European Politics Thread

[pariston_hill]

You get assigned your number from skatteverket (the tax office) at birth. It's usually your date of birth plus a four digit identification code. I think you get the card sent home a few weeks later but by like age 10-12 most kids have it memorized.

Still sounds weird to me, we have an ID number and a a Natural Person number (meaning your taxpayer registry). But only the ID is a thing kids get, as for much of infancy you can use their birth certificate as a document for them.
Sounds auspicious authoritarian the Swede way.

[Satsuki]

Social Security numbers/cards are a basic here. Both for tracking you in the Social Security program and for ID. It occasionally comes up in identity theft, but other than that there's never really been any problems here with it. They were created during FDR's New Deal as a way to help people during the Great Depression.

[Chrior]

Yeah, I don't get the issues with Macron's new laws at all. Portugal is very similar to Sweden in this regard (I wish we were more similar in other aspects as well). It's mandatory to register children up until 5 days after birth (I think) and thei immediately get an ID card. In all schools I've been, I've also had a student card. From as early as I remember, I had my ID card, along with taxpayer, social security, and healthcare numbers. Going to school is essentially compulsory as well, though I have no idea how it is enforced. I know that the Portuguese government started measures similar to those announced in France but for Romani/gypsies, in order to stop the cycle of children brainwashing and ghetto communities by traditional gypsy education, especially for young girls. In exchange for letting their children go to school and better integrate into society, they got nice social housing and a universal basic income that increases for each kid. Although there is still a big discrimination problem with gypsy communities, I really think it has become much much better. By living closer to city centers in actual buildings and having access to public education and healthcare, they became much more integrated into society than they were when they lived in giant camps in the outskirts. And by giving them a basic income to support their traditional occupations, it helps to steer them away from drug dealing and other crime. It sounds very weird to me how this didn't happen in France before and how people acuse Macron of extremism.

[MiyamotoMusashi]

Yeah, I don't get the issues with Macron's new laws at all. Portugal is very similar to Sweden in this regard (I wish we were more similar in other aspects as well). It's mandatory to register children up until 5 days after birth (I think) and thei immediately get an ID card. In all schools I've been, I've also had a student card. From as early as I remember, I had my ID card, along with taxpayer, social security, and healthcare numbers. Going to school is essentially compulsory as well, though I have no idea how it is enforced. I know that the Portuguese government started measures similar to those announced in France but for Romani/gypsies, in order to stop the cycle of children brainwashing and ghetto communities by traditional gypsy education, especially for young girls. In exchange for letting their children go to school and better integrate into society, they got nice social housing and a universal basic income that increases for each kid. Although there is still a big discrimination problem with gypsy communities, I really think it has become much much better. By living closer to city centers in actual buildings and having access to public education and healthcare, they became much more integrated into society than they were when they lived in giant camps in the outskirts. And by giving them a basic income to support their traditional occupations, it helps to steer them away from drug dealing and other crime. It sounds very weird to me how this didn't happen in France before and how people acuse Macron of extremism.

Because they are proposed alongside other legislation or statements that can easily be interpreted as discriminatory specifically against the Muslim population, and thus overshadows possible logical and good aspects of this particular bill (besides ID, controlling funding coming from outside of the country for example, or preventing separate societies building up due to isolated upbringing).
Examples would be Darmanin talking about halal food and how producing and selling separate products would lead to cultural minorities, or the new supposed "anti-discrimination" law that punishes the refusal of treatment by a doctor of the opposite gender with up to 5 year prison time, since it is discriminating against the doctor based on gender.
So it´s a general package thing.

[Nilitch]

Honestly, much has already been said. And to be even more honest, Americans must be one of the rare ones to have the recklessness to call this a "LePenist" law... especially after the Snowden revelations that revealed how the US is tracking down (and keeps doing it) everyone in the world like a true JamesBond villain.


For those who understand French.
"The president is annoyed at the treatment of the terrorist attacks by English-language media." Basically, this article (and many others articles and radio podcasts wether it's from the left or the right) says that the anglo-saxons are being way too politically correct. For the anglo-saxons, the problem comes above all from French secularism, which allows blasphemy. There are real terrorist attacks in France, but the NYTimes goes all "wow, sounds like the cops are too brutal with the terrorists, damn".

Examples would be Darmanin talking about halal food and how producing and selling separate products would lead to cultural minorities, or the new supposed "anti-discrimination" law that punishes the refusal of treatment by a doctor of the opposite gender with up to 5 year prison time, since it is discriminating against the doctor based on gender.
So it´s a general package thing.

Darmanin is a stupid shit who's only there because Macron is scared to lose the next elections. He's supposed to attract very right-wing voters. And yeah the second thing is harsh I guess, but what's wrong about it exactly ?

[MiyamotoMusashi]

Honestly, much has already been said. And to be even more honest, Americans must be one of the rare ones to have the recklessness to call this a "LePenist" law... especially after the Snowden revelations that revealed how the US is tracking down (and keeps doing it) everyone in the world like a true JamesBond villain.


For those who understand French.
"The president is annoyed at the treatment of the terrorist attacks by English-language media." Basically, this article (and many others articles and radio podcasts wether it's from the left or the right) says that the anglo-saxons are being way too politically correct. For the anglo-saxons, the problem comes above all from French secularism, which allows blasphemy. There are real terrorist attacks in France, but the NYTimes goes all "wow, sounds like the cops are too brutal with the terrorists, damn".




Darmanin is a stupid shit who's only there because Macron is scared to lose the next elections. He's supposed to attract very right-wing voters. And yeah the second thing is harsh I guess, but what's wrong about it exactly ?

It restricts religious freedom since, as much i think it is silly from my point of view, it is an essential part of the religion to only be in contact with your spouse and nobody else from the opposite gender, not to forget it is not eligible under the medical ethics code anyway, hence many medical professionals have already spoken out against it.
Identification, getting them into schools and educating them based on Western ideals, i am fully behind, same as all the Imam and funding stuff.
But the anti discrimination law is very silly and unnecessary and puts a shade on the necessary stuff.

In regards to the free speech debate and the reaction, both sides argue from an idealistic standpoint which is not appropriate in my opinion.
Of course it would be ideal if everyone in the world understands the value of tolerance, even in regards to things that hurts them one way or the other, and accepting that free speech is absolute, even if you and your beliefs can end up as the butt of a joke, but how realistic is that with people who have never even heard the name Voltaire, let alone read him (considering his play Mohamet, maybe it´s better they don´t...).
Cultural diversity has its consequences that many people like or tend to ignore and only look at the positives.

[Lord Gaimon]

It restricts religious freedom since, as much i think it is silly from my point of view, it is an essential part of the religion to only be in contact with your spouse and nobody else from the opposite gender.

Laicité means religion doesn't get special treatment, why should stupid beliefs be accommodated just because they are religious?

[MiyamotoMusashi]

Laïcité means religion doesn't get special treatment, why should stupid beliefs be accommodated just because they are religious?

Pretty simplistic question, not that i ever said that it should, i have no dog in this fight.
Like i said at the end of my last post, most people tend to look at multiculturalism as a sole positive thing most of the time but it can have severe consequences and implications that usually get ignored based on illusions, especially with two cultures clashing that have no willingness to compromise.
You can´t have 4 million devout people (exaggerated for the point) who follow what the Quran and the Fatwas they believe in strictly that also adhere to the values and ideas of the age of enlightenment, it´s a contradiction. Moderate religious people can do that because they stopped following the rules of their specific religion strictly and have molded whatever they believe in to fit both modern times and their personal lives, so they can still somewhat enact their religious beliefs but also still function within the modern society they live in, it´s a compromise.
So everything has its limits, including both religious freedom and freedom of speech, it´s just that the limits of both within Western societies are usually irrelevant for most of us or are not tangible, it all depends on where the limits are drawn.
Having said that, in my opinion it should not be at choosing the gender of your treating doctor, it´s silly and unnecessary since it is as harmless as selling halal food, and does not prevent the creation of moderate believers, and that should be the goal right now, not to antagonize that part of the population and completely restrict a key freedom that is necessary in their belief.
My personal ideal is obviously much different but i am not using that as a benchmark, it´s too distant from reality.

[Pachylad]

Are any German APForumers here able to shed light on how COVID cases drastically increased since November or so? I was under the impression that you guys were one of the countries to have had your shit together during the pandemic, and indeed Googling 'Germany covid' still gives me fawning articles on you guys' performance pre-November (flashback to when Singapore was a model country until our second outbreak stemming from our foreign workers' dormitories...)

[Riddler]

I'd say it's a mix of our politicians not using the resting time in summer to make sufficient preparitions for the second Covid wave that everyone was expecting to hit us in the winter (as it did), and people suffering from "Covid fatigue". In general, everybody seemed a lot more reasonable and willing to reduce their social activities to the bare minimum in the spring. Now, a lot of people are just fed up with and tired of all those rules and regulations, so they are a lot more lax about or outright ignore Covid guidelines.

Our government also tried to do a "Lockdown Light" in November and that didn't really work out that well, so they are just now ordering a complete lockdown like we had in spring.

[wolfwood]

Well you know what continental europe says. If at once you don't succeed, lockdown and lockdown again.

In other news brexit has been put on hold again for a new this time we really mean it deadline.

[DoctorPhil]

Whoa really? That surprises the hell out for me. I thought the british elite would do everything to push it through so they could dodge a few taxes. Wasn't the reason so many people went for Boris to finally get this Brexit stuff over with? I hope they're regretting their vote now.

[MiyamotoMusashi]

Are any German APForumers here able to shed light on how COVID cases drastically increased since November or so? I was under the impression that you guys were one of the countries to have had your shit together during the pandemic, and indeed Googling 'Germany covid' still gives me fawning articles on you guys' performance pre-November (flashback to when Singapore was a model country until our second outbreak stemming from our foreign workers' dormitories...)

Acting based on politics over scientific opinions and assessments, to summarize it.
Leading epidemiologists here underlined that the second wave would hit hard back in April, the government, leading up to a election year, believed the winter would pass as spring did based on wishful thinking, hence tried to keep people happy.
To be fair, it was not a completely agreed upon assessment regarding the second wave, a few claimed we would not see it, but most did...

[Jabra]

Are any German APForumers here able to shed light on how COVID cases drastically increased since November or so? I was under the impression that you guys were one of the countries to have had your shit together during the pandemic, and indeed Googling 'Germany covid' still gives me fawning articles on you guys' performance pre-November (flashback to when Singapore was a model country until our second outbreak stemming from our foreign workers' dormitories...)

On top of what Riddler said, what sets us apart from many other european countries is the federal system. We have 16 federal states with 16 federal ministers, and it's them who coordinate the meassures during a pandemic, not Merkel. Which was actually quite effective in spring because each state had it's own "homegrown" public health departments, they could act with a proper network already established.

IF they decide to act. And that's the downside of such a federal system, because each state is ruled by a different party or ruled by people who naturally have their own political agenda ("never waste a crisis!")

Here, have a "small" taste:

Spoiler:

The federal ministers of Bavaria and North-Rhine Westphalia, among the economically strongest states with the highest population. Both are ruled by moderate conservatives (european standard = liberal cucktards for you US people), both want to succeed Merkel as the chancellor. This dynamic alone caused so many unnecessary discussions and wasted time during summer, simply because this guy here:



took on the role of the hardliner very early in the pandemic, which forced his competitor...



to take the opposite stance (= undermining most measures against the pandemic, blaming rising infections on Bulgarian & Romanian migrants etc). Just because it was the only way to distinguish himself in the media. Well, and probably because his one-vote majority in his parliament wouldn't let him act differently anyway, since he's in a coalition with neo-liberals.

Then we have the FMs of the densely populated city-states, like Berlin & Hamburg. They're ruled by the moderate left (literal communism for you US people). One is a doctor himself, the other won his election just before the pandemic (next election is in 4 years) and the third will step down soon.



So they're all in a comfortable position to make rather unpopular decisions.
But while the left-wing bubble is generally pro-measures, the city-states have to deal with a incredibly diverse population. Not US-level diverse, but diverse. They suffer from areas with severe poverty and have to deal with various other challenges, like a high amount of young people, migrants and/or generally "free spirited" folk. You can get your majority for closing schools, but those hit the hardest by it won't be few and they lack the resources to compensate for it. Thus even they are reluctant to act appropriately.
And just to quote someone I know personally: "I didn't decide to study in Berlin to lock myself up...".

Now coordinating the discrepancies between the above examples is already a huge task, but it doesn't even end here!

Let me introduce the eastern federal states, with their own rather unique challenges:



Two of the FMs are moderate conservatives, the third is FAR left (I don't know if there is a US-equivalent to this...).

The common problem is not that they're left or right though, but that our version of the european populist/nazi party (AFD) is incredibly strong in those states. Up to 25% of all voters strong. Which naturally influences the other parties regardless of political compass. And just to get an idea of our homegrown populists: they are not just literal Nazis at this point, they're all out Bolsonaro/Trump level - spreading misinformation just for the sake of it. The topic doesn't even matter as long as it's anti government.

And then we have outliers in the far north of Germany, with a relatively low population density (comparable to sweden).



The pandemic was obviously a lot easier to manage due to their location and lack of neighbors with crazy infection rates, but this also meant that they always raised an eyebrow when it came to measures affecting all 16 states. They had low infection numbers, so why should they "suffer" like the others?

And while there is some truth in that, the seemingly endless discussions and bargaining lead to what Riddler described as Covid fatique. It felt a bit like children arguing on a grand stage, meanwhile people lost view of what's allowed and what isn't.

Like even with the coming lockdown (that applies to every state), I was asked by a friend how the curfew is supposed to work if her parents come to visit during christmas. Are they supposed to sleep at my friend's 2-room flat because they aren't allowed to leave for the hotel past 9PM? Should they be "done" with the festivities before nightfall?

It's shit like this that grinds people down, even if they're behind the measures in general.

To make it short, coordinating the 16 federal ministers is like herding cats, and the only tool Merkel has to apply pressure is her great popularity. She can beg, she can appeal, she can openly praise the ministers who follow her proposals (which are based on scientific advise 1 : 1).
But that's it.

So time goes by, week after week, with the common denominator being what it is, always too little too late.

[pariston_hill]

Interesting stuff about gov't rulling in Germany

Hey I take offense Jabra, Bolsonaro might as well be a nazi, he wants to use the slogan on the defunct fascist brazilian party (Ação Integralista) as the slogan for his new party. Even our very own fascist leader, Vargas was smart enough to not asscoiate with those idiots.

[wolfwood]

Yeah that is quite an informative read.

Just solidifies my belief that jabra is teh best girl of AP.

[Riddler]

Yeah, even I found that informative and learned something

[Nilitch]

Well well well, Julian Assange isn't going to be extradited to the US

[Green_vs_Red]

https://www.rawstory.com/twitters-pr...oubles-europe/

To a very small extent they’re right but using Trump’s ban as a catalyst for this rhetoric is.....stupid?

[Medical Orbit]

Websites can ban users who violate the site's terms of service, and companies can fire people for the same, etc.
Plus freedom of expression shouldn't cover encouraging violence.

I'm surprised that the chancellor of Germany of all countries took issue with it. In Germany the Nazi salute is illegal, calling people slurs is illegal, and store owners have the right to not serve you for any reason.
As a disclaimer I don't know Angela Merkel's specific beliefs about those laws, not every leader agrees with the laws and societal norms of their country, but I've heard positive things about Merkel before so it kind of felt like an inverse stopped clock moment.

if anything Trump's Twitter ban is delayed.

and would they be having those concerns if this was just some rando who got banned and not someone famous? Are they against people being banned for what they say in general, or only when it's a celebrity or politician?