The EU seems to be trying to catch up with China and Russia.
The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
31–40 of 425 posts
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#32Why every 12 months the European Commission comes up with a total dumb and authoritarian proposal and we have to actively fight it? It’s just tiring
Because any government's primary objective is to secure the power of the government, and most governments including western "democratic" ones view their people as the biggest threat to that objective. Which they are right about, mind you.
This is a really dumb thing to say and it really undermines the power of every day people to have a say in how our world is run.
The Government is our voice and our strength, and we are going to need that voice heard and our will exercised in the coming years.
We need to stop undermining our governments, we need to get money out of politics, and we need to sort out our democracies.
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#33ChatControl Explained: https://peertube.european-pirates.eu/w/d64e6e10-0ad0-4b37-88...
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#34If I lived in the EU I'd want to know who are proposing this kind of stuff and help with anything that gets them far from public and government -related jobs forever, but hey, that's me. Lots of people like to give up a bit of freedom and privacy in exchange for an increased sense of security.
It is EU commissioner Ylva Johansson. Unfortunately, there is not much you can do. She is not elected to this position, but appointed, and in this case by a former government who is no longer in power.
EU seems to have an abundance of unelected regulatory positions. Eurosceptics are right in that EU represents a form of non-democratic decision-making which has the power to supersede (more) democratically formulated laws from member states. Ideally, the autocratic tendencies of the EU and the member states should cancel out by disagreeing with each other, but in reality member states seem unwilling to oppose them most of the times.
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#35I urge fellow HN members to take a stand against this proposal by informing others, participating in public debates, and reaching out to their representatives in the EU Parliament. Let's work together to protect our democratic values and the future of the internet as we know it.
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because any government's primary objective is to secure the power of the government, and most governments including western "democratic" ones view their people as the biggest threat to that objective. Which they are right about, mind you.
This is a really dumb thing to say and it really undermines the power of every day people to have a say in how our world is run. The Government is our voice and our strength, and we are going to need that voice heard and our will exercised in the coming years. We need to stop undermining our governments, we need to get money out of politics, and we need to sort out our democracies.
Unless you can actually address what I wrote, explain why it is a "really dumb thing to say", I'll chalk that up to you being bewildered and terrified by the truth in what I say. That's okay, many people are completely subservient to authority, dependent on the government, want to be ruled and protected. I pass no moral judgement in my comment, merely explain why the EU is desperate to surveil their own citizens.
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#37This is so awful that it strikes me as likely being a door-in-the-face[1] proposal designed to make a more 'reasonable' proposal that is still vile on its own merits seem palatable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique
See also: Overton Window and Anchoring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_(cognitive_bias) ...but yes, this is why in the US republicans are constantly floating all sorts of batshit regressive policies on social welfare programs, LGBTQ people, voting rights, immigration - it shifts the ultimate compromise closer to their desired outcome, and even if it doesn't, it sti…
[deleted]
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#38Suggested alternative: The "End Political Corruption Proposal" "Given that political corruption is rife in European countries, with great detriments to the healthy function of government, all politicians in positions where they may be engaging in corrupt behavior must submit to 24-7 audio and video surveillance, which will be piped over public platforms for crowdsourcing of corruption detection. All personal communic…
[deleted]
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because any government's primary objective is to secure the power of the government, and most governments including western "democratic" ones view their people as the biggest threat to that objective. Which they are right about, mind you.
This is a really dumb thing to say and it really undermines the power of every day people to have a say in how our world is run. The Government is our voice and our strength, and we are going to need that voice heard and our will exercised in the coming years. We need to stop undermining our governments, we need to get money out of politics, and we need to sort out our democracies.
I prefer popular sovereignty. You can support a government.
Re: The chat control proposal does not belong in democratic societies
#40This is so awful that it strikes me as likely being a door-in-the-face[1] proposal designed to make a more 'reasonable' proposal that is still vile on its own merits seem palatable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Door-in-the-face_technique
Don't you think it'd be better to ratify the most vile proposal while the ideals of freedom still have majority reign? To create a fiasco so enduring it won't soon be forgotten? And before tools of mass manipulation become any more technologically sophisticated?
If I'm reading [1] correctly, we're just picking up momentum down a decades-long slippery slope.
1. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/FIW_202...