Comment

Comment on EU Chat Control didnt pass - proving the media got to alot of you

artyom@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

Proving even on Lemmy, you and me are extremly prone to propaganda.

What? LOL Who do you think is pushing said “propaganda” to make people fear Chat Control unnecessarily?

And we got told so many times, that EU now wants Chat Control. But it was a big fat lie.

It was demonstrably not a lie. There were so many regions in support of it that it was dangerously close to passing.

I’m thinking this post is the propaganda. Really really lazy propaganda.

Don’t worry, it’ll be back again in a few months with a new coat of paint.

source

Sort:hotnew top

DupaCycki@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

It was demonstrably not a lie. There were so many regions in support of it that it was dangerously close to passing.

It really wasn’t. It couldn’t have been close to passing without a vote even taking place. The vote was scheduled for October 14th. However, since countries representing more than 35% of the EU population have declared their opposition to this proposal, it has been canceled.

A lot of countries have indeed declared support, though this is completely separate from the vote. There, it’d require a qualified majority (55% of member states in favor, or countries representing 65% of the EU population in favor). Looking at MEPs’ public statements, it’s unlikely that the vote would have passed.

Nonetheless, it remains troubling that they keep trying to force this proposal through. We have to push back every single time, but they only need it to pass once. Who knows what the future may hold.

source
- artyom@piefed.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  
  It couldn’t have been close to passing without a vote even taking place.
  
  Huh?
  
  countries representing more than 35% of the EU population have declared their opposition
  
  That’s not even half…
  
  A lot of countries have indeed declared support, though this is completely separate from the vote.
  
  That’s because, as you mentioned earlier, the vote never happened.
  
  There, it’d require a qualified majority (55% of member states in favor, or countries representing 65% of the EU population in favor)
  
  Which, according to your own numbers, they already had.
  
  source
  - DupaCycki@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    Huh? Do countries voicing their approval or disapproval not count as a “vote”?
    
    No. The stances of countries are the [leaked] stances of their respective governments. Which may or may not reflect the views of the country’s MEPs. You can read more here: Fight Chat Control
    
    That’s not even half…
    
    True, and that’s indeed very concerning. However, it should be noted that this is not how many countries are against this proposal, but how many countries oppose it enough to reject it before voting. Many countries currently ‘undecided’ are likely to vote against the proposal in the end (if a vote took place). Likewise, some of them could vote in favor.
    
    Which, according to your own numbers, they already had.
    
    Not at all. I mentioned that, with Germany changing their stance to against, we had over 35% of the EU population against. Which means in favor and undecided both had less than 65% together. Right now I can’t count the populations, but there’s 12 countries in favor, 9 against and 6 undecided. This by no means gives the countries in favor a qualified majority. Unless at least half of undecided (3 countries) fully voted in favor. Which is fairly unlikely.
    
    Additionally, as I mentioned above, these numbers are for the member states’ governments, not their MEPs. Usually MEPs are more pro-people, but of course, it depends on the country and its current government.
    
    source
Alaknar@sopuli.xyz ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

There were so many regions in support of it that it was dangerously close to passing.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but - it wasn’t “close to passing”, it was “close to being passed on as a proposal for a law”, requiring then a formal vote, no?

So, even if Germany retained its support and the motion went forward, it could still get smashed during the vote.

I’m thinking this post is the propaganda. Really really lazy propaganda.

I think you’re misreading it and badly.

I read it as: “don’t believe those who panicked that the EU is a fascist dictatorship that wants to subjugate the population, because it’s still a democracy where the people have the power, as proven by Chat Control being thrown in the bin yet again”.

source
- artyom@piefed.social ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  
  it wasn’t “close to passing”, it was “close to being passed on as a proposal for a law”, requiring then a formal vote, no?
  
  It’s the same thing. Why would a country show support for the legislation and then vote against it later?
  
  source
  - Alaknar@sopuli.xyz ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    
    It’s the same thing.
    
    It absolutely is not. I don’t know, maybe you’re more familiar with the US federal system (pre-Trump, because that’s a different can of worms)? If so: imagine if the president (in this case having no ability to issue executive orders, mind you) says “we should do X”. That’s all well and good, but the X must still go through the Senate and Congress, where it might fail.
    
    Why would a country show support for the legislation and then vote against it later?
    
    Well, because “a country” is not a singular hive-mind, is it? The government says “yes”, but their own Parliament might say “no”.
    
    Governments have no say in what goes on in the EU Commission or Parliament. I mean, sure, most of the time the MEPs coming out of the government-aligned parties will have similar votes, but the EU elections aren’t in-step with most countries’ elections, so it’s never a 1:1 translation. And even then, many MEPs will just vote on their own.
    
    This is such a charitable reading that it’s probably fair to assume this is OPs alt account.
    
    Holy fuck, watch out when opening the fridge, mate, OP might jump out of it!
    
    source