Alphapuggle PieFedGermany decides against supporting chat control
www.patrick-breyer.de/en/citizen-protest-halts-…
…again. If it sounds familiar it’s not just you. But they’ve been back on “undecided” shortly after. Let’s hope this is the actual final decision.
50 Comments
Comments from other communities
Emilie EasieI’ve never been so proud of Germany before
The greatest German achievement since the Ottonian Dynasty.
This is not special. Just because our government was stupid enough to ever consider voting for it in the first place doesnt make ‘voting for the only sane option’ something to be proud of.
This is like your kid telling you they set the house on fire, you panic and then they go ’nah jk I only wrecked your car’ and youre like ‘Im so proud of you’
20cello
Sunshine (she/her)Stop embarrassing yourself Denmark. Danes I think you need to hold your government accountable.
Great!
I’m sick of this. We have to defeat it every time it comes up, and there is no doubt it’ll come up again in 2-3 months. They only have to win once and when they do it’ll be in our lives forever.
higgsboson
A_norny_mousse*minor
(they said “There will be no chat control without reason")
Voters in:
- Austria.
- Belgium.
- Czech Republic.
- Finland.
- Germany.
- Luxemburg.
- Netherlands.
- Poland.
Your members of european parliament have made a good choice!
Voters in:
- Bulgaria
- Croatia
- Cyprus
- Denmark (!)
- France
- Hungary
- Ireland
- Italy
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- Malta
- Portugal
- Slovakia
- Spain
- Sweden
In 2029 there’s new EU parliament elections. You can list your representatives on https://fightchatcontrol.eu/#delegates and make sure not to vote for them ever (again) 👍
Definintly make sure you vote for people that don’t support chat control in the EU elections but also make sure to do the same in national elections!
Currently the vote has not reached the EU parliament. The discussion is ongoing between the countries permanent representations / governments rather than elected MEPs as far as I understand.
Interestingly enough, in Denmark most of the MEPs came out against chat control.
The only party in favour of it is the socialdemocrats (generally the biggest party).
Given that 1% of danish voters signed the petition against chat control, it’s not looking great for them.
Also many other politicians of other countries did not express an opinion at all, which makes informed voting difficult to do.
When voting do read the political manifestos (most parties publish one) and do look into what you are voting for! Don’t just blindly go with gut feeling!
When voting do read the political manifestos
I’d argue against that. Instead look at past voting behaviour. What politicians say, and what politicians do, tend to be very different!
Your list has nothing to do with members of the European Parliament (whose opinions on this or anything else are almost certainly not uniform in any country). The now-cancelled vote was going to be in the Council, where national governments (executive branches) are represented, not MEPs.
Of course one should still vote for good MEPs in 2029, whichever country one is in, so that point stands, but let’s not confuse people about what is going on.
They will just keep trying until they can trick sneak it through. This fight will never be over because the system is broken.
We have to protest this shit every fucking year and those asshole politicians just keep trying.
We have to fight to get it denied every single time. They have to push it through only once. That’s why they keep trying.
..and we keep fighting.
The Czechs got upset at EU-level efforts on gun control — Czechia has permissive firearm law — and passed an amendment to Czechia’s constitution in 2021 guaranteeing certain firearm rights in Czechia. If the EU passed a directive that conflicted with it after that point without getting Czechs to approve an amendment to their constitution, Czechia would immediately begin violating the directive, which raises the stakes for people who wanted additional restrictions EU-wide.
One imagines that the same tactic could be used in other areas; if one or more EU members prohibited restrictions on end-to-end encryption or the like, it’d create a legal bar that would first need to be undone to create a restriction EU-wide.
That being said, if this sort of hardball tactic gets done too frequently, it’d make it really difficult to legislate at the EU level, because you’d have one state or another creating legal landmines all over.
And any other individual member could still impose their own state-level restrictions on end-to-end encryption in such a scenario — it’d only create an impediment to EU-wide restrictions.
AFAIK there are some EU countries with privacy laws that won’t allow chat control
I believe that the point of the Czechia situation was that it was a modification to the constitution; this will have a higher bar to change than would be the case for simply enacting an ordinary law. The idea was to entrench the status quo behind the bar for constitutional modification.
kagis
Looks like it’s a 60% supermajority in each legislative house:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Czech_Republic#Amending_the_Constitution
So to produce such an effect, if there are laws that would prohibit bans on end-to-end encryption, say, those laws would need to be constitutional law or similar in an EU member state where such a law has a higher-than-ordinary bar to change.
Introducing: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_10.html
Guarantees secret postal- and remote (original intent: radio) communications which applies to the internet ever since they thought they could make a quick buck by demanding radio broadcasting fees from youtubers, by which they placed the entire internet in the domain of radio laws.
Forget other EU countries and laws, the German constitution guarantees private postal and remote communications for every citizen. It’s also why Germany has historically never (that I know of) voted in favor of this bullshit: it violates the Briefgeheimnis (article 10 of the German constitution)
If they hadn’t rejected it the federal constitutional court in Karlsruhe would have sacked every single proposal on how to implement it, a process our current coalition is very familiar with from multiple attempts at trying to push preemptive collection of unencrypted data. They knew it wouldn’t pass here anyway and likely just waited on an opportune time to profit off the inevitable denial. Although I’ll give them that: some parts of the coalition were rather eager to meet the judges in Karlsruhe again anyway so it wasn’t a 100% guaranteed rejection either.
The EU is an economic-political union, not a socio-political union. Attempts to impose any sort of social law across all member nations feels like abuse of purpose, and also beside the point of having distinct member states in the first place.
As the IRA said to Thatcher, you have to get lucky every time, we only have to get lucky once
It’s like Wheel of Time. The Dragon gets reborn again and again fighting “the last battle” forever.
Classical Athens punished the people who proposed evil laws with fines or way worse. But our enlightened ”democracies” just let this happen without repercussions.
In Athens they also ostracized people the majority didn’t like from the polis, which is akin to what was once civil death.
Ancient Greece (and even less Rome, where I was born) are not at all my example of an enlightened society.
The question here is much simpler: Peter Hummelgård, Danish minister of justice and main author of the new proposal, is the man who got the Danish police a customized version of Palantir’s Gotham to “fight immigrant gangs”.
This is a man who recently said “we must break with the totally erroneous perception that it is everyone’s civil liberty to communicate on encrypted messaging services”, obviously lapping the peanut butter off Thiel’s genitals.
Lobbying needs to be better regulated, but especially people like him and everyone who voted for his party should see our fingers pointing to their faces in real life and online.
That’s how you fight this, by publicly shaming people for not grasping the fundamentals of Rights Culture.
I’m not saying the Ancient Greeks were nice, but I think politicians, especially career politicians, should face drastic consequences for betraying the constitution of the countries they’re supposed to serve. And classical Athens was only a minority of rulers among people who didn’t have any rights, but their institutions had some aspects that were more robust than modern States that have no checks and balances and rely on “but no one would ever do that”.
French police and municipalities have been using illegal surveillance (like Briefcam with the facial recognition enabled) for a long time and there are also no consequences, except for the fact the surveillance is being made increasingly legal because they “need” it.
For this kind of treasonous shit we really should have lifelong imprisonment back.
Nah, a ban from holding public office would do the trick easily enough.
I will proudly do so
How does this “once and for all” part work? Is there a clear, legal path towards preventing a similar proposal from being brought up again and again?
I guess ideally, we should put the right to encrypted communication into law or even into national constitutions. Unlikely to happen though.
Finland already has it in constitution, though it’s not about encryption but just right to privacy on private messaging. It was originally created to protect snail mail communication
Germany has a similar paragraph but that means nothing if they again decide that surveillance is necessary
Yes, get rid of hierarchies of power.
Italy went to undecided? when? my spam worked?
https://fightchatcontrol.eu/#contact-tool
let’s send some more spam
Who should I harass? Not sure who the best person for italy is
i just use the contact tool and spam ~100 emails to half the government
As a Swede, I’m truly ashamed that we shared Ylva Johansson (driving politician for this shit) with the rest of you.
As a Finn, could you also reign in the Swedish Party here? Or, maybe just take them back.
Or just throw them over the water to the east. Can you take care of them?
You see the German government would really prefer to stay in limbo in a lot of matters. Never decide anything. Never get anything done. Just wait as years pass by. That‘s how we lost world leading solar and robotic technologies to China and that‘s how conservatives run the country. You can expect a lot more back and forth in the coming years. On this matter and many others.
“to altmeier sth.: to gleefully smash the thriving beginnings of a key industry of the future in your country at the behest of your wealthy donors and lobbyists, condemning your countrymen to watch from the sidelines while others take the cake for themselves.”
I wish. The last government did some good directional policy. For electric cars the German government doing nothing would be rather good. Same story for boilers.
I like saying the last government was partially dysfunctional and still achieved more progress in 3 years than Merkel did in 16. christian democrats weren‘t part of it so that‘s probably why.
The Austrian ÖVP similar to the CDU/CSU, but the average austrian voter is self-sabotaging, and so those political sloths have been in the government since fucking WW2, and since 2000 the only thing they seem to do is fill their own pockets with only the thinnest veneer of legality.
And if the FDP wouldnt have Sabotaged it all it would have gotten done even more
Electric cars
I hope that this time it’s final and that they won’t just change their minds later.
The fascist oligarchs of surveillance capitalism will keep trying until it passes, or until it becomes political/literal suicide to support it.
We did it, Lemmy?
We were the tiniest part in it.
I’m sure that the average Lemmy-User has an much larger influence on the people around them in things like privacy laws in relation to the average internet user, because we tend to hyperfixate and can’t shut the fuck up lol
Rare German W.
Green being against+nwgative and red in favor+negative makes my brain ich in a way I can’t scratch
Green: good, red: bad.
But that’s very subjective, maybe I am a state agent and would love to read your chats?
Then you are bad and that is not subjective
thank fucking jesus for the krauts
About France …
According to fightchatcontrol.eu a majority of our MEPs have expressed against the law : from far right to far left. ALL of the others are left as “unknown”.
I think it’s fair to assume that France is against this law but that our current political mess prevents an official or coordinated response.
I think this is a very important point : I see a lot of hate against our MEPs because fightchatcontrol.eu does not reflect their actual position on this issue.
I’d advise to at least switch France to “undecided” and add a bit of context 🤷
I believe the map is supposed to represent the position of the European commission (who would have voted on it first), not the parliament. Good to hear your MEPs would have likely been against it though.
Oh thanks, that was indeed not clear to me 👍🏼