1. Undemocratic for sure and I don't like it either, but it's a good thing it finally happens. Sweden, my new habitat and, well, all countries that don't use euros yet should finally get to the 21st century.
2. Yet they just fined Intel over a billion euros for violating an antitrust law. Things like that don't work in single countries, but because the EU has so many people studying each case like that it becomes virtually impossible to buy one's way out. Do note that no country in Europe has done anything about the overfishing on a national level far as I know. I am not happy with all of their policies either, but there is no way for Europe to improve its habits and quality of life on such a vast scale without the EU. With the majority rule of EU it does not matter if, just an example, Austria is unwilling to change its regulations regarding global warming, because improvements can be enforced.
3. In the fishing question? Perhaps you have noted that pretty much all decisions made by your government work exactly the same way. Keep in mind that the Lisbon Treaty does introduce an option of getting issues raised by large groups addressed in the Parliament. It does require a lot of names, one million I believe, but in big issues such as this it should not be too difficult with the 500 million population. Granted, some of them are underaged.
4. I thought it was based on the original Treaty of Rome of 1957 that actually included the Benelux countries and Italy as well. Anyway, your argument is null in the sense that now the Lisbon Treaty defines what the EU is supposed to be, while you stated what it was. EU goes deeper than that though, including humanitarian aid for example, which is one thing I support.
