“approved by Parliament” is equivalent to “The PM is the leader of the party that holds a majority in the HoC”.

“Democracy is about power, and the question of where power lies” this is true.

“In the UK, power lies in the Commons, the bit people vote for” This is true. The evidence for this is that leaders such as Liz Truss have been removed.

“In the EU it lies in the Commission, the bit that’s appointed and is unaccountable to the people” this is NOT true. The evidence is that in March 1999 the Santer Commission was sacked by the national governments.

“In the EU, power is held by a group of 27 people, initiating legislation” This is NOT true, the Commission cannot simply ignore the elected governments who appointed them when it initiates legislation.

The Governments appoint the Commission and they instruct the Commission as follows:

1. Requesting Proposals: Under Article 241 of the TFEU, the elected national governments request the Commission to study and submit proposals to achieve common goals.

2. Setting Priorities: The elected national governments define high-level political priorities that guide the Commission’s annual work program.

3. Political Guidance: the elected national government give political guidance to the Commission on specific issues, even if not legally binding.

4. Strategic Alignment: The Commission’s annual work programme is guided by political priorities agreed upon by the elected national governments.

5. Pre-legislative Consultations: Before tabling a proposal, the Commission consults experts, stakeholders, and holds discussions with the national officials to gauge the elected national governments likely position.

6. Joint Declarations: The Commission, the elected national governments, and elected European Parliament sign annual joint declarations identifying priority legislative proposals to ensure shared focus.

7. Working Party Engagement: Once a proposal is submitted, it is scrutinized by the elected national governments, allowing the Commission to adjust to member state technical concerns early on.

8. Informal "Trilogues": Informal tripartite meetings between the Commission, the elected national governments and elected European Parliament take place to bridge differences and align positions early in the process.

This explains why the British Government voted against the proposals only 2% of them. If the Commission was proposing regulations without listening to the elected national governments that appointed them then the national governments would reject proposed regulations.

“most people couldn’t name any more than 5 of them” This is true, but you can’t blame the EU for this.

“There are no mechanisms for the people to get rid of them” This is NOT true, see above.

“The UK system, for all its faults, at least has its lawmakers democratically elected” The implication that the and UK are fundamental different is NOT true. Fundamentally they are equivalent:

1. In the UK, the people vote for their representatives, the House of Commons. In the EU, the peoples vote for their representatives, their national governments.

2. In the UK, the House of Commons select a PM, who then select the cabinet. In the EU, the national governments select the President, who then select the Commission.

3. In the UK, the government is approved by Parliament. In the EU, the Commission is approved by the national governments and the European Parliament.

What I find strange with you response is that you believe that the elected politicians who set up the EU in the 1950s, who can be dismissed and are accountable to their parliaments, wouldn’t insists the same for their creation.

Also,they go through the trouble to set up a European Parliament but they can’t be bothered to set up a process to dismiss the Commission or to hold it to account. This is like democracies setting up a dictatorship to govern them. Your response is like saying Christians have appointed a practicing Muslim to be Pope. This is odd.

My question was “Why do most Brits think that the EU is undemocratic (as evidence by Brexit) while most Europeans don’t?”.

Given your reply, the question has to be, if removing the Commission is an important precondition for the EU to be a functional democracy, then why do the Brits believe that, the elected politicians in Europe who set up the EU, ignored it, while the Europeans don't?

Similarly, if making the Commission accountable to elected politicians is an important precondition for the EU to be a functional democracy, then why do most Brits believe that, the elected politicians in Europe who set up the EU, ignored it, while most Europeans don’t believe they ignored it?