The sheer scale of the EU experiment renders the entire system faceless. UK with its 60 million voters only represents ( at last EU estimate) 13% of EU. Yes , its a model of democracy, but becomes government of the people by "other" people.
Ofcourse its faceless and way more than Westminster , which is positively local by comparison. Watched the useless Lords last night. ( another level of redundant democracy filled with scroungers) but lots of faces were recognisable...by us all.
Tony Benn was perfectly correct in his summation of EU, he insisted it was not democratic " for us". UK could never change a thing in EU if we didn't like it. Democracy is much more than merely having influence and a lost voice.
If the country as a whole wants an issue changing we should not have to lobby Brussels, curry favour with Barnier and Junkers. We should have the sovereignty to make decisions. Its called self determination. EU supporters are happy to give that away and to a system that is actually untried.
We have been over that ground so many times, that a furrow is worn. I ,we know the names of our local MEPs , I can go, were I so inclined to the local office of the EU, around the corner from the Dail,and I have knowledge of who our current EU Commissioner, elected by the Dail is. .. I don't particularly like him and his bluster, but I know who he is. I don't know the name of the official in the car tax office, who reminded me of my need to renew, so that person is nameless not faceless.
I can recognise the voices and faces of a number of Hollywood actors , but is just as meaningless as 48% as the people in a majority rule parliament.
I get the arguement about 13% representation.
Think for a moment about sovereignty. The UK has and retained sovereignty, were it not, then leaving the EU, instead of the monumental own goal, it is, it would be treason rebellion or sedition. Any of the commitments that the EU commission are seeking recompense for are those which in its sovereignty, the UK freely agreed to undertake. The amounts of money might be in dispute, but not the principles.
Could you be specific as to what if any issue the UK as a whole agreed on, and how and whether it was prevented by Brussels?
There is one section in your posting I find disturbing and that is a reference to" currying favour" with named individuals. It is disturbing because it exhibits a servile mentality. That one would lobby a parliament to make a case or bring something to notice, is very normal. The parliamentary parties are not all knowing so representations need to be made. But the notion that one would seek favours, by kowtowing is appalling in a democracy and is positively mediaeval.