| ▲ | Angostura 7 days ago |
| It may be imperfect, but having a system controlled by someone you vote for and can ultimately kick out is better than having a system controlled by another country's political apparatus. |
|
| ▲ | perihelions 7 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| I disagree. It seems clearly better, as a user, to use an uncensored, un-backdoored service based in a foreign country, then a censored/corrupted service controlled by their own country's government. The former meets the user's requirements, today; the "democracy can fix it!" one is an unrealized promise of the future. If, concrete example, e.g. Kagi doesn't censor or harvest data from or otherwise maltreat its users in any way, then what tangible benefit is it, to the European user, to avoid American-based Kagi, for so-called "sovereignty" reasons? What do they actually need, which is missing, that their democratic government can fix? For this question I'm not counting "other users are using it in a way I don't like"—I'm asking about the user themselves asking on their own behalf. |
| |
| ▲ | pyrale 7 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > It seems clearly better, as a user, to use an uncensored, un-backdoored service based in a foreign country This point of view I could have understood 20 years ago, but Snowden revelations happened in 2013. Before that, US social media have always been censored according to US social norms. Uncensored, un-backdoored services from a foreign country have never existed. As for sovereignty, considering the current US admin as well as US tech barons have been pushing their horses in several EU elections, it's pretty obvious that services from a foreign country with such policies are an issue. | |
| ▲ | alisonatwork 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | This dilemma might exist if Ecosia was thoroughly censored and corrupted to the point it was completely unfit for purpose, but it isn't, so for now it seems more like a hypothetical concern than a real one. What is a real concern, however, is the American government influencing world events in ways that materially harms people outside of America. That government retains its power through the ongoing global economic dominance of American companies. Ordinary people can't do much to directly affect global affairs, but they can at least choose where to spend their money, so why wouldn't they choose to spend their money with companies who aren't propping up foreign governments that harm them? | | | |
| ▲ | Wilder7977 7 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Kagi user here, but one could argue that there is no such thing as un-backdoored service when the US government can knock at Google's door (kagi uses GCP) and ask the data, with little to no accountability or due process. So I agree with you, but the premises are quite restrictive. |
|
|
| ▲ | xboxnolifes 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'd rather use the system controlled by someone without legal jurisdiction over me than someone who does. |
|
| ▲ | rdm_blackhole 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The European commission cannot be kicked out so your point is invalid. |
| |
| ▲ | layer8 7 days ago | parent [-] | | The European Parliament elects the president of the European Commission, and has to approve the commissioners of the European Commission. The European Council, who proposes the president and appoints the commissioners, is a representation of the governments of the member states, which are democratically elected as well. By electing their governments and the European Parliament, the European citizens ultimately determine who controls the European Commission, as a form of representative democracy. | | |
| ▲ | jasonvorhe 7 days ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, in theory ans yet, Ursel is still there so whatever. | | |
| ▲ | unionpivo 7 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Ursela is there because politicians(individual countries leaders) want here there. She is convenient scape goat for things that would hurt politicians image at home, so they let commission do the dirty work, so they can say it wasn't their fault. | |
| ▲ | layer8 7 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I don’t like her either, but why do you think that’s undemocratic when a majority of the European Parliament voted for her? | | |
| ▲ | immibis 5 days ago | parent [-] | | Democracy is when people vote for things, not when politicians vote for more politicians |
| |
| ▲ | izacus 7 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not cow towing to you doesn't make any system undemocratic. It does make you a little tyrant refusing to recognize the will of others. | | |
| ▲ | jasonvorhe 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Haven't heard that so far. Made me chuckle. - le tyrant | |
| ▲ | jasonvorhe 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Read some of your other comments and you seem quite the pro-EU "western democratic values" sycophant who clearly isn't interested in discourse since everyone else is just spewing bullshit. Not wasting any more time here. | | |
| ▲ | izacus 6 days ago | parent [-] | | Sorry if me calling out the utterly false "EU isn't democratic" BS hurts you. Especially when anyone with basic education can see it's modeled pretty much after all other parlementary democracies. I also notice that at no point was any support given in the bs claims - just online propaganda sound bite with no substance. And yes, I think EU gave me a lot as a citizen and I'm invested in it's success because it makes my life and life of my family better. I'm sorry if wanting my country to be better makes you angry. | | |
| ▲ | jasonvorhe 6 days ago | parent [-] | | You infer emotion where there is none. Not every disagreement stems from anger. Good luck to you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | jasonvorhe 7 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I haven't really seen major policy changes regarding parties of certain spectrums being voted out. In the end it all coalesces in some statist centrist plutocracy anyways. |
