• mathemachristian[he]@lemmy.ml
    3 hours

    Why do we have to keep fighting our own government for our rights? Why can’t our government just represent us?

  • Someonelol@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    3 hours

    Why can’t they vote on a ban to do any chat control bills? Stop this nonsense from happening again.

  • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.todayEnglish
    7 hours

    We should go to war against corpocracy, until all corporations are bankrupt.

    EVERY. DAMN. ONE.

  • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
    4 hours

    they will keep trying in the most sneaky ways until they are deposed. they only need to succeed once.

  • iamtherealwalrus@lemmy.world
    9 hours

    Where can I see who voted for and against? I want to know if I need to change who I vote for next EU election.

      • bampop@lemmy.world
        2 hours

        Green = “opposing”, red = “supporting”… “chat control extension”. I guess the greens are against the chat control proposal, though that’s hardly clear, and there seem to be more reds than greens so that suggests the chat control proposal was accepted, or is there some other layer to this? Also the stance of a state bears no relation to that of its representatives. Very confusing

        • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.caEnglish
          2 hours

          The “Chat Control” proposal would legalise scanning of all private digital communications, including encrypted messages and photos.

          it’s explained right there above the vote summary

          • bampop@lemmy.world
            2 hours

            It’s not the topic of the vote I’m trying to clarify but rather trying to make sense of that web page showing who is voting for what, and how, if at all that is connected to the European Parliament vote. That website suggests overwhelming support for the proposal at both state and representative level, I’m not sure what to make of that.

    • chigga@lemmy.world
      9 hours

      I think that Patrick posted it. basically the ones against where the conservatives, both left and right where against (even if there were some people inside those parities who voted to continue the scanning)

    • chigga@lemmy.world
      11 hours

      this is the real thing, this is almost certainly unconstitutional.

      greedy corps going against law as usual.

      • themurphy@lemmy.ml
        10 hours

        No, not really. It’s because they retracted the proposal before going to vote, because they knew it wouldnt pass after Germany publicly said they would vote against.

        Then they changed some stuff and send it again, which is now rejected as it seems.

        Now they need to wait, but they didnt before.

          • guy@piefed.socialEnglish
            10 hours

            The Commission probably since they’re the only entity who can propose law

            • leagman1@feddit.org
              9 hours

              How do I respond to this^^

              Yes, I think we’re all assuming the law came into parliament the regular way. I assumed the “they” are supposed lobbyists who are standing behind and outside the regular entity…

              Am I missing something or are you pulling a Nielsen on me? “Coffee?” “Yes, I know.”

              • guy@piefed.socialEnglish
                9 hours

                Oh, sorry. Thought you actually didn’t knew, my bad!

    • eldavi@lemmy.mlEnglish
      10 hours

      it’s indicative of the system we’re in. our oligarchs have enough money to pay people to push for this in perpetuity while the rest of us are forced to give up some degree of our lives to fight it off on a field of battles that’s tilted towards money; they will win eventually unless the system itself is changed.

    • melroy@kbin.melroy.org
      10 hours

      This is indeed the plan. Only 1 time is enough to get this through the system. But it requires 500 times saying no first.

          • guy@piefed.socialEnglish
            9 hours

            Well based on the seats in the parliament, most eu voters are rightwing to some degree. So it’s Tatcher going undercover IRA to bomb herself?

  • a4ng3l@lemmy.world
    10 hours

    Let’s celebrate this victory… even though it’s concerning that it is a recurring topic :-/

    • lb_o@lemmy.world
      2 hours

      Dude, we’re protesting now until all those fuckers who voted in favor of chat control are voted out of parliament. We have names!

  • TommySoda@lemmy.world
    10 hours

    They’ll just change a few things and try again. I feel like we’ve been hearing about chat control on and off for about 5 years now and I can’t imagine it’ll go away soon.

  • iByteABit@lemmy.ml
    10 hours

    Good, but pretty meaningless overall while they still allow lobbying to take place.

    They pretend to care that lobbying means corruption from corporate interests, but doing anything meaningful to stop lobbying entirely and punish anyone still doing it would be “authoritarian communism” now, wouldn’t it?