What do the other political parties in denmark say?
Sounds like they need new leadership.
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
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.)
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 @EuroMod@feddit.org
What do the other political parties in denmark say?
Sounds like they need new leadership.
Danes, if you re-elect this man, you are condoning this outrageous position.
What is actually going on with denmark? What is their problem with privacy? Have they always been like that?
I don't know about Denmark, but e.g. in Sweden tax declarations are considered public information. In many areas in the Netherlands, you are able to view the complete ground floor of houses from the street. The idea of privacy differs between cultures.
Nonetheless, I'm convinced every minister of justice would state the same, even in the most privacy fokussed countries.
We must break with the totally erroneous perception that ostensibly democratic governments can be trusted.
After all, that is a privilege reserved for politicians.
It's taken only about 35 years for the "free" countries of Europe to adopt the same mindset that the Eastern Bloc used to have. In large parts of Germany, for example, people can still remember how it was when you could expect your government to listen in on any and every private conversation. It wasn't good.
"And also at the same time compromise the security of every computing system in the country, lay the foundation for massive abuse of power and murder the concept of privacy. It's all for their own good."
I feel like this man has some mighty nasty skeletons in his closet if he was openly advocating for "rules for thee but not for me"
Does Denmark not have a secret of correspondence/letters kind of constitutional right?
We do and it's part of our constitution (same situation as Germany about not being updated). Not that any of the recent governments have cared about this minor detail.
We only recently got rid of another law, which required logging of calls and texts by telecommunications.
This only ended because the EU courts ruled it was against the right to privacy, and it still took them 8 years to drag their feet following the ruling to abolish the law.
Various government from both sides of the political spectrum have slowly introduced, or paved the way for, more mass surveillance, but the current government has been extremely vocal about surveillance.
Edit: penal code says "sealed" messages are off limits. Not that they care π
We (Germany) do, but it has never been updated to include electronic communication.
Doesn't need to be updated, electronic communication was included in the very first draft in 1948.
That's actually wrong. Art. 10 (1) GG protects the secret of the letter, secret of postal service and the secret of telecommunication (Brief-, Post- und Fernmeldegeheimnis).
If it hadn't already been established long ago, vile creeps like Peter Hummelgaard would lobby against postal privacy, too.
August 2024, where the minister says: "We have to break with the totally mistaken notion that it is every man's freedom to communicate on encrypted messaging services
Are you going to prevent people from using e2e encryption systems that run atop existing non-encrypted systems?
You bet they will. Right now its impractical, because a lot of people of it, but after laws like chat control pass it'll be easier to make encryption illegal altogether because a lot fewer people will go through the hurdles. Only criminals and deviants will use encryption. And you're no deviant, are you citizen?
If it was actually about catching criminals they would also care about this kind of thing, but they don't, they wanto to control the masses of generally law-abiding citizens who might maybe install Signal messenger while it's still legal.
Removed by moderator