why do they still keep hungary in the eu? why not add belarus too while they are at it. Clearly hungary is aligned with russia more, so isnt keeping them around kind of a security risk too?
With allies like Hungary, who needs enemies?
I am pretty sure Ukraine can last 40 days until the next election.
If you can’t get rid of a EU member all other members need to quit the EU and found a new one, without said member 🤔
Starting a new EU isn’t really feasible either since it’ll be the “old” EU who holds all the trade-deals and other agreements/contracts.
If the old EU only comprises of Hungary, the new EU would get just the same trade deals within a day, I reckon.
Still need to negotiate and sign deals. It’s not a quick process and some counties might want to change some things.
All in all it’ll be very complicated and messy. Not really realistic tbh, but a fun thought experiment.
What a disgrace. I wish all Hungarians Godspeed in getting rid of the Anti-EU idiots in power.
Uhh the hungarians put them in power ;_;
They are about as bright as the americans
In my anecdotal experience I think it’s somewhat true for the older generation, but I’ve seen initiatives and protests of the younger generation, more progressive generation that are absolutely pro-EU - despite the blatant anti-EU propaganda that can be seen on almost any street corner when traveling through Hungary.
Hungarians will have a new government in a few weeks. Ukraine just needs to outlast the election cycle.
-
I truly hope so, but…
-
it might turn out to be just a little bit less horrible.
-
Hungary must change its government or leave the EU. The current government stance doesn’t adhere to the European values, and the government alliances don’t match with the remaining EU countries or EU as a whole.
Viktor Orban is a hostile nation asset and should be treated accordingly.
I always hear Hungary fucking everything up, why not boot them from the union at this point? They clearly are an actor for a hostile nation, so there’s no need to deal with their bullshit.
There is no mechanism for removing a member state from the EU other than a voluntary exit.
And as long as Hungary is getting any kind of monetary benefits from the EU, which Orban can steal, he won’t pull such a move.
Also his handlers in Moscow might find him more valuable in the EU than outside, so they likely would object to that.
Maybe we could suspend their membership removing privileges and voting rights, while Hungary is investigated for compliance of EU regulations on for instance their freedom of speech, courts and democracy.
removing privileges and voting rights, while Hungary is investigated for compliance of EU regulations
It’s not that easy. This can be abused. Countries joined because the EU had limited power.
The US has broken the power of its states by threatening to withhold federal funding. The EU is starting to copy that. How does the EU make sure that we don’t copy Trump, too?
False equivalence. EU is not controlled by a single president, for such actions there would have to be a near unanimous agreement among the other member states.
So the comparison would be if for instance 45 states agreed to take away privileges from one state in USA, instead of just 1 president, that may not even have won by a majority vote.There’s a difference between a decision made in a democracy that respect minorities (EU), and a decision made by a president that is granted excessive powers in a dysfunctional democracy.
That’s how the US started. Still, legally, the president cannot change laws. It was normalized under Obama to get around this with executive orders.
It’s a development. If we step on that slippery slope, we should know in advance that we stop before it is too late. And above all, we should not assume that it can’t happen in the EU.
Obama made the least number of executive orders of any president for more than a century. So I seriously doubt he normalized them in any regard.
Also a slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slopeWhen the initial step is not demonstrably likely to result in the claimed effects, this is called the slippery slope fallacy.
The EU was created as an economic union with the intention to create a political union. It’s a slippery slope by design.
Obama made the least number of executive orders
Interesting. I only remember democrats arguing that Obama had to use the orders because republicans were blocking congress.
I’m betting a mechanism could be created. It hasn’t happened because Germany and France don’t want it to, yet. That could change.
Any EU decision must be unanimous, though.
That’s just not true.
There’s no such thing as ‘must be’. There’s only as much as the member states will put up with. If the cost exceeds the value, it will get changed, along with any rules that supposedly prevent it. The only thing the rules do is set a higher cost.
I get that 1956 was a while ago, but still…
