6 ms·

> like visitors of a specific mosque? Or a pub frequented by known nazis? But the article had a slightly different example than yours: > on visitors to a cert

• Thiez 3y ago
  The protesting farmers have been blocking highways with their tractors and lighting fires containing asbestos (also on / near highways). You could argue that the former should be allowed as part of a protest, but the latter moves you squarely outside the "law-abiding citizens" category.
  • Simon_ORourke 3y ago
    European farmers appear to be a singular career category where the government(s) will pay you to be a failure.
    • olliej 3y ago
      That’s the case in the US as well. What do you think agriculture subsidies are? If you want countries that don’t subsidize agriculture that has been Aussie and NZ since the 80s iirc. Though I haven’t lived in those countries for a decade or two now and Covid and various financial panics over the last decades resulted in a variety of corporate hand outs so it seems plausible that those businesses have got some government support since then.
    • doktrin 3y ago
      What makes them a singular category in this regard? Genuine question. Virtually all agricultural sectors enjoy some form of subsidy, for what I think are obvious reasons. Likewise it's not like the idea of government money going to less-than-optimally-productive labor is unheard of.
    • PeterStuer 3y ago
      It's a group that by the nature of their production cycle is very exploitable (you have to sell the harvest or it litterally turns into manure), and yet they are extremely essential to a population's survival (unlike e.g. hairdressers, no food ruins your month in a way an overdue trim can't match). So you want to keep farms up even in times the market wont.
    • coldtea 3y ago
      No, that's major US finance companies...
  • fransje26 3y ago
    > The protesting farmers have been blocking highways with their tractors Yeah, that's kind the idea of a protest. If you don't create enough inconvenience, than it will be, at best, a small line in a newspaper. "10 thousand farmers gathered in an abandoned meadow and drove around in protest." Yes, cute. They are going this far because, obviously, they have the feeling they haven't been heard, and/or because they feel decisions are being made that are not taking into account the reality of their profession. > lighting fires containing asbestos This sounds like nothing more than a dubious scaremongering claim to discredit whatever concern they are trying to air. It -might- be something that happened anecdotally and accidentally, but to describe it as something done deliberately while also putting their own health in danger requires quite a bit more proof than hearsay.
    • Thiez 3y ago
      Here, a recent source: https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6300928/aangehouden-demonsterende-boeren-mogen-strafzaak-in-vrijheid-afwachten.html https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6300928/aangehouden-demonsteren... It has happened regularly at farmer protests, so speculating that it might be accidental is absurd. They deliberately burn garbage containing asbestos. They are criminals that deserve to be behind bars.
      • fransje26 3y ago
        Corrected, I stand. Straight to jail with the two of them.
• actionfromafar 3y ago
  Blocking roads with climate activism can get you years in prison, but blocking roads with tractors and trailers of dung is law-abiding.
• mschuster91 3y ago
  > That's clearly politically motivated surveillance of ordinary, peaceful, law-abiding citizens who dissent from the government's views. Peaceful? In Germany, a particularly nasty incident made headlines where a drunk farmer tried to evade a roadblock and ended up injuring a policeman [1], just last week two got arrested for attempting to run over cops [2], others spread feces and trash over a highway and lit up barricades [3], and the large demonstration in January in Berlin had over ten arrests for violence as well as explosives [4]. [1] https://www.bild.de/regional/ruhrgebiet/ruhrgebiet-aktuell/bei-demo-in-siegen-bauer-faehrt-mit-trecker-amok-polizist-verletzt-86574782.bild.html https://www.bild.de/regional/ruhrgebiet/ruhrgebiet-aktuell/b... [2] https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/oldenburg_ostfriesland/Bauernproteste-in-Bremerhaven-eskalieren-Polizei-ermittelt,bremerhaven656.html https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/niedersachsen/oldenburg_ostfr... [3] https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/sachsen-anhalt/magdeburg/magdeburg/bauernprotest-demo-randale-guelle-anzeigen102.html https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/sachsen-anhalt/magdeburg/magd... [4] https://www.rnd.de/politik/bauernproteste-in-berlin-drei-verletzte-beamte-strafverfahren-und-festnahmen-XFKPMVGO4ZIO3BGFMHF52TVGMM.html https://www.rnd.de/politik/bauernproteste-in-berlin-drei-ver...
  • mk89 3y ago
    Also what happened to the economy minister was not a cool thing to do. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XRpCjLxICKg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XRpCjLxICKg
  • berkes 3y ago
    In the netherlands several of these "protesters" have been rounded up, arrested or otherwise prosecuted. Some later on. Several have been found guilty of breaking the law. Some as young as 17 or 19¹. Regardless of the political view or perspective or stance: they are provably not law-abiding. https://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie-en-contact/Organisatie/Rechtbanken/Rechtbank-Gelderland/Nieuws/Paginas/Broers-veroordeeld-voor-strafbare-feiten-tijdens-boerenprotesten.aspx https://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie-en-contact/Organisati...
  • wolverine876 3y ago
    If that's the worst across multiple countries, it seems very peaceful. Much worse happens in the general public. Are you suggesting that because a few people did things you don't like, everyone involved is violent? That is not only clearly false, but very dangerous.
• beeboobaa 3y ago
  The farmers have been anything but peaceful. They've destroyed public & private property, doused it in literal shit, started fires and threatened politicians. They've also blocked roads preventing emergency services from getting through.
  • suoduandao3 3y ago
    I think the point is, Farmers as a group were peaceful until very recently. Law abiding citizens don't riot because Mars stationed direct. I like Bill Burr's quote here - "A dog should not bite a man. But if a dog does bite a man, it's fair to ask what he was doing when it bit him"
    • beeboobaa 3y ago
      In this case the unfortunate answer is that they were given cushy subsidies and preferential treatment for years and this is sadly no longer sustainable due to climate change. They are now entitled and angry. It's understandable they don't like it, but the reaction is ridiculously extreme.
      • lupusreal 3y ago
        [flagged]
        • beeboobaa 3y ago
          The food grown in NL is mostly exported because it's so cheap to operate here thanks to subsidies.
          • szundi 3y ago
            Thanks for spending money on ruining other countries’ agriculture too. Happens to be bad for everyone it seems, other than these poor farmers.
    • olliej 3y ago
• arp242 3y ago
  The "protesting farmers" is just speculation from the NOS, and might as well be Nazis or motorbike gangs or extreme-left activists or $anything_else. Previous poster merely used it as an example to illustrate that these type of specifics matter. Also these "protesting farmers" involved a number of violent incidents, intimidation, threats, and things like that. Look, things aren't black-white here, but "peaceful, law-abiding citizens" is very much a distortion of what happened.
  • RamblingCTO 3y ago
    Yes, thank you! A lot of people took my comment the wrong way.
• olliej 3y ago
  I have a problem with “surveilling nazis”. If they’re not actively committing criminal acts, and there isn’t a warrant demonstrating with specificity that the particular facility or group is involved (e.g the same requirement for any other warrant) they should not be subject to any more surveillance than say a Christian group, or a Muslim group, or an lgbt group, or hell a group of sports team supporters. The amount of surveillance should be zero. I hate nazis with a passion, and would never be ok employing or working with someone who’s basic life belief is that a bunch of their coworkers (maybe including me?) don’t have the right to exist and are fundamentally inferior (if nothing else a cynical 100% capitalist take would be that having a Nazi anywhere in your management hierarchy will clearly open your company to plausible discrimination suits). Before anyone brings up accepting others beliefs, that’s not an issue. There is a basic social contract: you can believe whatever you want without consequences until your beliefs get to “other people don’t get to have the same rights as me”. The “paradox of tolerance” is BS used by bigots to try and allow them to attack the rights of others with impunity under the guise of accepting other’s beliefs.
  • doktrin 3y ago
    > The “paradox of tolerance” is BS used by bigots to try and allow them to attack the rights of others with impunity The Jewish philosopher who fled the Nazis was, in fact, a bigot seeking to attack the rights of others?
    • olliej 3y ago
      No. Popper was not using the "paradox of intolerance" to be a bigot attacking the rights of others. What Popper did was give a name to the behavior bigots were already demonstrating. Bigots don't say "you have to support my beliefs because of the paradox of tolerance", they say "you are not being tolerant if you don't support my intolerance" (for whatever group they're targeting). It's somewhat disingenuous to present an idea in terms of the circumstances in which it was introduced as being equivalent to that idea after people have had time to actually think about it and discuss it. It implies that no problem can be resolved in the time following its introduction. When Popper started talking about this as the "paradox of intolerance" it was "how do we resolve this issue where a maximally tolerant society must inherently become intolerant", but that was 80 odd years ago, and in that time the generally accepted answer is that tolerance is a social contract, and part of that is that tolerance is necessarily a two way street, so if your belief is that some other group[s] are not permitted to exist, or have the same rights, then no other group has to tolerate your beliefs. There is no problem of cycles of responsibility, because your intolerance was the initial trigger.
• RamblingCTO 3y ago
  The article specified them as examples and I found them quite framing. So yes, I changed it to cases where no one would probably have a problem with it. I'd personally have a problem with farmers being surveilled just because they are farmers and are protesting. I wanted to show that we need more data before having an opinion, as it depends on the details.
• ruszki 3y ago
  Since Russia through Hungary organise and support the farmer protests monetarily and politically, there is no question that they should be monitored on some level.
  • Gud 3y ago
    Show me the evidence that Russia are organising these protests, because I sincerely doubt if. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure some Russian money is involved, but that is hardly organising.
    • ruszki 3y ago
      https://24.hu/belfold/2024/01/26/brusszel-gazdatuntetes-mcc-orban-balazs/ https://24.hu/belfold/2024/01/26/brusszel-gazdatuntetes-mcc-... MCC is a shill university to transform state money to private, it’s not even a secret. They moved billions of Euros through it. Also, Hungary is utterly compromised, which can be checked by using the keywords spy, Russia and Hungary together. It’s compromised on every level. A good article about it is here: https://www.direkt36.hu/putyin-hekkerei-is-latjak-a-magyar-kulugy-titkait-az-orban-kormany-evek-ota-nem-birja-elharitani-oket/ https://www.direkt36.hu/putyin-hekkerei-is-latjak-a-magyar-k...