9 ms·
The thing that bothers me most about this as a European is; I have zero say in this, in the US you can strike out against surveillance, you can write to senator
by datamoshr 10y ago
The thing that bothers me most about this as a European is; I have zero say in this, in the US you can strike out against surveillance, you can write to senators, protest against terrible legislation. Actually have a voice, however faint it is. Whereas I don't get a say but the exact same treatment from your country. The Five Eyes have made me paranoid and the only escape seems to be downgrading your phone to a brick and carrying it in a Faraday cage. We may as well just go back to plain old telephones.
- d33 10y agoWhat's the difference really between a "faint voice" and no voice at all? What's the point of wasting breath if you get no influence?
- iamben 10y agoLots of faint voices, put together, can actually make quite a noise.
- dandelion_lover 10y ago...or make you think you have done something useful.
- benevol 10y agoThe "Brexit" stats have clearly shown that UK would have remained in the EU if the "millenials" had really made use of their right to vote. The "old" generation (voting to leave the EU) clearly understands the value of their vote(s).
- kaffee 10y agoVoter turnout was at record levels. It's not obvious that greater turnout of "millennials" specifically was likely to happen. Typically it's difficult to ensure that one kind of voter turns out without also increasing the rate of turnout for other kinds of voters as well.
- DanBC 10y agoBut voter turnout for younger people (18 to 24) was less than 40%. If they'd had 75% turnout they may have swung the election. In mid 2013 there were about 5.8m people between 18 and 24.
- nxzero 10y ago>> "In mid 2013 there were about 5.8m people between 18 and 24." Which is what percentage of the voting population?
- dasboth 10y agoThis was the biggest problem with the referendum: apathy from the younger voters.
- nickik 10y agoJust because those young who voted does not mean that those young that did not vote, would vote the same. I would assume that is not the case here, but its something to consider.
- tomp 10y agoYou're asuming that the ones that didn't vote would have the same distribution as those that did. Instead, maybe they actually were apathic, and their votes would be roughly 50-50 - so Leave could still win.
- DanBC 10y ago
- gardano 10y agoTo me, the vote was actually non-binary. There were the Remain votes, the Leave votes, but then there the Protest votes -- which from my perspective were votes that said "I want to Remain, but dammit I don't like how things are going right now".
- ffggvv 10y agoAnd a fourth one: integrate with the EU entirely (adopt the euro, etc.)
- Floegipoky 10y agoSomething that's always bothered me about people who complain about low voter turnout among young demographics in the US is that young people are the least likely to be able to make it to the polls. In the US, election days are like any other- your employer is required to accommodate your vote, but in practice, younger demographics are much more likely to be working multiple shit jobs with bosses who treat them like disposable labor and couldn't care less about their rights. There are initiatives in many places to literally ship retired voters to the polls so they can vote, but our government seems to make it difficult for working people to vote. Or, while we're at it, take advantage of any other government service like the DMV, post office, etc that are only open during business hours. Are election days national holidays in the UK?
- mjevans 10y agoI really like that idea. It should also cause businesses to push for LIMITING the number of voting holidays so that things are bundled up properly.
- dunkelheit 10y agoTime-proven way of influencing decisions made by other countries is having a strong army. Recently it has gone slightly out of fashion, but the general principle still holds. Those without power are not reckoned with.
- f_allwein 10y agoand then what? Declare war on the US?
- dunkelheit 10y agoOf course not. The point is to have a strong BATNA, as negotiations people put it. The USA is actually a great example of this principle. Their military spending is the biggest in the world. What for? Do they intend to eradicate all other nations so that only Americans remain? I hope not. More probably, they spend all these resources because they don't like it when other nations tell them what to do.
- dandelion_lover 10y agoDonate to EFF [0]. They have enough willingness and power given enough supporters to change the situation. [0] https://supporters.eff.org/donate https://supporters.eff.org/donate
- datamoshr 10y agoThanks for the suggestion. Already do. Best thing I can do to influence any sort of change.
- fulafel 10y agoYou can try to get your domestic spooks gang up with other EU spooks to stop colluding with the NSA. The agencies use intelligence as currency and you can apply sanctions this way. Carrying this info in cleartext across tappable international cables is pretty close to giving a free pass to spooks. Telecom regulators are enabling this because they're against/indifferent about strong encryption.
- uola 10y agoPartly true. Europeans have fairly good opportunities to influence domestic and regional issues. Probably better than the in the US. For instance look at how the data retention directive was invalidated [0]. That said, support for US misconduct in Europe is still surprisingly strong. From US companies paying less tax than European counterparts to blatant spying or kidnapping. I'm not sure what the answer here is other than being more aware of our own interests as persons, nations and regions. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive
- knz 10y ago> From US companies paying less tax than European counterparts to blatant spying or kidnapping. It's a little naive to assume that European countries do not have similar banking issues. Between Switzerland, London, the Channel Islands, Monaco, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands there is more than enough dodgy banking to compete with the US Likewise with spying and kidnapping - the major European powers have been playing those "games" (and worse) since long before 1776. Extraordinary rendition did not happen without the knowledge of European governments and the UK in particular has a long association with many of the countries where those picked up were interrogated/tortured in.
- Keyframe 10y agoYou can write to your MEP and ask for clarification on what are they doing in order to protect you from, what essentially amounts to, a hostile act from foreign power. Twist is they are working with them.
- coroutines 10y agoI was happy to see the disgust people had for the CIA black sites operated in other countries when that came to light during the Bush presidency. Not because of the torture, but because people here expected alleged terrorists to have the same rights as detained American citizens. I feel this is important to note, because we have a large population of young voters who I feel have concern for everyone - not just the US. This is very different from how my grandparents vote and I do think it's split along generational lines. In regards to overreaching surveillance: It's not ideal, but we over here do think of you when we vote.. I do.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- blockross 10y agounfortunately you're part of a minority. The mere fact that the election will happen between Clinton and Trump makes me think that mass surveillance and lack of respect for other countries are going to continue and probably worsen. Clinton: http://time.com/4150694/hillary-clinton-calls-for-more-surveillance-to-fight-terror/ http://time.com/4150694/hillary-clinton-calls-for-more-surve... Trump (not that it's really necessary): http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/261673-trump-sides-with-rubio-over-cruz-in-nsa-surveillance http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/26167...
- cm3 10y agoYou know Hillary is a bad idea when Trump is a more considerate choice in terms of security policies and also not being bound to campaign funders' priorities, despite his otherwise out-of-this-world views on important topics. Trump said he'd like to pull out troops from places like Europe, which makes one believe he wants to concentrate on local issues.
- Mtinie 10y agoI'm hesitant to consider the next presidential election's results as a harbinger of the state of politics during the 2020 or 2024 races. The Baby Boomer generation's influence is waning and I'm optimistic that the next generations who did not grow up in a period of extreme mutual distrust like we saw post-WW2 and during the Cold War will be better suited to lead. It's going to take us, as a global group of people on the planet, a long time to unwind a lot of the hawkish and nationalist policies that have evolved over the past 150 years. Certainly there will be periods where charismatic leaders with latent agendas drag us backwards and temper the progress, but ultimately if each successive generation is even just a bit more inclusive and globally considerate than the last, we'll find a way to make this work.
- MichaelGG 10y agoIs there any reason to believe that no European countries do this kind of thing? Relative to national budgets, this kind of stuff can't cost that much. Dunno where the EU is on their EU-level army right now, but it'd stand to reason that a EU-security org would do exactly this kind of stuff. The UK certainly has no qualms about it. Even the US's allies will try stunts as bad as false flag bombings[1]. So it's not like they can only monitor non-allies. So they can't shut down spying, and perhaps it just becomes a never-ending escalation of power then. Might as well grab all data. I don't like it, but I can understand how they might arrive at that position. Probably the only hope is to outlaw this worldwide, perhaps in some human rights kind of thing, then actually apply punishment for those caught. That seems unlikely to really work though. Even now, we have countries that steal nuclear tech and don't get punished - few will view spying as worse than that. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair
- Semiapies 10y agoQuite the opposite - GCHQ in the UK is just one agency that, from available evidence, is very probably doing the same things against its own people and those of the rest of Europe. The American outage at the NSA is entirely correct. The European histrionics are mostly yank-bashing with a side of whistling in the dark.
- knz 10y ago> The European histrionics are mostly yank-bashing with a side of whistling in the dark If I recall correctly, there was much in the media around the time of the Arab Spring about UK and German companies selling the tools of mass surveillance to governments that were less than friendly to their residents. It's easier to point a finger at the US than to acknowledge that the major European governments are usually deeply involved in the same activities and equally responsible for much of the conflict we see in the world today via the legacy of colonialism and actions such as the Sykes–Picot Agreement.
- Semiapies 10y ago
- peteretep 10y ago> as a European is; I have zero say in this While I don't like this, since when have foreign citizens ever had a say in a country's espionage and military programs?
- dunkelheit 10y agoThat's actually fairly common. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles#Military_restrictions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Versailles#Military_... for an example.
- nxzero 10y agoUsing the Treaty of Versailles as an example makes no sense. Are you suggesting war?
- dunkelheit 10y agoWhy doesn't it make sense? Admittedly, it is a rather blatant example of what the parent comment asked for, but because it is so blatant it is also pretty uncontroversial that what happened was precisely foreign citizens having a say in the military program of another nation. Ok, here is another example for you, not involving open warfare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio...
- mitchty 10y ago> Why doesn't it make sense? Because it is a treaty that was implemented after a World War? Circumstances of implementation matter. It is also a great example of a treaty that backfired and led to another war due to its sanctions end results. I'll also say you're stretching the analogy of a treaty as a way for a foreign citizen to have a say in another nations affairs. Technically correct but I don't think that really gets at "foreign citizen not of the ruling class of another country influencing another countries military programs (note no espionage examples)" Unless you're looking at a vassal state I don't see it happening. The non proliferation treaty is similarly a poor example as it was multiple nations deciding in their interests to stay on top with nuclear weapons and not allow more. What would better convince people would be another country impacting another countries military program negatively, not for mutual gain. The grandparent comment was referring to influencing the NSA surveillance of foreign countries. Guess what, as an American I have no say over the spy agencies of France, or any multitude of agencies either. The NSA just has been doing a better job at it for numerous historical reasons. I'm not condoning it but so far you've not really provided a convincing argument that foreign citizens can influence other countries espionage agencies.
- vmateixeira 10y agoAnd just wait for the TTIP outcome..
- imglorp 10y agoActually Congress already made laws bounding NSA behavior and mission but they are operating outside the law. They are a self serving criminal enterprise at this point.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- wtbob 10y agoYour government is free to negotiate whatever treaties are acceptable under its laws and the U.S. Constitution; you have whatever voice in your own government that your laws give you. It makes literally no sense to me that a government would have any more concern for another government's citizen than that other government has incentivised it to.
- lyqwyd 10y agoI don't believe a government can have concern for its own citizens if it does not have concern for people outside of its own borders.
- awqrre 10y agoYou may have a say on how your government uses the data collected by the US.
- sabertoothed 10y agoSnarky, and not helpful.
- awqrre 10y agoThey share data between governments to avoid local privacy laws... I think that the laws need to be updated to reflect that.
- toomanythings2 10y agoI feel the same about the KGB and China's spy agencies. How come I have no say in how they operate?
- SSLy 10y agoKGB doesn't exist for more than 25 years. Checking your facts would be a first step, i guess.
- zby 10y agoThat's what they want you to think!
- toomanythings2 10y agoThat doesn't matter and totally misses the point.
- BryanBigs 10y agoFine, substitute FSB if you must..now back to the point of the comment..
- EarthMephit 10y agoThe KGB and spy agencies of old used to need to assign agents to sit outside your house to watch you. The NSA is a different breed of agency, who can now record whatever everyone reads, hears or says and keep these records almost forever.
- toomanythings2 10y agoHas nothing to do with my point.
- jellicle 10y agoWhat point do you think you're making?
- 10y ago
- tdhz77 10y agoCome join our Country as the 51st state.
- jklinger410 10y ago>Whereas I don't get a say but the exact same treatment from your country. The NSA works with the 5 eyes to gather data on you. If you want to stop the NSA from spying on you, vote in your democratic country to remove yourselves from our intelligence agreements. It doesn't necessarily mean the NSA won't spy on you, but it does mean it will be technically illegal for them to do so, so they probably won't do it unless they actually care about you.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- etiam 10y agoI don't see that it would make said spying illegal under US law, and those are the only laws I expect NSA to fear enough to even bother subverting. Not that I disagree with the suggestion to put pressure on the partners though.
- djschnei 10y agoInteractions with foreign parties is rarely enforced through domestic law (in this sense). It's the job of your government to protect you from foreign governments. Your government having intelligence agreements with our government is them saying to you they don't value your privacy enough to protect it.
- avar 10y agoReminds me of a humorous saying I read somewhere. Roughly: Move to the U.S., because the only thing worse than living there is being subjected to its foreign policy.