Lithuania? Just pitch it as a way to fight back against Russia, and it will pass in a jiffy just like all the other anti-russian laws they've been rolling through
Oppressive state surveillance in the USSR (commonly verging on persecution of undesirable groups) was a strong reason for countries breaking away from it between 1990 and 1991, when the union collapsed. Lithuania was arguably the first one.
The privacy protections we see today are a reaction to some extent, but Lithuanians enjoy them. It was not an over-reaction.
It would be wise to use the examples of heavy-handed state surveillance in history in arguments for privacy laws. The US did this to argue for their economic model quite effectively. Whether that ultimately is good — I mean that some people have become so afraid of communism that they can’t agree on some fundamental social welfare systems and duty of care for each other as people — I don’t know. But contrasting liberal capitalism with planned-economy communism was effective in galvanising people towards the former. “Enemy of my enemy is my friend” and all that.
- Two months ago there were major arson attacks and failed attempts linked to Russians in multiple states like Poland and Germany.
- Russian linked agents at the beginning of school year dissiminated false information about bombs being planted at schools in Lithuania which disrupted the process in general and undermined trust of parents and children.
- They are also constantly creating false narratives about ongoing social events with ant-lithuanian anti-european spin and spreading them online.
- Lets also not forget that Russia is constantly using migrants to attack borders of European states.
Russians are trying to wage war in every gray area they can find. Why this paragon of free speech (kekw) constantly engages in anti-lithuanian policies?
Even more interesting recently they started mapping out locations of optic fibers scattered across the ocean. Lets hope they wont use this information.
All of these are real threats. Even the CSAM arguments have a grain of truth to it. What changes overtime is people’s relationship to these threats and their perception of what mitigating factors are actually going to be effective
The person was saying that you can use a “Russia” line to get the population to agree to a measure or chat control.
You just went in and basically proved their point.
You may think that Im pedantic or whatever but Russia has history of subtly playing with words and thus dictating the discourse. For example term eastern europe was hijacked by soviets to enshrine and justify their sphere of influence which was a completely made up term which descends from germans and their ostsiedlung--the settling of lands to the east of germans states by germans.