5 ms·

From a post on Mastodon: > democracy is when you repeatedly push for unpopular laws until they pass, and the more times you do it the more democratic it is It

From a post on Mastodon: > democracy is when you repeatedly push for unpopular laws until they pass, and the more times you do it the more democratic it is It is unlikely that 60 additional “no” votes can be found by Thursday to stop this.

soco 4mo ago
So basically the people we elected will vote yes. How's that undemocratic? Because the majority doesn't vote the way I like it? I'm not even ironic, I truly don't understand those comments. You get what you voted for, garbage in garbage out.
- iamnothere 4mo ago
  All votes have a certain margin or fluctuation, as individual representatives can be pressured, swayed, or coerced by any number of means. If a vote fails over and over again then eventually passes under dubious circumstances (start of vacation when attention is elsewhere), that seems to be against the spirit of democratic rule. At least to me, but what do I know? Maybe everyone loves this outcome and all the prior rejections were just a fluke.
- poly2it 4mo ago
  The vast majority (72%) of European citizens are opposed to Chat control. Regardless, the proposal has been brought up and rejected relentlessly, mostly by action of politicians (commissioners) who are not directly elected to begin with. We have more than enough reasons to be furious. https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/poll-72-of-citizens-oppose-eu-plans-to-search-all-private-messages-for-allegedly-illegal-material-and-report-to-the-police/ https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/poll-72-of-citizens-oppose-...
  - delusional 4mo ago
    Did you read the question of that survey? Talk about poisoning the well.
    - Gander5739 4mo ago
      https://youtu.be/ahgjEjJkZks https://youtu.be/ahgjEjJkZks
  - SpicyLemonZest 4mo ago
    What you have to understand about issue polling is that it's very easy to get whatever results you want if you simply instruct the pollster to ask in absurd ways. This was the question posed to respondents: > EUR02a. Some politicians are calling for the automatic searching of all personal electronic mail and messages of each citizen for presumed suspect content in the search for child pornography. Suspected cases will be notified to the police. An advantage of this could be that more offenders are caught. However, according to police reports, in the vast majority of cases innocent citizens come under suspicion of having committed an offence due to unreliable processes. Please place yourself in the position that your personal electronic mail and messages are searched for suspect content. What is your opinion? Obviously this is not a good faith attempt to understand if people support message scanning.
    - iamnothere 4mo ago
      Since you don’t consider that “good faith” I have rephrased it for you, in a format you may prefer: > EUR02a. In the interest of protecting children, some politicians are calling for the automatic searching of all personal electronic mail and messages of each EU subject in the search for dangerous, illegal child pornography. Suspected cases will be notified to the police. An advantage of this could be that more offenders are caught and children protected. According to activists who defend child pornographers, police reports indicate that a few innocent people may be mildly inconvenienced due to unreliable processes. Please place yourself in the position of a law enforcement official trying to catch these evil people, who is currently obstructed due to false questions of “rights” and “privacy.” What is your opinion? I jest, of course, I’m sure you would prefer something more straightforward and less manipulative like “EUR02a. Do you support child pornography?”
      - SpicyLemonZest 4mo ago
        I understand that you're trying to dunk on me but I don't get what the point is supposed to be. It's certainly possible to come up with other bad ways to ask the question. If someone was interested in genuinely understanding the public's opinion, rather than including a demand to take some particular perspective, they would ask things like "Do you support online platforms scanning all personal messages for child pornography?" or "If you had to weigh the two, would you consider detection of child pornography or the right to privacy to be a higher priority?" And of course for the latter you’d randomize the order in case people are more or less likely to pick the first option.
  - tzs 4mo ago
    That's talking about a different Chat Control that has mandatory scanning. This is talking about an older Chat Control that allowed sites to scan on their own without getting in trouble due to privacy laws, which has been in effect but recently expired. The thing passing now is reauthorizing that older law.
    - debugnik 4mo ago
      We already had two votes to renew it before it expired, and both failed. The second one was forced by the EPP immediately after the first, and then they voted against it too because they failed to amend it even stronger before the vote.
- echelon 4mo ago
  They keep voting on surveillance state measures that the oligarchy wants that will limit the freedom of the people. They keep voting and voting and voting until the energy of the people to protest diminishes or they find a way to get it in. There needs to be a counter-balance where politicians can be removed or even punished by the people for proposing unpopular bills.
- throwaway27448 4mo ago
  > How's that undemocratic? Because they're not representing the needs of their constituents? Democracy is more than just voting—and if it wasn't, most states we think of as authoritarian would also be democratic.
- arjie 4mo ago
  Well, you can imagine a bunch of scenarios that match the "try repeatedly until it succeeds". One good case: The original rule was good but had specifics that made it unpopular. Retrying repeatedly is a pathway to refining it into the minimal valuable version that is acceptable to all. One bad case: The original rule is terrible and progress was stopped only because of public outrage. The assumption of the public is that a groundswell of opposition will cause a fundamental rethinking. However, because such outrage cannot last, repeated attempts will cause fatigue in the public opinion and resignation to pass anything. If the situation is closer to the front it's "democratic". If it's closer to the back it's "not democratic". One represents a refinement to match the will of the people; the other relies on our human inability to focus tremendous energies continuously on a broad front. Both match a representative democracy repeatedly tabling (haha) a bill.
- boobsbr 4mo ago
  I didn't vote for the person that was elected. Where's my representation?
ryandrake 4mo ago
They only have to win once. You have to win every time.
- charcircuit 4mo ago
  To repeal it you only need to win once too.
  - debugnik 4mo ago
    Not quite, the EU parliament can't propose new laws nor repeal existing ones, only amend them and vote on proposals from the commission. The Stop Killing Games campaign, for example, has noticed that the EU commission keeps repeating lobbyist lies and has no expectations of new laws actually passing, so they're focusing on amending existing law through parliament.
  - inigyou 4mo ago
    The repeal would have to be proposed by the same people who proposed the law in the first place. The European Parliament can't initiate the process on its own.
- dyauspitr 4mo ago
  I want them to win. The internet is stupid right now. A culture eating its own tail.
  - goolz 4mo ago
    Pray tell, how would stepping closer to a dystopian hellscape help the internet from eating itself? Somehow, having omnipotent watchers is going to make the internet... more fun and welcoming?
    - pizzaman1 4mo ago
      I think he means that maybe it‘s for the best if „the internet“ in its current state dies, i.e. people move on from the current platforms towards other ones or real life.

soco 4mo ago

So basically the people we elected will vote yes. How's that undemocratic? Because the majority doesn't vote the way I like it? I'm not even ironic, I truly don't understand those comments. You get what you voted for, garbage in garbage out.

iamnothere 4mo ago
All votes have a certain margin or fluctuation, as individual representatives can be pressured, swayed, or coerced by any number of means. If a vote fails over and over again then eventually passes under dubious circumstances (start of vacation when attention is elsewhere), that seems to be against the spirit of democratic rule. At least to me, but what do I know? Maybe everyone loves this outcome and all the prior rejections were just a fluke.
poly2it 4mo ago
The vast majority (72%) of European citizens are opposed to Chat control. Regardless, the proposal has been brought up and rejected relentlessly, mostly by action of politicians (commissioners) who are not directly elected to begin with. We have more than enough reasons to be furious. https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/poll-72-of-citizens-oppose-eu-plans-to-search-all-private-messages-for-allegedly-illegal-material-and-report-to-the-police/ https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/poll-72-of-citizens-oppose-...
- delusional 4mo ago
  Did you read the question of that survey? Talk about poisoning the well.
  - Gander5739 4mo ago
    https://youtu.be/ahgjEjJkZks https://youtu.be/ahgjEjJkZks
- SpicyLemonZest 4mo ago
  What you have to understand about issue polling is that it's very easy to get whatever results you want if you simply instruct the pollster to ask in absurd ways. This was the question posed to respondents: > EUR02a. Some politicians are calling for the automatic searching of all personal electronic mail and messages of each citizen for presumed suspect content in the search for child pornography. Suspected cases will be notified to the police. An advantage of this could be that more offenders are caught. However, according to police reports, in the vast majority of cases innocent citizens come under suspicion of having committed an offence due to unreliable processes. Please place yourself in the position that your personal electronic mail and messages are searched for suspect content. What is your opinion? Obviously this is not a good faith attempt to understand if people support message scanning.
  - iamnothere 4mo ago
    Since you don’t consider that “good faith” I have rephrased it for you, in a format you may prefer: > EUR02a. In the interest of protecting children, some politicians are calling for the automatic searching of all personal electronic mail and messages of each EU subject in the search for dangerous, illegal child pornography. Suspected cases will be notified to the police. An advantage of this could be that more offenders are caught and children protected. According to activists who defend child pornographers, police reports indicate that a few innocent people may be mildly inconvenienced due to unreliable processes. Please place yourself in the position of a law enforcement official trying to catch these evil people, who is currently obstructed due to false questions of “rights” and “privacy.” What is your opinion? I jest, of course, I’m sure you would prefer something more straightforward and less manipulative like “EUR02a. Do you support child pornography?”
    - SpicyLemonZest 4mo ago
      I understand that you're trying to dunk on me but I don't get what the point is supposed to be. It's certainly possible to come up with other bad ways to ask the question. If someone was interested in genuinely understanding the public's opinion, rather than including a demand to take some particular perspective, they would ask things like "Do you support online platforms scanning all personal messages for child pornography?" or "If you had to weigh the two, would you consider detection of child pornography or the right to privacy to be a higher priority?" And of course for the latter you’d randomize the order in case people are more or less likely to pick the first option.
- tzs 4mo ago
  That's talking about a different Chat Control that has mandatory scanning. This is talking about an older Chat Control that allowed sites to scan on their own without getting in trouble due to privacy laws, which has been in effect but recently expired. The thing passing now is reauthorizing that older law.
  - debugnik 4mo ago
    We already had two votes to renew it before it expired, and both failed. The second one was forced by the EPP immediately after the first, and then they voted against it too because they failed to amend it even stronger before the vote.
echelon 4mo ago
They keep voting on surveillance state measures that the oligarchy wants that will limit the freedom of the people. They keep voting and voting and voting until the energy of the people to protest diminishes or they find a way to get it in. There needs to be a counter-balance where politicians can be removed or even punished by the people for proposing unpopular bills.
throwaway27448 4mo ago
> How's that undemocratic? Because they're not representing the needs of their constituents? Democracy is more than just voting—and if it wasn't, most states we think of as authoritarian would also be democratic.
arjie 4mo ago
Well, you can imagine a bunch of scenarios that match the "try repeatedly until it succeeds". One good case: The original rule was good but had specifics that made it unpopular. Retrying repeatedly is a pathway to refining it into the minimal valuable version that is acceptable to all. One bad case: The original rule is terrible and progress was stopped only because of public outrage. The assumption of the public is that a groundswell of opposition will cause a fundamental rethinking. However, because such outrage cannot last, repeated attempts will cause fatigue in the public opinion and resignation to pass anything. If the situation is closer to the front it's "democratic". If it's closer to the back it's "not democratic". One represents a refinement to match the will of the people; the other relies on our human inability to focus tremendous energies continuously on a broad front. Both match a representative democracy repeatedly tabling (haha) a bill.
boobsbr 4mo ago
I didn't vote for the person that was elected. Where's my representation?

ryandrake 4mo ago

They only have to win once. You have to win every time.

charcircuit 4mo ago
To repeal it you only need to win once too.
- debugnik 4mo ago
  Not quite, the EU parliament can't propose new laws nor repeal existing ones, only amend them and vote on proposals from the commission. The Stop Killing Games campaign, for example, has noticed that the EU commission keeps repeating lobbyist lies and has no expectations of new laws actually passing, so they're focusing on amending existing law through parliament.
- inigyou 4mo ago
  The repeal would have to be proposed by the same people who proposed the law in the first place. The European Parliament can't initiate the process on its own.
dyauspitr 4mo ago
I want them to win. The internet is stupid right now. A culture eating its own tail.
- goolz 4mo ago
  Pray tell, how would stepping closer to a dystopian hellscape help the internet from eating itself? Somehow, having omnipotent watchers is going to make the internet... more fun and welcoming?
  - pizzaman1 4mo ago
    I think he means that maybe it‘s for the best if „the internet“ in its current state dies, i.e. people move on from the current platforms towards other ones or real life.