11 ms·

Pretty neat how, out of the blue, two seemingly unrelated efforts manage to tighten together to create the perfect unavoidable storm. I swear those Thursday bi

Pretty neat how, out of the blue, two seemingly unrelated efforts manage to tighten together to create the perfect unavoidable storm. I swear those Thursday bilderberg meetings are a thing.

varispeed 1y ago
People have been talking about this for years. Corruption, authoritarianism and fascism is eating the EU from within and people who warned about it were called from tin foil hatters to just nutters.
- bboygravity 1y ago
  Still are being called that now. Any political party of any member state that even thinks about being critical of the EU will instantly be completely destroyed by "independent" national (state sponsored) media.
  - Yeul 1y ago
    Mate everyone in the Netherlands hates the EU. But after calculating it is still more profitable to be in it. We can see how Trump treated Switzerland.
  - gambiting 1y ago
    What are you talking about. UK is the prime example of political parties being extremely critical of the EU and eventually getting exactly what they asked for. But even if you think UK is some kind of weird one-off example - it's not. Look at Poland - PiS has been openly critical of EU for years now and held power for years, will most likely win it again in the next elections. Konfederacja straight up calls EU facist on a daily basis and they have like 20% support for some insane reason. >>by "independent" national (state sponsored) media. You have to explain what you mean by this - you can't be independent and state sponsored. Or do you mean unbiasased(like what the BBC or TVP are meant to be, which they are obviously not but they are not "independent")
    - YetAnotherNick 1y ago
      UK is a wrong example as their issue wasn't EU's policies but the idea of one Europe. They wanted to have control on the borders that was fundamentally incompatible with EU.
      - SiempreViernes 1y ago
        Why would you first claim the issue "wasn't EU's policies" and then list the extremely central EU free movement policy as the issue?
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        And even then it was based on a misunderstanding of border policy, a false perception of control by the EU. In the years since Brexit all of the issues they had have only worsened and the biggest political agitator now is just the same group that pushed for Brexit with a new name still running on an anti immigrant ticket. Turns out the border problems were policies of their own governments.
      - graemep 1y ago
        I disagree. Control or borders was one of many issues. Policies and regulations were definitely an issue too. https://media.ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CSI-Brexit-4-People%E2%80%99s-Stated-Reasons-for-Voting-Leave.pdf https://media.ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CSI-B... I think something that is under estimated is how much it was a matter of identity - do people feel British or European? The areas that voted remain most strongly were the nationalist areas of Scotland and Northern Ireland.
    - Etherlord87 1y ago
      That "insane reason" is the propaganda machine(s) of russia and china. Konfederacja is called Konfederussia by many Poles just because how often what they say align with russian interest. The founder of Konfederacja, Janusz Korwin-Mikke once said that in the war between russia and Poland, he would fight on the side of the former.
  - Geof25 1y ago
    It is exactly the opposite. EU is blamed for everything what is wrong and local politicians are taking credit for whatever is good.
- 127 1y ago
  It seems the general direction in all big organization on this planet. EU is definitely not immune, but perhaps the most resistant so far.
  - Aerroon 1y ago
    The Data Retention Directive was passed in 2006 by the EU. It was law of the land for almost a decade: >According to the Data Retention Directive, EU member states had to store information on all citizens' telecommunications data (phone and internet connections) for a minimum of six months and at most twenty-four months, to be delivered on demand to police authorities. >Under the directive, the police and security agencies would have been able to request access to details such as IP addresses and time of use of every email, phone call and text message sent or received. There was no provision in the directive that permission to access the data must be confirmed by a court. On 8 April 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union declared the Directive invalid in response to a case brought by Digital Rights Ireland against the Irish authorities and others because blanket data collection violated the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular the right of privacy enshrined in Article 8(1). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive
- happymellon 1y ago
  At least in the UK, a lot of these calls were made by the far right. It's easy to dismiss as hypocritical, but it doesn't mean that they were wrong. Their "solution" to leave rather than fix was simply because they wanted it but in their control. Honestly they are nutters who make stuff up about "bendy bananas" etc, which dilutes the complaint.
  - soraminazuki 1y ago
    I believe people in tech have been making these calls decades before the far right started making noise for their political ends.
  - tastyface 1y ago
    The far right may have *latched on* to these calls, but rest assured they are as eager as anyone to use state power to quash dissidents, if not more so.
    - happymellon 1y ago
      > rest assured they are as eager as anyone to use state power to quash dissidents, if not more so Yep completely agree, as mentioned. > Their "solution" to leave rather than fix was simply because they wanted it but in their control.
  - brikym 1y ago
    The media, owned and controlled by powerful people who benefit from the status quo, just tacked on the term 'far' to remind people not to venture outside the Overton window or think too hard. It's scary and far away. Stay the cosy middle where it's safe. Anyone against the pro-corporate status quo (for example mass immigration) is tainted having an extreme opinion; Discussion over. There are a few nutters and poor people notice these trends first. The media tend to zoom in on those people and of course that taints all their concerns because normal people don't want to say anything that people might see as poor or nutty; they want to be seen as successful and smart. Only poor people would complain about immigration and only extremists and pedos would complain about censorship and you are not one of them right?
glenstein 1y ago
The thing that depresses me about offhand references to bilderberg group is it's a missed chance to name real names. I don't know who they are, but from chat gpt'ing it looks like there's some particular agencies regularly behind these. One is "DG Home," an EU department on security that drafts legislation. Another is Europol, a security coordination body that can't legislate but frequently advocates for this kind of legislation. And then there's LEWP, The law enforcement working party, a "working group" comprised of security officials from member EU states, also involved in EU policy making in some capacity. Perhaps targeted reform of these bodies is in order so they don't keep producing this legislation over and over. The blocking minority shouldn't just oppose the legislation itself, but make sure that their representation at those bodies is stopping those recommendations from moving forward. The legislating infrastructure needs to be challenged as much as any particular bill.
lyu07282 1y ago
That's the fun part, they are all public conferences, like: https://initiatives.weforum.org/global-coalition-for-digital-safety/home https://initiatives.weforum.org/global-coalition-for-digital... It doesn't have to be in secret, they can and do plan and coordinate these efforts in the open. When we hear about it, it was already planned for many years.
p0w3n3d 1y ago
> seemingly unrelated efforts What are the odds
crimsoneer 1y ago
I mean, "the police should have the power to read your communication" is not some fringe view. It's been the view of every state in the history of forever.

Pretty neat how, out of the blue, two seemingly unrelated efforts manage to tighten together to create the perfect unavoidable storm. I swear those Thursday bilderberg meetings are a thing.

varispeed 1y ago

People have been talking about this for years. Corruption, authoritarianism and fascism is eating the EU from within and people who warned about it were called from tin foil hatters to just nutters.

bboygravity 1y ago
Still are being called that now. Any political party of any member state that even thinks about being critical of the EU will instantly be completely destroyed by "independent" national (state sponsored) media.
- Yeul 1y ago
  Mate everyone in the Netherlands hates the EU. But after calculating it is still more profitable to be in it. We can see how Trump treated Switzerland.
- gambiting 1y ago
  What are you talking about. UK is the prime example of political parties being extremely critical of the EU and eventually getting exactly what they asked for. But even if you think UK is some kind of weird one-off example - it's not. Look at Poland - PiS has been openly critical of EU for years now and held power for years, will most likely win it again in the next elections. Konfederacja straight up calls EU facist on a daily basis and they have like 20% support for some insane reason. >>by "independent" national (state sponsored) media. You have to explain what you mean by this - you can't be independent and state sponsored. Or do you mean unbiasased(like what the BBC or TVP are meant to be, which they are obviously not but they are not "independent")
  - YetAnotherNick 1y ago
    UK is a wrong example as their issue wasn't EU's policies but the idea of one Europe. They wanted to have control on the borders that was fundamentally incompatible with EU.
    - SiempreViernes 1y ago
      Why would you first claim the issue "wasn't EU's policies" and then list the extremely central EU free movement policy as the issue?
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      And even then it was based on a misunderstanding of border policy, a false perception of control by the EU. In the years since Brexit all of the issues they had have only worsened and the biggest political agitator now is just the same group that pushed for Brexit with a new name still running on an anti immigrant ticket. Turns out the border problems were policies of their own governments.
    - graemep 1y ago
      I disagree. Control or borders was one of many issues. Policies and regulations were definitely an issue too. https://media.ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CSI-Brexit-4-People%E2%80%99s-Stated-Reasons-for-Voting-Leave.pdf https://media.ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CSI-B... I think something that is under estimated is how much it was a matter of identity - do people feel British or European? The areas that voted remain most strongly were the nationalist areas of Scotland and Northern Ireland.
  - Etherlord87 1y ago
    That "insane reason" is the propaganda machine(s) of russia and china. Konfederacja is called Konfederussia by many Poles just because how often what they say align with russian interest. The founder of Konfederacja, Janusz Korwin-Mikke once said that in the war between russia and Poland, he would fight on the side of the former.
- Geof25 1y ago
  It is exactly the opposite. EU is blamed for everything what is wrong and local politicians are taking credit for whatever is good.
127 1y ago
It seems the general direction in all big organization on this planet. EU is definitely not immune, but perhaps the most resistant so far.
- Aerroon 1y ago
  The Data Retention Directive was passed in 2006 by the EU. It was law of the land for almost a decade: >According to the Data Retention Directive, EU member states had to store information on all citizens' telecommunications data (phone and internet connections) for a minimum of six months and at most twenty-four months, to be delivered on demand to police authorities. >Under the directive, the police and security agencies would have been able to request access to details such as IP addresses and time of use of every email, phone call and text message sent or received. There was no provision in the directive that permission to access the data must be confirmed by a court. On 8 April 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union declared the Directive invalid in response to a case brought by Digital Rights Ireland against the Irish authorities and others because blanket data collection violated the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular the right of privacy enshrined in Article 8(1). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive
happymellon 1y ago
At least in the UK, a lot of these calls were made by the far right. It's easy to dismiss as hypocritical, but it doesn't mean that they were wrong. Their "solution" to leave rather than fix was simply because they wanted it but in their control. Honestly they are nutters who make stuff up about "bendy bananas" etc, which dilutes the complaint.
- soraminazuki 1y ago
  I believe people in tech have been making these calls decades before the far right started making noise for their political ends.
- tastyface 1y ago
  The far right may have *latched on* to these calls, but rest assured they are as eager as anyone to use state power to quash dissidents, if not more so.
  - happymellon 1y ago
    > rest assured they are as eager as anyone to use state power to quash dissidents, if not more so Yep completely agree, as mentioned. > Their "solution" to leave rather than fix was simply because they wanted it but in their control.
- brikym 1y ago
  The media, owned and controlled by powerful people who benefit from the status quo, just tacked on the term 'far' to remind people not to venture outside the Overton window or think too hard. It's scary and far away. Stay the cosy middle where it's safe. Anyone against the pro-corporate status quo (for example mass immigration) is tainted having an extreme opinion; Discussion over. There are a few nutters and poor people notice these trends first. The media tend to zoom in on those people and of course that taints all their concerns because normal people don't want to say anything that people might see as poor or nutty; they want to be seen as successful and smart. Only poor people would complain about immigration and only extremists and pedos would complain about censorship and you are not one of them right?

glenstein 1y ago

The thing that depresses me about offhand references to bilderberg group is it's a missed chance to name real names. I don't know who they are, but from chat gpt'ing it looks like there's some particular agencies regularly behind these. One is "DG Home," an EU department on security that drafts legislation. Another is Europol, a security coordination body that can't legislate but frequently advocates for this kind of legislation. And then there's LEWP, The law enforcement working party, a "working group" comprised of security officials from member EU states, also involved in EU policy making in some capacity. Perhaps targeted reform of these bodies is in order so they don't keep producing this legislation over and over. The blocking minority shouldn't just oppose the legislation itself, but make sure that their representation at those bodies is stopping those recommendations from moving forward. The legislating infrastructure needs to be challenged as much as any particular bill.

lyu07282 1y ago

That's the fun part, they are all public conferences, like: https://initiatives.weforum.org/global-coalition-for-digital-safety/home https://initiatives.weforum.org/global-coalition-for-digital... It doesn't have to be in secret, they can and do plan and coordinate these efforts in the open. When we hear about it, it was already planned for many years.

p0w3n3d 1y ago

> seemingly unrelated efforts What are the odds

crimsoneer 1y ago

I mean, "the police should have the power to read your communication" is not some fringe view. It's been the view of every state in the history of forever.