> Other than Orban being corrupt and unpopular because the same applies to most politicians at EU level especially Ursula vs Leyen.
I am so tired of these "they are all bad anyway" stances. AFAIK, Ursula van der Leyen is not actively supporting a country who invaded a EU neighbour some years ago or routinely performs assassinations on EU territory. Also, I do not think she is actively criticizing the EU whenever she has the opportunity while pocketing as much money from it as she can. Maybe we could talk about Orban stance wrt democracy and people rights.
I don't especially like Ursula van der Leyen, I think she is the usual misdirected pro-market believer the kind we had too much in EU so far. But she is not that bad.
I guess they are the same anyway.
All that said, Ireland action is bad but not that bad.
I agree van der Leyen is a corrupt, lobby friendly politician with some strange ideas (in my opinion).
But she isn't "evil" or someone who would commit treason or anything like that.
She also isn't incompetent in the way a lot of media in German loves to paint here. Actually she even seem quite competent wrt. some of the core skills of politicians. This doesn't mean I don't think a lot of here decisions are supper misguided, but that is a clash of beliefs and ideals which is not the same as incompetence.
> "evil" or someone who would commit treason or anything like that
is a really low bar
and do you really think you become President of the European Commission by being severely incompetent? If she where as severely incompetent as some media likes to picture she would at best have been complimented away to some mostly irrelevant position, not one of the highest position in the EU organs.
I asked you to point out her achievements and you just glazed her further on the basis that "you can't possibly fail upwards to a high level leadership position" when a lot of people in recently history have, and in her position it's not even that hard to do when business interests use their money and influence to guarantee that their preferred puppet sorry I meant candidate gets there, especially that the process for the position she's in is appointed by committee selection and not by direct election by the people.
And maybe some of the media portray her as incompetent because it's their job to investigate politics and they notice more of her fuckups than you do, especially given your lack of positive examples for her.
my point is that calling someone a "Leyen is a corrupt, lobby friendly politician" while putting a relative low bar of "not evil" on here moral standard and that she isn't completely incompetent is not glazing. I have no intend to discuss any detailed politics on HN.
>I am so tired of these "they are all bad anyway" stances.
What evidence do you have they are not all bad? I can't think of too many major high level EU leaders that people would consider to be a net positive.
>Hungary suspected of spying for Russia
Are you aware that former German and Austrian politicians are on the payroll of Russian oil and gas companies and Putin even came to the wedding s of some of them? Are you aware Austrian banks still operate in Russia profiting?
Yet I never hear anyone blaming Austrian every 5 minutes the same way they do Hungary.
Why the double standards where all the blame in on Hungary yet other EU members fly under the radar for much more pro-Russia cooperation and profiteering?
>Also, I do not think she is actively criticizing the EU whenever she has the opportunity while pocketing as much money from it as she can.
Then why did she delete her messages with Pfizer? You're right, she's not profiteering, she's just helping her puppet masters profiteer. Big difference.
> What evidence do you have they are not all bad? I can't think of too many major high level EU leaders that people would consider to be a net positive.
A net positive compared to what? To have nobody at the head of the state and have anarchy? Or compared to the next one who wants the job?
Let's be concrete. I live in France, which currently is not going to give anyone lessons about governance. Current president is Macron. Is he evil bad, super corrupt? I do not think so. He is a bad mix of arrogance, naivety and brilliance in some domains. In the end, his run will end with average results as best, but not for lack of trying. It does not make him evil bad.
Previous one, Hollande was nice guy out of his league. Mediocre at best. But not evil or corrupt.
Previous one, Sarkozy, was brilliant and corrupt. He is going to jail next month. Still nowhere as bad as Orban on the civil rights front.
Regardless, all of them are better than having Le Pen (far right) as president. Who is already known to be corrupt populist and a Russian puppet.
I am afraid this is another of these "perfect is the enemy of the good" conversation.
Same with Van der Leyen. Fair enough she may have taken money from Pfizer and whatnot. But you are comparing that to someone who literally suggests violent action against people of his own country. I am sorry but things are not white and black.
I find it funny that most people on HN despise politicians but on the other hand are very happy to keep their cosy job for ad-tech/vc-fueled/well-paid companies instead of doing their part.
Try running for mayor of a small/medium city and see how well you respond for corruption after a few years of constant harassment.
>But you are comparing that to someone who literally suggests violent action against people of his own country.
What's worse? Suggesting violence against someone, or actions of corruption that loose taxpayers shit tones of money, which if it wasn't stolen by politicians would have gone to things like healthcare to keep people alive? If only there was a way to quantify money lost from corruption to deaths from underfunded healthcare, it would start to sink in for you, but you care more about optics than about actual harm done.
Same for Austrian and German politicians being in bed with Putin to tie Europe's energy security to Russian oil and gas but noooo, Orban is the real evil because he said hurty things.
>Fair enough she may have taken money from Pfizer and whatnot.
When massive corruption leading to deaths is just "and what not" to you, then I can't argue anymore with you. The problem isn't she taking Pfizer money, its she selling out the taxpayer's money every step of the way in her political career. Pfizer's money comes with strings attached, same for every other lobbyist.
>but on the other hand are very happy to keep their cosy job for ad-tech/vc-fueled/well-paid companies instead of doing their part.
Is that a self report? Because I don't have any of those.
Citizens elect politicians, then pay them to run a city/country as their main job, they don't have time to be a politician beyond their regular jobs that put food on their table.
> Are you aware that former German and Austrian politicians are on the payroll of Russian oil and gas companies and Putin even came to the wedding s of some of them? Are you aware Austrian banks still operate in Russia profiting?
Source?
> Why the double standards where all the blame in on Hungary yet other EU members fly under the radar for much more pro-Russia cooperation and profiteering?
There are no double standards. Besides Orban and Fico, there are no EU ministers or governments going to Minsk, Belarus, or Russia, to meet with Putin.
When the war started, MOL, the state-owned petrol company of Hungary, said it would take about 3 years for them to shift all their refineries to move away from Russian oil. It's 2025, and they are still heavily-dependent on Russian oil. They did nothing to end this dependence [0].
Orban settled a deal with Russia to buy gas and oil, whose terms are confidential and will probably be so for the next decades. What every Hungarian news portal reported was essentially Hungary was being scammed, as it would be much cheaper to buy the same oil/gas from the Dutch stock exchange [1].
Regarding Austrian banks, Raiffeisen was just on the news this month because they are still operating in Russia. So, no, I wouldn't say it's a double standard. Besides, the Austrian politicians are certainly not making a fuss and blocking or vetoing any decision regarding Ukraine or Russian sanctions because of that [2]. Meanwhile, we have Hungary who keeps creating excuses to apply their vetos on such decisions, and Fico, who's doing the same, because the EU (von der Leyen) showed the world anyone can blackmail the EU and get away with it.
I am so tired of these "they are all bad anyway" stances. AFAIK, Ursula van der Leyen is not actively supporting a country who invaded a EU neighbour some years ago or routinely performs assassinations on EU territory. Also, I do not think she is actively criticizing the EU whenever she has the opportunity while pocketing as much money from it as she can. Maybe we could talk about Orban stance wrt democracy and people rights.
I don't especially like Ursula van der Leyen, I think she is the usual misdirected pro-market believer the kind we had too much in EU so far. But she is not that bad.
I guess they are the same anyway.
All that said, Ireland action is bad but not that bad.