Article
A truly pan‑European political party? One programme for all of Europe, individual membership, shared funding and a single headquarters?
How to make European Parliament elections clearer and more democratic? One of the questions that stood at the birth of Volt Europa. In Slovakia the movement remains largely unknown; in France its representatives appear on national television.
Its representatives are running in this year’s European Parliament elections. But we cannot yet expect a major victory; the movement has very little recognition across Europe. Perhaps in five or ten years we will hear more of it, depending on their activities.
They come with a change in how politics is conducted within the European Union. Paradoxically, they criticise what Eurosceptics also focus on, the so‑called democratic deficit of the EU.
That is why they want to create the first pan‑European political party, and they enter this year’s European elections with a single programme in several member states. The opposite of what we have seen so far. A large number of parties and programmes. If we imagine five parties per member state, 5 x 28 programmes is really a lot. Then the question appears: what difference can a handful of MEPs from a small country really make?
Want to know more about Volt Europa? Read: Why am I a Member of Volt Europa? Real Positive Change, and an Innovative Approach
Summary
Common questions on this article's topic
What is Volt Europa?
How does Volt Europa differ from traditional European parties?
What is the EU democratic deficit and how does Volt address it?
Can a pan-European party actually work?
Is Volt Europa pro-EU or anti-EU?
Why do not most people care about European elections?
If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.
LinkedIn
More articles
How and why I am gradually leaving social media and the big platforms. When I read that Meta is testing a new way to charge for organic posts that link outside its platform, it confirms how right I was to become steadily less dependent on the big platforms and on social media. It does not mean I have left them completely. It means that whether or not I stay in touch with my readers depends on them less and less, and today almost not at all.
One of my family members described a firm that has its data in several different tools, and its employees still join it by hand, in spreadsheets. That is the ordinary state of firms. When somebody tells such people not to do it by hand and to use AI, they will not understand. Most firms do not even have the basic connectors between the tools they use. These firms need help with AI transformation.
The same task, two models. Fable 5 against Opus 4.8. On paper Fable is the better model, with a larger context and stronger specs. And still it lost. Opus handled the task with a single round of checking for 721,000 tokens, while Fable needed nine rounds and burnt through 2.78 million tokens. The difference was not in the model, but in how I set the task. And I know it, because I measured it.
A few weeks ago I installed a small local AI model on my laptop that watches a live camera feed. I turned the webcam on in the dark, and in near total darkness it recognised me and the objects in the room. That such things exist, I have known for a long time. What opened my eyes was the accessibility. I installed it in one prompt, free, and it runs entirely on my machine, sending data nowhere.
I once wrote about building my own privacy-friendly analytics tool. It had bot detection from the first version, yet it was not enough. Direct visits took a strangely high share of my traffic. When someone claims that 20% of their visits are bots and 80% are humans, I used to think the same. Today I would say the opposite ratio is closer to the truth. This is how I got there.
I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.
Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.
For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?
A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.
Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.
Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.