5 ms·

> This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the streets they walk on. That would be against everything eu

by mosura 10mo ago

> This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the streets they walk on. That would be against everything european governments stand for.

deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
p0pularopinion 10mo ago
> That would be against everything european governments stand for. I really struggle to understand why the hell this is always only applied to european governments? The idea to take 1984 as a book of requirements seems to extend *far* beyond europe.
- nisegami 10mo ago
  There's societal memory of monarchies and kings that held a lot of power that still impacts things to this day, sometimes unconsciously and sometimes consciously.
  - psd1 10mo ago
    The NSA is an American body, and Trump is the subject of a personality cult far in excess of any European monarch. Authoritarianism is a personality trait independent of political structures.
- dathinab 10mo ago
  yes, and here is a fun fact, most of the push for mass surveillance comes from the European Council, the thing is that literally are "just" the locally elected leaders... not some vague far away "the EU (personalized)" thing which also mean you can locally enact pressure on them furthermore the EU supreme court(s) might have more often hindered mass surveillance laws in member states then the council pushing for them... and if we speak as of "now", not just the UK, but also the US and probably many other states have far more mass surveillance then the EU has "in general". so year the whole "EU is at fault of everything" sentiment makes little sense. I guess in some cases it's an excuse for people having given up on politics. But given how often EU decisions are severely presented out of context I guess some degree of anti-EU propaganda is in there, too.
  - josteink 10mo ago
    > mass surveillance comes from the European Council, the thing is that literally are "just" the locally elected leaders... Factually incorrect. The European Parliament is elected. The Council is appointed, so there is no direct democratic incentive for the council to act on and no direct electorate to please. On top of that the actually elected European Parliament can only approve (or turn down) directives authored by the Council. They have no authority to draft policies on their own. To make matters even worse the European Council, which drafts the policies, has no public minutes to inspect. Which obviously makes it ripe for corruption. Which evidently there is a lot of! Looking at the complete picture, the EU looks like a construct designed intentionally to superficially appear democratic while in reality being the opposite. The more you look at how it actually works, the worse it looks. Sadly. Europe deserved something better than this.
    - dathinab 10mo ago
      > Factually incorrect. no please read what I wrote _local elected leaders_ they are the leaders each member state democratically elected in their own way and that makes a lot of sense the EU isn't a country after all so using the already democratically elected leaders makes a lot of sense > They have no authority to draft policies on their own. yes neither did I claim so, the EU is by far not perfect > Which evidently there is a lot of! yes, but that is mainly a reflection of corruption in local Politics
    - yeahforsureman 10mo ago
      This is so off in many ways. In short, there are three core institutions, the "technocratic" European Commission, the European Parliament elected by direct popular vote, and the Council ("of the EU"/"of ministers") made up of the relevant (in terms of subject matter) ministers of the standing national govs. The law-making procedures depend on policy areas etc. but usually in the policy areas where EU is fully competent, the Commission — the democratically least accountable of the three bodies — by default makes the initiatives and negotiates/mediates them further along with the Parliament and Council, but only the last two together really have the power to finally approve actual legislation, usually either Regulations (directly applicable in member states as such — so an increasingly preferred instrument of near-full harmonisation), or Directives (requiring separate national transposition / implementation and usually leaving more room for national-level discretion otherwise as well). While not fully comparable to nation-state parliaments, the powers of the EU Parliament have been strengthened vis-à-vis both the Commission and the Council, and it's certainly long been a misrepresentation to say that they, e.g., only have the power to "approve or turn down" proposals of the Commission and/or the Council.
miroljub 10mo ago
I don't understand why you got heavily downvoted. Yes, there are governments that are worse than European, but the decline of European government is the fastest. You may be surprised that the UK is the world leader in the number of people arrested because of internet posts. And that Germany, which is still way behind the UK, has more people arrested for the same reason than Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Belarus, Saudi Arabia, and a few others combined. And many people still believe that those countries are beacons of democracy while the others are backward dictatorships.
- mosura 10mo ago
  Indeed: https://metro.co.uk/2025/12/17/man-jailed-burning-migrant-hotels-posts-x-reported-brother-in-law-25565440/ https://metro.co.uk/2025/12/17/man-jailed-burning-migrant-ho... “An X user who posted two anti-immigration tweets been handed a 18-month jail sentence.” Edit to point out 1. That is a quote and 2. The UK considers this Ok though https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjeykklwn7vo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjeykklwn7vo
  - _bohm 10mo ago
    Not that I believe people should be jailed for speech, but merely referring to what he said as “anti-immigration” is very much burying the lede
    - creata 10mo ago
      For people too lazy to click, the second post was: > I think it’s time for the British to gang together, hit the streets and start the slaughter. > Violence and murder is the only way now. Start off burning every migrant hotel then head off to MPs’ houses and Parliament, we need to take over by FORCE. I'm not sure what the punishment for such a clear but ineffective incitement to violence should be, but it shouldn't be nothing.
      - MangoToupe 10mo ago
        This is an convictable crime in the US. Inciting violence is emphatically not protected speech.
findyoucef 10mo ago
They're supposedly against genocide but that hasn't stopped them from shamelessly supporting one.
- hirako2000 10mo ago
  And messages like these should be monitored. Who knows, we may need to lock all your bank accounts for "suspicious activity".
immibis 10mo ago
Is that why they rejected Chat Control 1.0?
dathinab 10mo ago
this is simply not true it was the EU which had stopped many similar unhinged attempts from the UK when the UK was still a member similar it had been the EU which had shut down various other surveillance nonsense of the EU you are basically pretending the EU is a person with one uniform opinion and goals but it's like the opposite of it, like in a lot of way it's a union of states, each having a vastly different goals and culture and non of them having a "single uniform opinion" either but (in most cases) a more complex political field then the US (on a federal level) Furthermore the most influential organ of the EU when it comes to making changes is literally a composition of the elected leaders of the member states. So for most big controversial decisions the driving and directing force isn't "the EU" but but the various elected leaders of the member states. For EU citizens blaming "the EU" instead of blaming your own elected leaders is common, but pretty counter productive, as it's basically pretending you have no power to change things. Furthermore in the EU you have an additional parliament which (in general) needs to ratify laws and two high courts which can (and in context of mass surveillance repeatedly have) shut down misguided "laws", including in many cases local attempts at mass surveillance laws. So while some parts of the EU have consistently pushed for mass surveillance in recent years other parts also have consistently moved against it. In general while the EU needs a lot more transparency and some more democratic processes in some aspects a lot (not all) of the "stories told to make the EU look dump/bad" have a lot of important context stripped from that (like e.g. that a lot of the current push for surveillance comes from the locally elected leaders not the EU parliament or some other abstract "the EU" thing, it's your own countries leader/lead party(1) which does or at least tolerates that shit).
- blitzar 10mo ago
  > blaming "the EU" instead of blaming your own elected leaders The elected leaders like to blame the EU (or for those without an EU - any external body or even the mythical deep state) for everything adverse. The reality is these "failures" they blame on someone else are generally in alignment with their own policies goals and objectives.

by mosura 10mo ago

> This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the streets they walk on. That would be against everything european governments stand for.

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

p0pularopinion 10mo ago

> That would be against everything european governments stand for. I really struggle to understand why the hell this is always only applied to european governments? The idea to take 1984 as a book of requirements seems to extend *far* beyond europe.

nisegami 10mo ago
There's societal memory of monarchies and kings that held a lot of power that still impacts things to this day, sometimes unconsciously and sometimes consciously.
- psd1 10mo ago
  The NSA is an American body, and Trump is the subject of a personality cult far in excess of any European monarch. Authoritarianism is a personality trait independent of political structures.
dathinab 10mo ago
yes, and here is a fun fact, most of the push for mass surveillance comes from the European Council, the thing is that literally are "just" the locally elected leaders... not some vague far away "the EU (personalized)" thing which also mean you can locally enact pressure on them furthermore the EU supreme court(s) might have more often hindered mass surveillance laws in member states then the council pushing for them... and if we speak as of "now", not just the UK, but also the US and probably many other states have far more mass surveillance then the EU has "in general". so year the whole "EU is at fault of everything" sentiment makes little sense. I guess in some cases it's an excuse for people having given up on politics. But given how often EU decisions are severely presented out of context I guess some degree of anti-EU propaganda is in there, too.
- josteink 10mo ago
  > mass surveillance comes from the European Council, the thing is that literally are "just" the locally elected leaders... Factually incorrect. The European Parliament is elected. The Council is appointed, so there is no direct democratic incentive for the council to act on and no direct electorate to please. On top of that the actually elected European Parliament can only approve (or turn down) directives authored by the Council. They have no authority to draft policies on their own. To make matters even worse the European Council, which drafts the policies, has no public minutes to inspect. Which obviously makes it ripe for corruption. Which evidently there is a lot of! Looking at the complete picture, the EU looks like a construct designed intentionally to superficially appear democratic while in reality being the opposite. The more you look at how it actually works, the worse it looks. Sadly. Europe deserved something better than this.
  - dathinab 10mo ago
    > Factually incorrect. no please read what I wrote _local elected leaders_ they are the leaders each member state democratically elected in their own way and that makes a lot of sense the EU isn't a country after all so using the already democratically elected leaders makes a lot of sense > They have no authority to draft policies on their own. yes neither did I claim so, the EU is by far not perfect > Which evidently there is a lot of! yes, but that is mainly a reflection of corruption in local Politics
  - yeahforsureman 10mo ago
    This is so off in many ways. In short, there are three core institutions, the "technocratic" European Commission, the European Parliament elected by direct popular vote, and the Council ("of the EU"/"of ministers") made up of the relevant (in terms of subject matter) ministers of the standing national govs. The law-making procedures depend on policy areas etc. but usually in the policy areas where EU is fully competent, the Commission — the democratically least accountable of the three bodies — by default makes the initiatives and negotiates/mediates them further along with the Parliament and Council, but only the last two together really have the power to finally approve actual legislation, usually either Regulations (directly applicable in member states as such — so an increasingly preferred instrument of near-full harmonisation), or Directives (requiring separate national transposition / implementation and usually leaving more room for national-level discretion otherwise as well). While not fully comparable to nation-state parliaments, the powers of the EU Parliament have been strengthened vis-à-vis both the Commission and the Council, and it's certainly long been a misrepresentation to say that they, e.g., only have the power to "approve or turn down" proposals of the Commission and/or the Council.

miroljub 10mo ago

I don't understand why you got heavily downvoted. Yes, there are governments that are worse than European, but the decline of European government is the fastest. You may be surprised that the UK is the world leader in the number of people arrested because of internet posts. And that Germany, which is still way behind the UK, has more people arrested for the same reason than Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Belarus, Saudi Arabia, and a few others combined. And many people still believe that those countries are beacons of democracy while the others are backward dictatorships.

mosura 10mo ago
Indeed: https://metro.co.uk/2025/12/17/man-jailed-burning-migrant-hotels-posts-x-reported-brother-in-law-25565440/ https://metro.co.uk/2025/12/17/man-jailed-burning-migrant-ho... “An X user who posted two anti-immigration tweets been handed a 18-month jail sentence.” Edit to point out 1. That is a quote and 2. The UK considers this Ok though https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjeykklwn7vo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjeykklwn7vo
- _bohm 10mo ago
  Not that I believe people should be jailed for speech, but merely referring to what he said as “anti-immigration” is very much burying the lede
  - creata 10mo ago
    For people too lazy to click, the second post was: > I think it’s time for the British to gang together, hit the streets and start the slaughter. > Violence and murder is the only way now. Start off burning every migrant hotel then head off to MPs’ houses and Parliament, we need to take over by FORCE. I'm not sure what the punishment for such a clear but ineffective incitement to violence should be, but it shouldn't be nothing.
    - MangoToupe 10mo ago
      This is an convictable crime in the US. Inciting violence is emphatically not protected speech.

findyoucef 10mo ago

They're supposedly against genocide but that hasn't stopped them from shamelessly supporting one.

hirako2000 10mo ago
And messages like these should be monitored. Who knows, we may need to lock all your bank accounts for "suspicious activity".

immibis 10mo ago

Is that why they rejected Chat Control 1.0?

dathinab 10mo ago

this is simply not true it was the EU which had stopped many similar unhinged attempts from the UK when the UK was still a member similar it had been the EU which had shut down various other surveillance nonsense of the EU you are basically pretending the EU is a person with one uniform opinion and goals but it's like the opposite of it, like in a lot of way it's a union of states, each having a vastly different goals and culture and non of them having a "single uniform opinion" either but (in most cases) a more complex political field then the US (on a federal level) Furthermore the most influential organ of the EU when it comes to making changes is literally a composition of the elected leaders of the member states. So for most big controversial decisions the driving and directing force isn't "the EU" but but the various elected leaders of the member states. For EU citizens blaming "the EU" instead of blaming your own elected leaders is common, but pretty counter productive, as it's basically pretending you have no power to change things. Furthermore in the EU you have an additional parliament which (in general) needs to ratify laws and two high courts which can (and in context of mass surveillance repeatedly have) shut down misguided "laws", including in many cases local attempts at mass surveillance laws. So while some parts of the EU have consistently pushed for mass surveillance in recent years other parts also have consistently moved against it. In general while the EU needs a lot more transparency and some more democratic processes in some aspects a lot (not all) of the "stories told to make the EU look dump/bad" have a lot of important context stripped from that (like e.g. that a lot of the current push for surveillance comes from the locally elected leaders not the EU parliament or some other abstract "the EU" thing, it's your own countries leader/lead party(1) which does or at least tolerates that shit).

blitzar 10mo ago
> blaming "the EU" instead of blaming your own elected leaders The elected leaders like to blame the EU (or for those without an EU - any external body or even the mythical deep state) for everything adverse. The reality is these "failures" they blame on someone else are generally in alignment with their own policies goals and objectives.