Reforming the EU Party System



  • At the moment, and indeed ever since I (or any of my compatriots) set foot inside the European Council, I have failed to see any functioning use for the current partisan system within the EU.

    However, I understand that factions may have an important theoretical role to play in harmonising like ideologies on Commission choices and Council votes, so I call here for reform and not abolition of the idea of EU-wide factions.

    I believe that we should dissolve the two current factions in favour of the following four factions:

    EPP (Christian Democrats)
    EUL (Socialist-Communist-Green)
    ALDE (Left-Leaning Liberal)
    ECR (Conservative-National-Eurosceptic)

    These four factions would provide a better system of categorising Council representatives by their ideology, at which the current system woefully fails- for example the nearest grouping to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union is the Liberals.

    I would also put forward the idea of all new nations, before their first vote in the European Council, registering on a roll-call their nation's name and representative's name, alongside their partisan affiliation if they wish to have one and have been accepted into that party. Opposition parties may join Euro-parties if they so wish.

    If a nation ceases to exist or falls into anarchy, or fails to vote in five successive European Council votes, they shall be struck off the register and made to register once more to be able to vote.

    The registration system would help to quantify the breakdown of the European Council by ideology and affiliation, and thus would help the parties themselves co-ordinate their campaigns in the Council. I am sure that one of my nationals would be willing to provide pie charts and graphs of voting records and affiliations in the European Council.

    I see these changes as important to the rejuvenation of the European Council and its becoming once more a proud and active legislative body, instead of the semi-chaotic and inactive nature that has blighted it for well over a year.


  • administrators

    I like the idea of creating additional parties. It would give member nations more, and more specific, options when joining a Europarty.



  • The idea is noble. However, since when should political parties be set up by the government. (OOC: Perhaps this is my VERY American point of view on the topic... if I am ignorant to an old European tradition, please let me know.)

    Political parties are groups striving for a common interest. People must first gather and thereafter decide that they have the strength in numbers to represent the ideal they wish to help become reality.

    The current parties developed out of necessity, not out of government action.

    Forcing the current two political parties to split into four would just weaken the strength and participation rate of each faction.



  • QUOTE (Nazione Italiana @ Nov 21 2009, 10:08 PM)

    The idea is noble. However, since when should political parties be set up by the government. (OOC: Perhaps this is my VERY American point of view on the topic... if I am ignorant to an old European tradition, please let me know.)

    Political parties are groups striving for a common interest. People must first gather and thereafter decide that they have the strength in numbers to represent the ideal they wish to help become reality.

    The current parties developed out of necessity, not out of government action.

    Forcing the current two political parties to split into four would just weaken the strength and participation rate of each faction.

    The problem is, Mr. Panzeri, that in your nation's lengthy absence from the European stage, the current party system has declined to a point of non-existence. The halls of both parties have been left empty for over a year, and you could tell with the Nuclear Proliferation Act that there was no party involvement in the European Council at all.

    Neither party has any strength or participation rate that could be weakened, and- although I admit it is strange for a centre-right man like myself to bat for the Socialists- anyone who sees themselves as to the left of Liberal has no berth in EU politics. The current parties devloped out of necessity, and it is out of necessity that the new parties shall also develop.

    And I am not suggesting that the EU Commission, or any other government body, should be the people to set up a faction. I am suggesting that the shells of the former political parties should voluntarily disband themselves by will of the national parties that they consist of, and then like-minded parties shall once again group themselves into Europarties- the proposal above being merely hypothetical groupings that I believe are the best units for a new EU party system and I hope shall be created via consensus of the major national parties of the region.



  • I agree with the idea of creating additional Euro-parties to better reflect the ideologies of Council representatives. The four proposed groupings would probably cover the national parties which have ideologies that are significantly different from either of the two currently existing factions.

    OOC: I really like Angleter's inclusion of a group ~gue/ngl



  • QUOTE (Brecon @ Nov 22 2009, 05:33 PM)

    OOC: I really like Angleter's inclusion of a group ~gue/ngl

    OOC: I was trying to find a way of making a group that would not only include the Social Democratic sort of parties, but also the CPSU and the enviro-socialist groups.


  • group:cid:2:privileges:mods:members

    I think this is a great Idea and would like to pledge my party Os Corelius to the ALDE cause

    Each party of the nation would be happy to affiliate with the resonante groupings suggested!

    Viscount K. Xavier


  • group:cid:2:privileges:mods:members

    The Os Corelius Party wishes to act and become an establishing co-founding nation within the ALDE Group of parties.



  • So we have one party having stepped forward to found ALDE.

    I have been contacted by the opposition party in my nation, the CLP, who have stated that they are interested in founding the ECR grouping.

    If Mr. Panzeri wishes for his party to set up the EPP group as a compromise for his cautious reaction to this proposal, I would be more than happy to let him do so, and if the CPSU or the ruling party of Brecon wish to set up the EUL then they should do so.

    I hope that we have the new parties up and running by the start of December, before my compatriot Premier Commissioner Smith calls Commission elections.


  • administrators

    OOC: I think there are inherent complications that arise with registering nations with political parties. I don't think it's very realistic to put nations into regional political parties. Why not have domestic political parties align themselves with regional parties instead? And representatives from each country can be affiliated with political parties at the european level.



  • QUOTE (Belarum @ Nov 24 2009, 01:54 AM)

    OOC: I think there are inherent complications that arise with registering nations with political parties. I don't think it's very realistic to put nations into regional political parties. Why not have domestic political parties align themselves with regional parties instead? And representatives from each country can be affiliated with political parties at the european level.

    OOC: That is what I intended. I never wanted nations themselves to align with Europarties, just their parties. Also, as I said, opposition parties are welcome to join Europarties, which may wish to fund their members' electoral parties to increase power.

    The roll-call system means that either the Europarty of that nation's ruling party, or the Europarty of the Council representative (if they are not the same), shall be declared as a means of clarifying which representatives are active in the Council, hold certain beliefs and are likely to vote in a certain way. No nations as a whole are affiliated to parties-

    And that's another point. With the new system I would expect parties to be much more stringent on who they accept. There should be no more cases of 'the Liberal, Conservative and Socialist Parties all agree on joining the EPP'.


  • administrators

    The CPSU is willing to take part in this proposed system, but we find our ideologies incompatible with the Greens.



  • QUOTE (Soviet Union @ Nov 25 2009, 11:47 AM)

    The CPSU is willing to take part in this proposed system, but we find our ideologies incompatible with the Greens.

    Well, in that case, the EUL could not explicitly hold an environmental stance, but I would expect it to be the Europarty of choice for Green parties.


  • group:cid:2:privileges:mods:members

    The Os Corelius party Hereby Declare the formation of ALDE Group within the European Parliament - The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe

    As the party is starting out we would like to declare a temporary chairman in the form of The Os Corelius Party's European Union MEP Group Leader Praetor Harajok Zelezny.

    We would like to request that the administatorsallow us a thread in The parties thread set up in ALDE's name.

    Once set up registrations of parties will begin.

    thank you
    Viscount K. Xavier - Leader of Os Corelius Party and Head of State for Os Corelia



  • If there are no further objections I would like to ask the EPP-ED and ELP to dissolve themselves over this weekend. I hope that, by Monday morning, the four new parties are established. Then I shall establish the roll-call system for the Council. Meanwhile I would like to read a letter from the leader of Angleter's Conservative & Libertarian Party, Monty V. Catt:

    --TO THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL--

    I would hereby like to announce, as leader of the CLP, that our party is to form a new faction across Europe to bring together parties of conservative values, economic liberalism, and national pride. This group is to be known as the 'European Conservatives & Reformists' or 'ECR', and its temporary leader shall be Mr. Alan Arlington MPP, until we have enough members to hold a clear vote.

    We ask of the administrators of the region to set up a berth for our new Europarty in the appropriate section. Thank you.

    Yours,

    Mr. Montezuma Valdemar Catt,
    Leader of the (CLP) Opposition.



  • Please could a member of the ELP and a member of the EPP-ED in favour of this move at least table a motion within the party to dissolve?


  • group:cid:2:privileges:mods:members

    We need to motion to go through instantly- please agree on it



  • OOC: If these are based on RL parties, it would help to have a cheatsheet on the political stances of each. Terms like "liberal", "conservative", "democrat" and even "reformist" are very different in Europe than they are in the states; I have no idea what these four proposed parties actually stand for.


  • administrators

    _ooc: I need to express some concern over the grouping of ideologies. "Socialist-Communist-Green" is a generic way to refer to "them Commies" in the States, if I am not mistaken, just most politely.

    The three ideologies can be virtually incompatible, so there should be a broader variety for choices. European Socialism is closer to what Americans term "liberal" while European Liberalism and Neo-Conservatism are not as different from one another as they are in the United States.

    "Communism" is used to refer to the far left-leaning parties, which self-describe their ideologies as socialist (but clearly not of the same branch as the other socialist parties.) Then you have Greens, Eurocommunists, Conservatives (could be liberal, nationalist, or conservative in American terms) etc.

    From what I see, by including CPSU in EUL, the party is far left and left leaning rather than left or centre-left, so expect stances like the usual social solidarity and worker rights thingy, but also protectionism, strong state sector, and generally Soviet Socialism-oriented things, perhaps even objecting to capitalist free market economics and free trade if the CPSU gets its way through. You can virtually expect an EUL to be a communist party in practice. EUL will stand for European United Left, which does match CPSU's view of what "Left" constitutes.

    Left- and Centre-Left-leaning parties with democratic socialist, more free-market and green ideologies, which inevitably would ideologically clash with those of the CPSU because of how it would handle economic and administrative matters, would generally fall under ALDE (which has a horrible description just because of that. "Left-Leaning Liberal" is too American in my opinion, and this is supposed to be the _European_Union after all.) ALDE is, thus, getting the role of a centre-left, socialist and social-democrat party.

    Christian-Democrats of EPP would probably fall in between the socialists of ALDE and the conservatives of ECR. Maybe social state on one hand, but more right-wing than ALDE feels like. Different way to handle things and all, and different views on administration, exact details of the social system, and who knows what else.

    The ECR would be the polar opposite ideology of the EUL. Euroscepticism would likely be shared between the two, but similarities end there: ECR is likely to attract nationalist, fascistoid, populist factions with strong right-wing ideologies. ECR members can advocate a fascist-style social state or a dangerously liberalised economy (ie. ultra-capitalism) while using nationalist platforms and banding together to fend off "them Communists" (EUL and ALDE) and "them Centrists" (EPP.)


    Regarding the European United Left or EUL. I need to be sharp at this, given the CPSU will be a founding member and a sponsor of the initiative; the EUL is not going to stand for fascistoid Communist-wannabe ideologies.

    As an example from this site, the way Prussia handles things irks Moscow a lot, but not enough to launch a full-scale ideological offensive against it. The likes of Prussia, which include all openly totalitarian states using poor excuses and distorting ideology "fit better in ECR than EUL" if Zyuganov would get to have a say on who joins what.

    Overall, the EUL is going to support general democratic frames (regardless of how they function wink.gif ) because hearing the voice of the people is what Communism is supposed to be for.

    Below are what the CPSU hopes the EUL will be going for (text based off the 2009 Manifesto of the KKE for the European Elections):_QUOTE

    _

    • Resistance - disobedience - insubordination to the EU
    • Rallying together for a Europe of peace, of popular rights, of socialism
    • The wealth produced is the labour of the working class, of the peoples
    • International action and solidarity
    • Become the majority in our states and in Europe
    • Salaries, unemployment benefits and the period for which they are given increased
    • Maintenance of the sovereign rights of EU member-states
    • Prevent the EU of becoming a global policeman, stop police actions and aggressive acts of rogue states

    WHY TO JOIN THE EUL

    • EUL says YES to coordination and common action by communists, radical parties, and anti-imperialist forces that resist and fight against the choices and strategy of the EU and its treaties. It supports cooperation and common action on the basis of common goals of struggle and common directions, with simultaneous respect for the independence of each party.
    • Rallying together, effective policy of alliances in Europe. Empower the movement today, an open window for positive prospects tomorrow. Unyielding, militant action in the European Council.
    • Membership in the EUL is in defence of the rights of people all over the world, in the fight against the causes of poverty, hunger, disease, misery, social crime and the spread of narcotics.
    • Membership in the EUL is opposition to militarisation, state terrorism and oppression. Sending troops to wage imperialist wars. Changing frontiers and creating protectorate states, suspending collective and individual rights, enacting laws against terrorism, the European warrants, agreement of judicial concurrence with other countries. Against racist migration policy.
    • Contributing more to the organisation of a radical pole of communist, radical, anti-imperialist forces and movements in Europe, and parties of the left which have not compromised with European imperialism. Contributing more to international coordination and common action against the decisions and choices of the capital.

    WE SAY YES

    To the rights of the working class and other working people, to people with shops and small businesses, to holders of small and medium-sized farms, women and young people, and the salaried intelligentsia.

    Yes to free public education and scientific research that serves the people's needs.

    To the rights of small tradesmen and small entrepreneurs.

    To the rights of small and medium-sized peasants.

    The peoples have another choice : RESISTANCE - DISOBEDIENCE - DISENGAGEMENT - EQUITABLE COOPERATION IN EUROPE

    A Europe of prosperity, of the peoples' rights, of peace
    and of socialism will become reality

    No obstacles, no hardship can stop it

    No to the "euro-submission"

    Resistance, insubordination, disobedience._



  • OOC: I'm actually English myself, and 'left-leaning liberal' was just a term I used to exclude parties like the (RL) German FDP which embrace neo-liberal economic views alongside social liberalism.

    And 'Socialist-Communist-Green' was a way of basically including all parties from the GUE/NGL RL group plus the CPSU and the left side of the S&D (no Blairs).

    Basically how I envisioned it in terms of RL European groupings:

    EUL: Communists, GUE/NGL and left half of S&D (French & Spanish Socialists);
    ALDE: Right half of S&D (New Labour/Third Way) and the left half of ALDE (UK Lib Dems);
    EPP: Right half of ALDE (German FDP) and the EPP;
    ECR: The ECR, EFD and all the right-wing non-inscrit nasties.

    As for general ideology:

    The ECR is avowedly neo-liberal but will accept state capitalism and is strongly socially conservative and Eurosceptic;
    The EPP has moral and neo-liberal leanings but generally is in favour of limited welfare systems;
    The ALDE is socially liberal and secular, and opposes neo-liberal thought in favour of a welfare state/social market economy (would adopt Keynesian thought in a recession while the EPP and ECR would remain neo-liberal);
    The EUL favours strong government participation in the economy (over 50% public spending as a share of GDP), may be socialist-democratic or Communist, and is generally Eurosceptic (although some parts may favour a centralised socialist superstate in the Jacques Delors mould). Enviro-socialist parties would join this grouping.

    And Prussia would be a non-inscrit if it could vote in the Council.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to NS European Union was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.