BY ONE FUCKING VOTE!
https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/189574
Vote out every single fucker who is trying to limit our freedoms!
i don’t understand, was EPP for or against the extension ? Cause my understanding was that they asked to have a second vote even if the first one already rejected the extension.
Thats actually insane in itself that it got that close. Next time they will succeed. :/
People are so stupid to support this. They dont seem to understand that its never about protecting anyone and its always about building dystopia.
Why do we have to keep fighting our own government for our rights? Why can’t our government just represent us?
Because unfortunately our rights are opposed to the will of capital and they serve capital first and foremost
Governments don’t represent the common people anymore.
We should topple the EU then tbh
To put it in Douglas Adams words: Because the politicians are lizards ;)
Why can’t they vote on a ban to do any chat control bills? Stop this nonsense from happening again.
If you have money you can ask the lobbyists.
I imagine they’re thinking, “Well we will see what the new vote next month has to say about that!”
We should go to war against corpocracy, until all corporations are bankrupt.
EVERY. DAMN. ONE.
Why was chat control allowed to be presented again in the first place.
this is the real thing, this is almost certainly unconstitutional.
greedy corps going against law as usual.
No, not really. It’s because they retracted the proposal before going to vote, because they knew it wouldnt pass after Germany publicly said they would vote against.
Then they changed some stuff and send it again, which is now rejected as it seems.
Now they need to wait, but they didnt before.
So this war is far from an end huh?
We have to win every time. They only need to win once.
They won’t stop pushing until they get it
April 3, already planned
Who are they?
The Commission probably since they’re the only entity who can propose law
How do I respond to this^^
Yes, I think we’re all assuming the law came into parliament the regular way. I assumed the “they” are supposed lobbyists who are standing behind and outside the regular entity…
Am I missing something or are you pulling a Nielsen on me? “Coffee?” “Yes, I know.”
Oh, sorry. Thought you actually didn’t knew, my bad!
they will keep trying in the most sneaky ways until they are deposed. they only need to succeed once.
Where can I see who voted for and against? I want to know if I need to change who I vote for next EU election.
Scroll down and select your country: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/
It’s always the ones you most expect.
Green = “opposing”, red = “supporting”… “chat control extension”. I guess the greens are against the chat control proposal, though that’s hardly clear, and there seem to be more reds than greens so that suggests the chat control proposal was accepted, or is there some other layer to this? Also the stance of a state bears no relation to that of its representatives. Very confusing
352 against
248 pro
44 undecided
A simple majority will do
The “Chat Control” proposal would legalise scanning of all private digital communications, including encrypted messages and photos.
it’s explained right there above the vote summary
It’s not the topic of the vote I’m trying to clarify but rather trying to make sense of that web page showing who is voting for what, and how, if at all that is connected to the European Parliament vote. That website suggests overwhelming support for the proposal at both state and representative level, I’m not sure what to make of that.
Yeah it seems to be backwards, they voted for an “Extension of the temporary derogation”, which I assume means if do you want to take more time to discuss this problem vote yes, or vote no to enact the newly proposed law now. Which is why the greens are paradoxically for the proposal and the EPP is against. Another layer of shenanigans to confuse people I guess.
I think that Patrick posted it. basically the ones against where the conservatives, both left and right where against (even if there were some people inside those parities who voted to continue the scanning)
What?
I see conservatives+ extreme right pro. Also some fake leftAgainst greens -real left.
(Not absolute since they vote individually)
But by faction:
pro: EPP,ECR, ID/Patriots
Against: EFA, The Left, Renew Europe, S&D(divided)
Undecided: S&D, Renew Europe
For those of us out of the loop, who is Patrick?
Probably Patrick Breyer, who often posts about privacy issues in the EU parliament.
Thanks!
i think they mean patrick breyer from the german pirate party
Definitely not a Krusty Krab
Can it just fuck off for good this time?
PLEASE
it’s indicative of the system we’re in. our oligarchs have enough money to pay people to push for this in perpetuity while the rest of us are forced to give up some degree of our lives to fight it off on a field of battles that’s tilted towards money; they will win eventually unless the system itself is changed.
Congratulations!
Will they just revote again then until it passes?
hopefully no. but we are still in danger
This is indeed the plan. Only 1 time is enough to get this through the system. But it requires 500 times saying no first.
When the European Union is low-key IRA
That would make us Margaret Thatcher, which is very gross
Well based on the seats in the parliament, most eu voters are rightwing to some degree. So it’s Tatcher going undercover IRA to bomb herself?
Let’s celebrate this victory… even though it’s concerning that it is a recurring topic :-/
see u all on monday
Dude, we’re protesting now until all those fuckers who voted in favor of chat control are voted out of parliament. We have names!
They’ll just change a few things and try again. I feel like we’ve been hearing about chat control on and off for about 5 years now and I can’t imagine it’ll go away soon.
Good, but pretty meaningless overall while they still allow lobbying to take place.
They pretend to care that lobbying means corruption from corporate interests, but doing anything meaningful to stop lobbying entirely and punish anyone still doing it would be “authoritarian communism” now, wouldn’t it?
