@dis 508861 wrote:
“Someone must monitor” – I can only disagree for the most extrem. If anything Breivik examplifies three things: that only with the complete surrender of privacy can such atrocity be maybe, possibly, if the enforcers of the legalcode happen to have time travelling devices, limited more than they can without any surrender of privacy.
“someone” does not always have to be the Police or Council – I just picked that as the video was shown yesterday on UK news. Ordinary people are making their own surveillance infrastructure.
Many leftwing groups across Northern Europe have to carry out their own surveillance operations to protect themselves. It is not a good or ideal situation but when society is so divided that is unavoidable. As an example, unauthorised photographers simply are not permitted in Christiana Denmark, nor in many parts of Amsterdam. Which is understandable as drugs prohibition still limits freedom, but means there is still a counterargument DIY media from those areas is biased.
but if you are running say an anarchist bookshop or hackerspace or a rave, and a random van turns up which is not known to be from the crew, then surely it makes sense to keep close watch on what it might contain? OK a bomb is very extreme and unlikely, but it could be full of rightwing hooligans, or even a more desparate person who is only there to try and steal your computers or other useful things that would disrupt your community.
Even in the licensed Dutch raves, who was allowed to put up photos was once strongly limited to make the events look as good as possible. That said smartphones and youtube and a trend towards the absolute surrender of privacy you advocate has arrived, but has shown a darker side of these events (many mass fights for some reason).
Today with technology you cannot stop anyone from monitoring anyone else. which can be both good and bad. as many youtube films do not show people who take drugs in a good way and that impacts how others view them and the laws.
I don’t know enough Norweigian to judge exactly how much Brevik’s activities were suppressed in his youth (as in North Europe good English skills are used to hide bad news but more subtly than French etc do this).
The impression from English language info about this incident I got was they were not and he cynically but very effectively made use of a “liberal” society to hide the ultimate extent of his plans and activities, especially as he managed to weave them in alongside the free market and fears about immigration. I am aware from friends who are from Scandinavia that leftwing dissent was clamped down on quite hard in the 1980s and even 1990s.
I also grew up in 1980s as well and can understand many of the problems affecting European public services and healthcare and mental health care but welfare payments currently have to come from taxation of those who do with to participate in a capitalist economy – and because of this there are also many “normal” people who democratically vote for centre right politicians because they don’t want to pay as much of these taxes (even though they are a pittance compared to money spent on atomic bombs, limiting taxes for big American companies and other bad things).
Also in my country (the UK) there is not that “socialist” culture of working together to a consensus, nor as much a deep seated dislike of “strong government” (as we were not invaded in WW II). We also follow USA too closely and their culture of low tax and less public service and belief in society. Which today is a source of a lot of problems across Europe, UK folk do actually have more individual freedom and they use it in a selfish way (consumerism, cars, instant gratification). And this culture crosses over the North Sea. I live in a North Sea coastal town of England and it is full of not just the usual immigrants seeking work (which is fair enough) but also middle class white European immigrants from rich North European countries who have moved here to pay less taxes than they would in their home country.
