61
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
61 points (95.5% liked)
Europe
6835 readers
803 users here now
News and information from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @[email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It’s just a matter of time before neoliberals will cancel an election where a socialist wins. I’m terrified that people jump with glee as a response to this. You’re only allowed to vote because you voted in a way that didn’t disturb things too much. I’d rather have far right win and prove again that they are incapable of running a country. The only thing we need to save are institutions and neoliberals right now are tearing them down faster than they are ruining economy.
You rather have millions of people suffer and die than to acknowledge the paradox of tolerance?
I’d rather eat shit now rather than delay it and make it even worse. This doesn’t solve anything, it’s just pretending things are fine.
I would agree with you if it was not the fact that the right are very intolerant and hateful people meaning more people would suffer. This is not like politics from 20 years ago where it was a minor policy difference separating the parties, the right are actively working to remove rights from people.
So, essentially, you don’t want democracy anymore because results are way too different from what you expect. Precisely what I was talking about.
If you think the right are going to usher in a golden age of democracy then I don’t think you have been paying attention to what has been happening or what they have been saying.
By the time right gets to power democratic institutions will be demolished by neoliberals already. Neoliberals are destroying them because it allows them to rule for a couple more years, amass even more wealth and weather the incoming catastrophe, not because of concern for your wellbeing.
Liberals are by far the lesser of the two evils. Once again I would urge you to pay attention to what the right say and do. They talk of freedoms while stripping it away from others. You speak of liberals enriching themselves when as an example in the US Trump has reduced the taxes on the wealthy while the cost of living is increasing thats looks like the wealthy being given quite the enriching opportunity . Here in Australia our right leaning politician Peter Dutton has amassed a fortune through his political career and is quite friendly with mining the magnates. So please do tell me how the right still enrich but also take away the rights of woman to access to abortions, people wanting to transition and pose a general threat to who they perceive as immigrants even if they are legal in most countries is the better of the two.
No. Economic violence is violence too.
How long can this go on? When will they stop? If it’s up to liberals then never and at the end of that graph there’s monarchy. People want out but you won’t let them.
Do you think that the far right would conduct less economic violence?
It’s a tossup if they go for free market Mad Max or if they start doing handouts to the elderly in exchange for votes. With liberals the first one is guaranteed. Ultimately it’s up to the voters to choose and not internet commentators like us. That right was denied to them.
I think that America is currently doing a fine job of demonstrating how there are ways to do economic violence faster than neoliberalism
For the people to choose, there has to be some measure of a level playing field and informed undestanding of the options. The influence campaign in support of Georgescu violated those principles
Trump is a moron when it comes to economics but he’s not really a political ideologue rather than a grifter surrounded by a mixture of neoliberals and fascists unified by a common goal of making money. What’s happening in America is just late stages of neoliberalism which converges with fascism as time goes on.
As to influence campaigns - everything is one. Our conversation is an influence campaign so where do you draw the line? I’ve seen many attempts but it always looked like it wasn’t done in good faith by any of the sides. You’ll probably say this is financed covertly and used social media to distort truth. This description matches how free market economics are being force fed by mainstream media owned by the most wealthy. I’m for banning all or nothing, otherwise it’s just a tool for politicians to gain unfair advantage over others.
I think that your analysis of Trump is just the motivations behind his actions rather than any reason to not categorise him as far right.
Regardless of where either of us would personally draw it, surely the existing point at which that line was drawn in Romania before the election should matter? That's what the Romanian courts ruled that the influence campaign had crossed over. Whether it's in the best place or not, just one of several sides covertly stepping over it clearly creates a huge advantage for that side
I’m not putting a label on Trump because he has few core beliefs but many whims. People like him and what’s called far right are not playing the traditional political game anymore and produce extreme ambiguity on purpose (those weird nazi salutes are a part of this). That’s because while we debate if Elon is a nazi (he is) or if Trump is a nazi (he’s not), they get to continue doing their business and with how systems and taxes are built that’s the only thing they need to do to continue gaining money (which now equals power).
Western watchdogs, Venice commission and various NGOs don’t see it like that. It was done arbitrarily, based on confidential information and without a right to appeal. I get that many people sigh with relief but this thing should have been done honestly, with heavy burden of what this really means long term and therefore with a plan to make things right. I’m pretty sure nobody is going to make things right because it was done so that things could remain the same. And they remain the same because that way the rich continue getting richer, which is a point I’m circling back to because it’s so important. We are now at decades of this trend and we’re getting dangerously close to going back to feudalism which is the absolute worst that could happen, worse than fascism even imo.
I can't speak to the others you mentioned because I don't know which ones you mean, but this one isn't true. The Venice Commission's report ( https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-PI%282025%29001-e ) includes:
And reiterates that in the conclusion:
They - rightly, in my opinion - extensively discuss how serious a matter it is to annul an election. However, what they were actually asked for was not a ruling on Georgescu's case, but rather a more general view:
They give a list of recommendations of when it might be appropriate and how it should be done. They do not say that Romania acted improperly, nor say that such annulments are never appropriate.
The European Court of Human Rights very firmly rejected Georgescu's claims as well https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-242417%22]}
I'm not responding to the other stuff not because I mean to ignore it or because I have no response, rather just that I think we've got a difference of opinion that's too subjective for either of us to meaningfully persuade the other. I do understand where you're coming from, even if we arrive at different conclusions.
I think you are just trying to make an argument without absorbing what I am saying, I am not saying Liberals policies are always great for the economy either. The wealth inequality is going to get worse and the only way to correct this is to tax the top more.
But show me in conservative history where they have attempted to correct this same issue? Their policies are just as bad if not worse in case of Trump with his tarrifs kicking of a trade war and that cost is going to be passed onto the consumer which is excellerating what your concern is. The only reason the inequality is maybe not as bad in countries like my own that have strong worker laws that allow/force better wages/salaries. But make no mistake if we or other countries like ours still do not increase the tax on the wealthy then that gap will increase as well.
This all sounds like you are just spewing debates points without truly understanding any of it, try and do some research please before you try again.
Edit: Added a point to further clarify my view.
I agree. Annul an election if you suspect interference, sure, but banning a candidate is downright undemocratic. It won't even achieve their goal because it'll give him and whoever he chooses to run instead of him a ton of extra publicity+popularity anyway.
Given that the nature of the interference in favour of Georgescu was an influence campaign, surely letting him run is just letting the interference happen? The effects of it don't disappear just because you do a second vote