The EU is a bureaucratic organization with some purely symbolic democratic rituals. Governments (not citizens) of member countries really affecting it are supposed to be democratic, but at this point they are just OK, mostly. Nothing good to compare with.

Anyway - all these names are as meaningless as flags. Every decision made defines a system. You might call something a social democracy, but through 1, 2, 3 decisions overnight it’s suddenly something different, if there was a critical point.

I wish.

You should look up “Parliament of the European Union” for more information, if you’re actually interested. Currently the EVP (conservative party) is the largest, and overall there is a majority of centre-right to extremist right parties. The current President of the EU Comission (basically EU government) is Ursula von der Leyen, a member of the EVP.

It’s been a long time since the EU was lead by social democrats, and even then, they were in a coalition with conservatives.

So no, the EU is neither technically nor actually a social democracy

The EU is not a country.

Some countries in the EU currently have or have had Social Democratic governments, but mainly they have governments which are Neoliberal, though a milder form than the US: generally the mainstream Rightwing around this parts has policies which are to the left of the Democrat Party in the US, though not by much, so for example nobody has a Healthcare system which is as bad as the US - even the ones with a Health Insurance based system have way more rules and consumer protections around it - and even in the worst countries Public Transport is better than in the in US.

Then again at least one country in the EU - Hungary - currently has Fascism whilst the other ones which are said to have Far-Right governments (such as Italy) politically sit between the US Democrats and Republicans.

In the things which are the responsibility of the EU (i.e. trade-related subjects), the EU is significantly more pro-consumer than the US, with for example the precautionary principle - i.e. proven safe before allowed, rather than the US’ method of allowing until proven unsafe - being used for chemical substances which people tend to come in contact with, and more broadly with consumers having way more rights all across the EU than they have in the US (were it massively depends on the State) and with stricter rules when it comes to pollution and more broadly Environmental damage.

I supposed that in the things which fall under the responsibility of the EU, it tends to be sort of half-way between Neoliberal and Social-Democrat, for example it’s very Neoliberal when it comes to Finance, but it’s Social Democrat when it comes to consumer rights and protections, especially for things like food, though even there it’s sort of somewhere between lax and strict in regulatory terms. I suspect this is due to different countries caring more about different domains and hence the politics of countries which care more about a specific domain getting more strongly imprinted in legislation at an EU level so it ends up reflected into very different political spins for different trade domains.