it was the government themselves doing it.

Orban, they don't like him ruling his own country for Hungarians, think he should follow EU dictates or his people face blackmail and collective punishment.

- And look what their chosen ones have done to their own countries.
It's no wonder Germans want to be rid of the traffic light coalition.
They are being thrown out by their people but the elite EU overlords wish to keep the clownshow going.

They act like they rule by divine right.
But it's all slowly coming apart, thanks to the Zelensky curse.
Most of those present at the beginning are now gone
- Except Macron and Meloni.

When we get our own country right it might be OK to pontificate on the EU.

Hi Adomas,

Welcome to the forum

There's more at the following link:

http://euronews.com/my-europe/2024/06/10/europe-veers-right-but-centre-ground-resists-what-the-eu-election-result-mean-and-whats-n

My apologies.

Here's the link again:

http://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/06/10/europe-veers-right-but-centre-ground-resists-what-the-eu-election-results-mean-and-whats-n

It appears that the European Parliament will have more hard
right members than ever before, occupying close to a
quarter of the 720 seats according to the Associated Press.

We're told that they will have to overcome differences if they
want to maximize their influences on the EU Parliament that
rile their constituents. Issues like migration, climate
rules, et cetra.

Not an easy job. I still think that the centrists will win
out. But we'll have to wait and see.

Hi Adomas,

Are you of Lithuanian ancestry?

Kudos Armchair Critic. Yes others, I think Nial Ferguson, is saying that the EU is a failed experiment and is living on borrowed time. I think that the EU has some theoretical benefits, but has structural issues with the way it was implemented, the concept was probably subverted at formation by special interest groups so that it was never effective. The EU could be similar to the British Commonwealth. Maybe the EU could be restructured into a European Commonwealth.

This character, who appears to be a foreigner of some sort, has a blog on which he bangs away to an audience of none. He found out that certain posters on OLO will react to any twaddle.

The EU and its elections are of no interest when we have our own election coming up, and the chance to remove the worst government ever.

In the meantime, a few idiots identifying as "Nazis" have been arrested and charged with who knows what, while Palestinian anti-Israel, anti-Semitic lunatics continue their demonstrations and hate speech courtesy of the anti-Semitic, anti-Israel Albanese government.

"The EU and its elections are of no interest when we have our own election coming up, and the chance to remove the worst government ever."

- To replace it with what?
The future worst government ever.

If you want to get into foreign politics, how about the magnanimous Donald Trump inviting Rudd and Wong to his inauguration after all those scumbags have said about him.

I wonder if either of them will have the decency to decline the invitation, and perhaps even ruminate on their disgusting outbursts against the best leader of the West since Ronald Reagan. Probably not. They wouldn't be so pig-ignorant in the first place if they did.

I have to say, though, I don't understand why they would be invited: to run their noses in the poo, maybe.

But, the political class is full of fragile, nasty people. There is a photo of them standing, hands on hearts, at Jimmy Carter's funeral. All the current and ex pollies, with their spouses.

All except Donald and Mrs. Trump who were standing next to Obama - but who were cut out of the published photograph. Such immaturity and sour grapes from the ‘ruling class’ is pathetic.

What we all have to do is stop voting for the same politicians and expecting different results.

We saw from the last federal election that voters
do change their support of political parties and
politicians. There were numerous surprises of both
politicians and parties losing out and others
winning.

Peter Dutton recently made his campaign speech in
Victoria. Possibly hoping to regain votes for
his party.

However, changes will have to be made. People no longer
fall for the outmoded tactics of the past.

As far as the EU is concerned? I imagine that having over
700 different seats with at times different perspectives
all looking out for their own interests would not be an
easy task to try to influence. Still, I think that it is
worth a try for world peace and reconciliation.

Where would we be without the EU?

"I have to say, though, I don't understand why they would be invited: to run their noses in the poo, maybe."
- To kneel before their emperor and master.

"What we all have to do is stop voting for the same politicians and expecting different results."
- It's both a flawed and foolproof system that guarantees us poor outcomes and disappointment every time with no-one to blame but ourselves.
Couple that with the fact our leaders are branch managers not statesmen and what other outcome can be expected?

Politician: 'It's not my fault, they voted for me'.

Democracy is a shite sandwich anyway.
Your choice is choosing which half of that sandwich you want to eat.

The correct answer is this:
'I'd prefer not to have to eat a sandwich filled with feces in the first place'.

The ethics centre reminds us that in this country we've had
leadership spills, ministerial scandals, legal corruption,
campaign donations, misinformation, lies, and divisions.
Therefore it is no wonder that many Australians have become
distrustful of democracy.

Abroad we've had Brexit, the Middle East conflict, Russian
use of force, the near collapse of the EU and a former US
president trying to avoid impeachment.

It's therefore not suprising that many people are flloking
for something simpler, efficient, stabler, and easy.

There's more at:

http://www.ethics.org.au/democracy.is-still-the-least-worst-option-we-have/

Shirin Ebadi Iranian political activist, lawyer and
former judge was the first Iranian and Muslim woman
to be awarded the Nobel Prize in 2003.

She said:

"If you want to raise a crop for one year, plant corn.
If you want to raise a crop for decades, plant trees.
If you want to raise a crop for centuries, raise men.
If you want to plant a crop for centuries raise
democracies".

Carl A. Schenck said:

"Democracy cannot exist without respect for the
identity and worth of cultures and peoples".

Rigoberta Menchu Tum wrote:

"Men's capacity for justice makes democracy possible,
but man's inclination for injustice makes democracy
necessary".

My favourite quotes comes from Winston Churchill:

"Democracy is the worst form of government,
except for all those other forms that have been tried
from time to time" .

Cheers.

Foxy,
You say "People no longer fall for the outmoded tactics of the past."

Even though I wish this was true I have to disagree with you.

Recently in QLD there was a change in government essentially based on the rage bait slogan "adult crime adult time".

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/79127-if-your-plan-is-for-one-year-plant-rice-if

“If your plan is for one year plant rice. If your plan is for ten years plant trees. If your plan is for one hundred years educate children. ”
&#8213; Confucius

Maybe this is where Foxy got her quotes from...

http://www.ipu.org/news/news-in-brief/2021-09/you-may-not-know-these-7-quotes-democracy
_______________

Comment- Foxy's quote attributed to Rigoberta Menchu Tum "Men's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but man's inclination for injustice makes democracy necessary".

Answer- This sounds similar to Mencius and Xunzi both Confucian scholars Mencius (man is naturally good) and Xunzi (man is naturally bad). Also similar to Locke (man in a state of nature is good)/ Hobbes (Bellum Omnium Contra Omnes) and Mill (harm principle)/ Aristotle (virtue). Man's Good/ Bad natures can be compared with Hegel's Thesis/ Anti-Thesis/ Synthesis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xunzi_(philosopher)
http://www.britannica.com/biography/Xunzi
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/xunzi/
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09552367.2024.2430121

Confucian philosophy considers the family as the atom of society.

Oxford University- Confucianism and Social Structure by Alan T. Wood
http://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/45499/chapter/392459146

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Confucianism
http://www.britannica.com/biography/Zhougong
http://www.britannica.com/topic/Zhouli

http://www.worldhistory.org/Confucianism/

"A belief in a higher power alone was not enough to encourage right action, however, nor to control one's baser instincts. Confucius advocated a strict code of ethics one should adhere to in order to maintain the middle way in life of peace and prosperity. These are known as the Five Constants and Four Virtues:

Ren – benevolence
Yi – righteousness
Li – ritual
Zhi – knowledge
Xin – integrity
Xiao – filial piety
Zhong – loyalty
Jie – contingency
Yi – justice/righteousness

All of these were equally important, but they began with filial piety. People were encouraged to honor and respect their parents and observe a hierarchy of authority where a son obeyed his father's wishes, a younger brother respected and deferred to his older brother, and women did the same with men. In this way, the family would live harmoniously and, if enough families embraced filial piety, one would soon have a whole community of contented people, then a state, and then an entire country. There would be no need of oppressive governments or laws because people would, essentially, be governing themselves through recognition of the benefits of virtuous behavior."

The sad thing is China lost it's way to legalism.

Essentially Confucianism is bottom up hierarchical society based on traditional eternal structures. Legalism is top down authoritarianism. China's Emperor's chose authoritarianism so did Mao in his adoption of authoritarian Marxism. Rome and the Catholic Church use a localistic hierarchical bottom up model. Machiavelli and Aristotle saw the bottom up approach as less authoritarian. Is fear or love the better way to govern society? Marxism or Traditionalism??

Gustav Le Bon says that a cultures direction is determined by deep cultural principles that are not easy to change. It will not be easy for China to rediscover the roots of their society.

India was ruled by the Mogul's as I understand. A foreign power without sympathy for the local population, without the desire to preserve them and their identity, only to use them. Does India now desire the become the Mogul. Do they have the wisdom of their desires. The Zealot preaches before he instructs or learns. I think they should rule themselves first, then seek to influence others.

http://www.britannica.com/place/India/The-Mughal-Empire-1526-1761

I find the following interesting, and perhaps misunderstood aspects of Mill's On Liberty....

http://gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm

Last Page of On Liberty-

The worth of a State, in the long run, is the worth of the individuals composing it; and a State which postpones the interests of their mental expansion and elevation, to a little more of administrative skill, or of that semblance of it which practice gives, in the details of business; a State which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands even for beneficial purposes, will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished; and that the perfection of machinery to which it has sacrificed everything, will in the end avail it nothing, for want of the vital power which, in order that the machine might work more smoothly, it has preferred to banish.

http://fs2.american.edu/dfagel/www/Mill.html

How (it may be asked) can any part of
the conduct of a member of society be a matter of indifference to the other members? No person is
an entirely isolated being; it is impossible for a person to do anything seriously or permanently
hurtful to himself, without mischief reaching at least to his near connections, and often far beyond
them.

If he injures his property, he does harm to those who directly or indirectly derived support from
it, and usually diminishes, by a greater or less amount, the general resources of the community. If
he deteriorates his bodily or mental faculties, he not only brings evil upon all who depended on him
for any portion of their happiness, but disqualifies himself for rendering the services which he owes to
his fellow-creatures generally; perhaps becomes a burden on their affection or benevolence; and if
such conduct were very frequent, hardly any offence that is committed would detract more from the
general sum of good. Finally, if by his vices or follies a person does no direct harm to others, he is
nevertheless (it may be said) injurious by his example; and ought to be compelled to control
himself, for the sake of those whom the sight or knowledge of his conduct might corrupt or mislead.

http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/onliberty/section5/
On Liberty Chapter 4, Of the Limits to the Authority of Society over the Individual

__________

China and the CCP think of themselves as "the middle kingdom" but they cannot be central to anything when they don't rule themselves. Might is not right.

" At all times, vigilance is the price of liberty.
We must remain vigilant because while it might be us
today, it will be some other group down the road
20 years from now. The measure of our society over
history is our fidelity to our principles. We must
remind our government and our people to remain faithful
to those principles or otherwise our society, like so
many in the past, will be swept on the ash heap of history".
( David E. Springer).

Might is indeed not always right.

Ayn Rand said:

"Might is not always right, but what is right is always
right".

Sagacious spirits doubt all and hold fact only to that
which is demonstrably true. Human rights and wrongs are not
determined by justice but by might.

Might is still king maker and king breaker as of yore,
and as so many regimes and leaders around the world demonstrate.
Autocrats still manage to rule. People will always continue to resist.