There are advantages to "government by evolution", as opposed to "government by monoculture"

With the former approach, every country is allowed to try different things, some amazing, some dumb, and learn from the amazing and dumb things that others have done.

In the latter, there's only one governing body, and whatever that body said, goes. There's no science or statistics, just sides shouting their arguments at each other, calling people names.

Both the EU and the US used to heavily lean towards the former approach, but they're slowly but inexorably moving towards the latter.

> So in summary: because the law was avoided today, the EU needs to be abolished? Weird take.

There are many reasons to abolish the EU, but the topic here is chat control.

> You can see it the other way around, without the EU, Denmark and others would have already implemented ChatControl in their country. This is driven by member states (Denmark), not the parliament, after all.

Would they? We don't know. Would the government of Denmark be ready to commit political suicide by insisting again and again on something so unpopular?

The whole premise of the EU is to allow various unelected interest groups to push unpopular regulation to the EU member states without any consequences.