Hi everyone. Probably not everyone knows but EU has CLOUD Act analogue too - it has a name “e-evidence - cross border access”. so this is a description of framework from the official site - “create a European Production Order: this will allow a judicial authority in one Member State to obtain electronic evidence (such as emails, text or messages in apps, as well as information to identify a perpetrator as a first step) directly from a service provider or its legal representative in another Member State, which will be obliged to respond within 10 days, and within 8 hours in cases of emergency (compared to up to 120 days for the existing European Investigation Order or an average of 10 months for a Mutual Legal Assistance procedure);”
basically it means that the national authorities of the country where companies are registered no longer has juducial control over law protection of their companies - so for example if extreme right government of Poland will be dissappointed with your post on Mastodon about Pegasus surveillance used by them against political journalists by new Framework they will issue juicial order to obtain your mastodon account details, ip, email etc and will electronically request your mastodon provider (which reside for example in Belgium) to give this data to them withis 8 hours or 10 days (without possibility to make appelation) basically overriding national courts of country of registration of the provider.
Do you believe that EU goverment respect right to privacy and national souvereginity as a fundamental right?
That’s weird, as the precursors “European coal and steel community”, “european economic community” are clearly economic alliances.
So did you (1)
The answer should not be to bypass judicial prudence. Yet that’s what they’ve chosen.
And that’s but one example. The insistence of the unelected EU commission to again and again put chatcontrol for a vote, despite it being unpopular, is another example.
The CRA act is another: basically killing independen softwarw development.
I think you probably grew up in western EU? Those of us that did live under a autoritarian regime, in my case DDR, know the lenghts they will go to to supress people who’s thoughts they deem bad.
One of the things that’s most difficult to communicate is this: all the freedom surpressing tools that are being build today, which you believe will be used solely against “the bad people”, will be used against you. For your own good.
What the EU needs is more direct democracy, not the charade that is parliament/commission, but sadly it’s going in the opposite direction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuman_Declaration
The EU Commission is the executive branch and it’s approved by the parliament. You should check the basics.
You basically say that we should stop producing knives because someone could use them against people.
In this specific case, I don’t see why in a union the location of a person or a company should have any influence on how the law operates. By the way, these laws also work the other way around in favor of the weaks. Imagine if you wanted to sue a guy protected by his government that made it difficult to collect proofs.
It’s a nice idea on paper, but I doubt that it would work. The truth is that the vast majority of people fail to understand the basic functioning of the institutions, not to mention how they easily fall for misinformation and conspirationism due to a lack of critical sense and knowledge. It’s a different discussion though.
People who dislike democracy tend to like the EU indeed. I don’t think it’s a different discussion. I think it’s the philosophical core of this issue.
I feel like you and I are in completely different camps in that regard, as you feel the basis of society should be hierarchical and control. This explains why some appreciate less judiciary oversight on government, less freedom for individuals.
Others think the basis of society should be cooperation, appreciation of individuals, freedom both for and from others.
For the people who prefer domination and control I can only advise empathy. It won’t be you who controls others. So try to feel what it’s like to not be regarded as a person that deserves freedom and agency. People are more than an entry in a database.
Exactly, it should be the executive branch! It makes no sense that the executive branch proposes laws! And it makes no sense that a law-making part of government is not up for election. This is one of the least democratic institutes that dares to call itself a democracy.
Where the analogy doesn’t work is that knives already exist. A better analogy would be: don’t build novel weapons of mass destruction that are pointed at your own populace.
Brings us back to our core philosophical difference: cooperation vs subjugation. A union, to me, is cooperative with everyone’s boundaries respected. A union to you is top down dictating who does what.
That’s your opinion and it’s not based on facts.
No I don’t.
I’m afraid that you don’t understand how the executive power works.
You also do not understand the difference between a parliament and a government.
You shouldn’t assume what I think, especially when you are wrong.
What you propose is an alliance where countries maintain their differences, essentially the dissolution of the EU and the return to the Europe of the early 1900. Interestingly that’s the same thing that Putin and Trump hope for. You are free to think it’s better, but I’m not sure you fully understand what that really means.
If it walk like a duck, and quacks like a duck. Perhaps you should engage in some soul seeking :(
Again, there’s more ways to interact with others than (a) everyone is dictated top down vs (b) dog eat dog.
What I propose is voluntary democratic cooperation. An improvement upon the current structure with more respect for everyone.
“In Russia they’re doing it too” is to me insufficient motivation to lessen our democratic basis and individual freedoms.
How it should work is a legislative branch to propose laws, a parliament to vote on it, an executive to implement it. The bastardization of the process by the EU is that the executive initiates legislation, and isn’t directly elected.
That’s why they can repeatedly propose the same unpopular law, without any fear of losing power.
I propose you to read less anti-EU propaganda. All the initiatives in the EU are made in agreement with the elected EU parliament and are supported by the member states. You should also check how the right of veto works, all the problems for the lack of authority of the EU (contrary to what you say), and what’s the legislative procedure, because you don’t seem to be fully aware of it.