Especially where the rhetoric for dismantling that institution already took Europe in a very dark path a century ago.

Sorry, but you are representing the “a dark path”, where power is concentrated in the hands of a few.

And that is not what is happening. You can hold quite a lot of viewpoints, including opposing who is in charge. You just can't use EU funds to campaign for EU to be effectively abolished.

Imagine someone running for presidency in the US campaigning for it to disintegrate.

> Sorry, but you are representing the “a dark path”, where power is concentrated in the hands of a few.

Quite the opposite. EU fragments power so much that fucking Orban gets to block any initiative, even though Hungary is far from being one of the main countries in the block.

Also, very cute of you to cry authoritarianism when we are talking about Le Pen of all people, someone who holds very authoritarian views herself. Quite telling, whenever such a politician faces consequences of their bullshit, a lot of people come out of the woods to make excuses for them. Fuck that noise.

I agree that Marie Le Pen holds authoritarian views. When it comes to politicians this seems to be the rule rather than an exception. But that doesn’t make EU a particularly democratic organisation.

In my opinion, it is rare to find politicians who try to increase democracy.

Regarding your USA example, I believe it is only a nominally democratic state. I don’t think what they do over there is particularly good and should not be wused as a positive example.

I believe the best example of a functioning democracy is Switzerland.

I fundamentally disagree with that. It would be like using public funds to run for presidency in a country while campaigning for that country to cease to exist.

Note that they didn't forbid her to campaign on a platform that is against the EU - which I think they should - they only forbid her to use public EU funds to do so.

That you want to paint this as undemocratic is very bizarre.

> But that doesn’t make EU a particularly democratic organisation.

To the opposite, EU fragments power quite a lot. It is one of the main reasons why it is slow to act sometimes, many changes requires unanimous approval from all member countries (which is why Orban gets to veto any initiative while he is gurgling on Putin's balls).

> In my opinion, it is rare to find politicians who try to increase democracy.

I don't even know if we would agree what a perfectly functioning democracy even is.

You seem to think this is an absurd scenario - I don't know how to tell you this, but it's not. It's allowed in healthy democracies. To give just three contemporary European examples:

1. In the UK the Scottish National Party gets public money for being in Parliament, yet has the stated goal that the UK should cease to exist. SNP MPs aren't thrown in prison or banned from politics. That's because the UK is a democracy.

2. Flanders has independence parties that poll highly and take part in regular politics without being banned from Belgian politics.

3. MEPs themselves are frequently arch Euro-nationalists. They get public money and then campaign to effectively abolish the countries they represent, demanding their national governments be replaced by the EU institutions. This is of course not considered illegal.

Whilst there are regions that criminalize attempts to actually become independent (which they shouldn't), even they typically don't criminalize merely being in favor of it.

> Note that they didn't forbid her to campaign on a platform that is against the EU - which I think they should - they only forbid her to use public EU funds to do so.

She's been banned from politics entirely and given a prison sentence. That meets the threshold for something being forbidden.

It honestly sounds like you'd have been happy with all the other attempts to unite Europe under a single government that happened in the 20th century. Not only are you delighted by this clearly despotic move, you think it should be illegal to even be against the EU at all: a purist argument for the EU as totalitarian dictatorship. You should really think about whether that's the place you want to be, philosophically. Especially as frustration over the EU's undemocratic approach was the primary reason the UK left.

SNP is a very particular case in that Scotland is a country, and the UK is a country made up of countries.

Also, Scotland is not trying to abolish the UK, it would still be a United Kingdom of England, Wales, and Northen Ireland.

> 2. 2. Flanders has independence parties that poll highly and take part in regular politics without being banned from Belgian politics.

Again, you are speaking of a portion of a country that desires independence. This is not the same as abolishing the country. Belgium would not cease to exist.

I could bring up movements that desire the separation of Catalonia and Basque Country in Spain too.

> 3. MEPs themselves are frequently arch Euro-nationalists. They get public money and then campaign to effectively abolish the countries they represent, demanding their national governments be replaced by the EU institutions. This is of course not considered illegal.

Replacing national institutions with more EU integration is not trying to abolish the existence of that country. You are extrapolating something there in a weird slippery slope.

> She's been banned from politics entirely and given a prison sentence. That meets the threshold for something being forbidden.

Perhaps she should not have engaged in embezzlement. Good that she was banished. It is important to respect the rules in place, else they become irrelevant and more politicians would feel emboldened to break them.

> It honestly sounds like you'd have been happy with all the other attempts to unite Europe under a single government that happened in the 20th century.

Nice way to try to paint me as a Nazi while you are crying about Le Pen of all people.

Protip, I am not the Nazi in this conversation.

> Not only are you delighted by this clearly despotic move, you think it should be illegal to even be against the EU at all: a purist argument for the EU as totalitarian dictatorship.

EU is far from being totalitarian, and far from being a dictatorship. If it was we wouldn't have to handle Orban being a pain in the ass for every initiative.

In fact, it is so democratic that things move slooooowly, because it needs a lot of consensus for things to move forward. It's a price I agree to pay, even if Orban is the cost for it.

> You should really think about whether that's the place you want to be, philosophically.

I am very much in favor of more EU integration, and I certainly vote for pro EU politiciand and parties for that matter. EU federalization should be the goal for me.

> Especially as frustration over the EU's undemocratic approach was the primary reason the UK left.

And that worked super well for the UK lol.

You are just trying to excuse a plain case of embezzlement by dressing up as authoritarianism. Good that a cheater such as Le Pen is removed from elections. If democracy allows cheaters to run, that is shortcut to disaster.

Were Le Pen able to win an election without embezzlement of EU funds, I would agree she is as popular as you claim.

> And to the people who call themselves "European citizens", I would say this: you can build a positive, shared European identity without the EU.

As someone that lives in an EU country, I fully disagree. Even the largest EU countries are relatively small for the world stage. Consider that Germany has the population of Chinese provinces.

EU is an absurdly positive to every country involved, to the point where I actively desire further integration. Federalization of Europe should be the goal, not less integration.

> The average rock concert does more for long term European integration than any EU regulation because the EU is not Europe and Europe is not the EU. The EU is a transient political arrangement, one that is by now actually working against true European integration.

And this is the point where I come to conclusion you are arguing in bad faith.

> The path it's on leads to ever harsher authoritarianism.

Funny you mention this when you are crying about Le Pen and fucking AfD.

Yeah, nothing authoritarian from those people. It is the EU that is truly authoritarian. Sure.

Fuck that noise.

If so, this seems crazy to me.

In other cases the same things have been done without fines, I think, e.g. the German Greens. Because their policies align with the Commission their campaigning in Germany isn't considered "embezzlement".

The basic issue the EU has is that the Parliament isn't actually a Parliament. It's not genuinely the legislative branch because it can't change the law, which is the dictionary definition of Parliament. As a consequence it fills up with anti EU parties put there as a protest vote. These parties then want to spend their time advocating against the EU back home which is embarrassing to the EU as there is no other so-called Parliament in the world with so many members who think it shouldn't exist. These kinds of legal actions were conventionally about that.

This one has gone further because it's a way for the left to continue locking down mass immigration policies. Although you will read that Le Pen is far right in reality she is a classical left wing socialist with the policies typical of such a person, she is just against the EU and its migration policies. It's a purely ideological action, hence the ankle bracelet.

You are absolutely delusional.

This is on the same ballpark of the argument some brain damaged people repeat that the NSDAP was leftist because it had "socialist" in the party name.