• Water_Melon_boy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    A wise man once told me, don’t mess with politics. The moment you show stance (which usually isn’t beneficial), you cut off options from yourself and endanger customer relationship.

    Proton should just do business as usual, without that single post things would probably be just fine.

  • Onyx376@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i2ff6q/call_for_andy_yen_to_resign/

    UPDATE: Andy Reply

    According to Andy’s logic, if Hitler were the president of some unfortunate country, we should differentiate the boss from his good nominees. Even using a company founded by an entire community to show a good evaluation made by one of its founders to give him a loving pat on the back and show the world that he is not completely bad as they think, but not meaning that the founder agrees with all his innocent actions, of course, such as disregarding the rights of many people around the world because they are just part of the democratic game.

    • _____@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 days ago

      le false equivalence totally validates my endorsement for the worst president elected in US history

    • refalo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      Honestly I find his attitude to be quite commendable and I think that speaks much louder than whatever it is you disagree with.

      Maybe he should have just left Trump’s name out of it entirely as that seems to be what really pushed people’s buttons.

      People are going to twist things around no matter what is said though. Don’t forget hindsight makes everyone look guilty.

      • KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        It would be one thing if Trump was actually anti-trust…but he isn’t.

        He’s anti companies which don’t prostrate themselves in front of him and bow to his whims. They’re bad, terrible, anti American companies. The ones that do are great, wonderful, beautiful companies. The bad ones need to be broken up and given to the big ones.

        He’s so transparent it’s painful. If someone says good things about Trump or give him money, they’re good. If they don’t, they’re bad. It’s absurdly obvious.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          If that motivation still leads to work against tech monopolies, good. Can’t wait for people to do the right thing for the right reason. If that won’t happen it will be criticized as a lack of action.

          Ultimately the benefit for the population is having as much freedom and fair competition in the tech space as possible. If that comes from Trump hallucinations, from a dream or from something else, who cares…?

          • msage@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            If that motivation still leads to work against tech monopolies

            It doesn’t, never did, never will.

            I can’t believe we have to argue in 2025 about this.

            The whole project 2025 is about breaking bad regulations, antitrust won’t survive. You just have to kiss the ring, and do whatever.

          • aimizo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            How can anyone possibly think that Trump is against tech monopolies when Bezos, Musk, and Zuckerberg are going to be sitting behind him shoulder to shoulder at the inauguration?

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        Maybe he should have just left Trump’s name out of it entirely as that seems to be what really pushed people’s buttons.

        It probably didn’t help, but no, I don’t think that was it. I think it was his sweeping generalizations about dems/republicans as a whole, along with the insinuation that dems were bought, republicans are “looking out for the little guys”, and the election undermined the will of the people:

        Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost. Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          You are right about the generalization on parties, but the “little guy” he meant are small tech companies opposed to big tech. It was clear to me in the context, and to clear any doubt, he explicitly said that in a reddit comment.

          I want to specify because this has been stretched on here as far as “he said republicans care for the working class”.

          • Ulrich@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            the “little guy” he meant are small tech companies

            That changes nothing.

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 days ago

              Added for completeness. Lots of people got pissed because they assumed he meant that in general republicans stand with the little guy, prompting comments such as “what about trans/immigrants/etc.”.

              You did not do that, of course, but you can see how your comment could reinforce this opinion in people who didn’t read the actual tweet and discussion and were just looking for reasons to get angry.

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        He should have just stayed the fuck out of Americans politics being a provider of a secure service that many Americans of all political persuasions use.

        He is an idiot who cost his company business. The only spin is trying to downplay it at this point. The consequences are lost profits.

        • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          Let’s be real. You mean he should have stayed out of it if he was going to voice an opinion that doesn’t match yours. People don’t want apolitical, they want an echo chamber.

          • Doomsider@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            No, he should stay out of either side because business is about making money. I don’t want to know what politics you support. I don’t care for politicizing everything. It is a fucking turn off.

            You want my money, do your job, sell me your product, give me your service, but don’t talk to me about your hot takes on politics. Also religion as well. I and many many other people don’t want to hear it.

            • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 days ago

              Your comment might hold a valid argument, if your previous comments hadn’t made it perfectly clear you take issue with the fact he praised something a politician you don’t like has done.

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 days ago

                Whether you agree with my character or not what I said was accurate for any business person/enterprise. It is really not beneficial and increases risk unnecessarily.

            • howrar@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 days ago

              Better that they tell us imo. If someone thinks that the people I care about don’t deserve to exist for reasons no one can control, I’d rather know and avoid giving them money than to help them quietly gain influence and power until they can eradicate these people themselves.

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 days ago

                There is a certain logic to this. I tend to agree that I would like to know. I also think I would probably find out I would have to be self sufficient if I truly did not want to give to bad actors.

          • njm1314@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            You say it doesn’t match that other users opinion, but doesn’t it not match the vast majority of proton users opinions? Authoritarians aren’t usually big on personal privacy. So praising one when you run a company based upon privacy is a dumb idea. It would be like running a vegan food company and praising people who like Slaughter cattle. It’s a stupid fucking mindset. Which says a lot of things to me about his capacity as a CEO frankly. If he’s this dumb why should people trust them to run a business they frequent?

    • sudneo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 days ago

      So, to get this straight, for you it’s impossible to recognize that a pick for a position is a good pick in the Trump government, by definition, without consideration of the actual pick?

      To me this is religion, not politics or ideology (which I both consider very good things). To be even more clear, I consider Andy’s position completely rational and legitimate in this case. I believe it’s absolutely legitimate to be happy Trump picked someone good for a position and at the same time not support the rest 98%. At most, the interesting debate is why that pick is not good, which is 100% opinable and worthy of a discussion.

      But saying that any statement, in any context, whatever narrow and specific equal full support is completely insane to me.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        If all he said was literally “i approve of this pick for this position” you’d be correct.

        What actually happened was he approved of the pick and also claimed the republicans are now actually the party that stands for the “little guy”.

        Then followed up with a non apology that claimed what he said was not intended to be a “political statement”.

        by all means, argue that you think there’s a fuss over nothing, but if you leave important context out seemingly because it doesn’t suit your narrative it weakens your argument substantially.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 days ago

          I know what happened, I followed quite thoroughly.

          He thinks that republicans are now the ones with a higher chance to push antitrust cases against big tech (I.e., work for the little guy - EDIT: source). He thinks this based on the last few years and a few things that happened. He likes the nomination from Trump. How is this a full support to Trump? How believing that republicans will do better - in this area - equals being a Nazi?

          Of course I believe that there is a fuss over nothing. The above statement has been inflated and I have already read “he applauded to Trump antitrans policies”, " posted Nazi symbols" and other complete fantasies.

          Many people, who are on the internet on a perpetual witch hunt decided to interpret a clearly specific tweet (about antitrust and big tech) as a global political statement, and read that “little guy” as “common man” or - I have read it here on Lemmy - “working class”. Basically everyone tried to propose ideas about why that post was so awful, rather than first trying to understand what the hell he meant. I will agree the first tweet is ambiguous, but that’s because it’s a 200 characters tweet, he then explained his position quite clearly, and the summary above is what he actually meant.

          This “context” added doesn’t move my post a centimeter IMO.

          • Senal@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            See, now that’s a more thorough explanation of your position.

            I disagree with pretty much all of your assertions (though the witch hunt stuff can be true sometimes) , but at least i know I’m disagreeing with an opinion formed using the whole of the information provided.

            This “context” added doesn’t move my post a centimeter IMO.

            It shows you read the initial information in it’s entirety and still came to the conclusion you did.

            That removes the possibility of responses such as “Did you even read the initial tweet?”.

            Well… it should remove that possibility, in practice it just means you can safely ignore those responses because clearly the people making those responses haven’t read your response in it’s entirety.

          • Yozul@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 days ago

            While it’s certainly true that some of the people who are angry at him for that tweet are saying things in their anger that are overboard, I think only pointing out the most ridiculous things that people who disagree with you have ever said in their anger is a really terrible way of engaging honestly on the subject.

            It’s important to remember that an authoritarian that always figured out what the right thing to do was and did the opposite of that would be a really bad authoritarian. Republicans at the state level have been increasing state surveillance to hunt down and punish people for choices they make with their own bodies. For a lot of people in America, Trump is the head of the organization that they want privacy to protect themselves from, and the current largest threat to privacy in America.

            For the CEO of a company that is supposedly about protecting our privacy to completely unprompted start publicly praising decisions made by the very threat we’re supposed to trust them to protect us from, and then to double down on their praise when called out, is deeply concerning.

            Yes. It’s true that not every single thing Trump does will be the worst possible thing, but his goals are fundamentally opposed to ours. When I say I want big tech to be broken up it’s because I want their to be less concentration of power. When Trump wants to break up big tech it’s because he wants to eliminate the competition to his concentration of power. That is not worthy of my praise, even if in any one particular instance the thing he is doing is similar to what I would do, and the fact that the CEO of Proton either doesn’t understand this or doesn’t care is deeply concerning. I do not trust them after this, and I doubt they can ever get that trust back.

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 days ago

              He praised one thing, and motivated that praise. It’s 100% possible to disagree, but I don’t find it concerning at all. I find it reasonable, because proton can better protect the privacy of users if more people can choose freely privacy oriented tools (like proton). Hence, if Trump does or says something that can help moving in that direction, it can be labeled as a good thing. Not every sentence is a collective or global assessment of all things considered.

              When Trump wants to break up big tech it’s because he wants to eliminate the competition to his concentration of power.

              • this is something US citizens should concern themselves
              • it is only tangentially irrelevant
              • if by breaking up monopolies people will be able to choose more privacy-preserving services, what you think is Trump’s goal will fail anyway. More privacy and less data is also a way to limit the amount of demographic targeting he uses so well in his campaigns.

              So I am good with him doing the right thing for the wrong reason, and I wish him a swift failure afterwards.

              doesn’t understand this or doesn’t care is deeply concerning

              Have you considered that he might not agree with what is just your opinion? Obviously you are free to draw any conclusion you want and not use them.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        Context matters. Why did you ignore it? We see so many CEOs kissing Trump’s feet these days. Here Andy is, doing the same… Of course I don’t know what’s in Andy’s head, but Trump loves groveling, and clearly Andy is riding that bandwagon on purpose.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          That’s not context, that’s a superficial observation. Zuck kissed the ring by changing Facebook policy to align with trump/musk posture on “free speech”, Andy said he likes the antitrust pick. They are completely different things.

          • orcrist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            Right, Andy’s action was bad but not as bad. We agree. It’s not identical.

            And when given the chance to explain how he felt about this situation, on how the bad timing is … purely accidental or something … he did a bad job of it. Which suggests our original conclusions were in fact correct.

            Also, if you think observations about time, place, and manner are superfluous, that’s a peculiar thought. Maybe we disagree. Maybe I think basic elements of societal interaction and communication are important and informative.

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 days ago

              This tweet happened right after trump picked for the antitrust position. The “time” is completely logical, the “place” is a tweet and the manner is a short statement supporting that pick. Also proton is a US company, so it doesn’t have the same reason to “bend the knee” as other US big tech are doing.

              So it’s not that I am ignoring context, I genuinely don’t see relation. He praised something that he pushes for years, he did not suddenly switch to “free speech” like Zuck.

    • CaptSneeze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 days ago

      “People forget I don’t live in China. Just because I praise Mao for wanting to shed the yoke of cultural tradition, doesn’t mean I necessary support everything he’s doing…” -Andy, if this was 1966

      • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        I’d say he’s already a foot over the line.

        He’s backally saying, “We Americans don’t get it. He did nothing wrong because both sides are the same.”

        Rather than remorse, he’s doubled down.

  • Scratch under the surface of every for profit privacy / anonymity service, you find shitty libertarian cryptobros who probably post racist memes on 4chan while whining about feminism in the man-o-sphere. That doesn’t speak to the nature of people who care about privacy, it speaks to the nature of people who care about privacy and also want to do capitalism.

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Except Proton AG is owned by a Non-Profit, the Proton Foundation. Andy Yen can’t directly pocket the profits, except by asking the non-profit board of trustees to give him a raise in salary (and there’s probably legal limitations to the salary, otherwise everyone could just claim to be a “Non-Profit” while secretly making profits).

  • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    This needs to be pinned at the top: only a Nazi goes out of their way to put an 88 in their username. He thinks he’s clever by putting it in binary so people don’t immediately call him out. Nazis get off on that kind of “clever” dogwhistle.

    • lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      only a Nazi goes out of their way to put an 88 in their username

      Yeah, I’m gonna need a citation for that. I was born in 1988.

    • Frostbeard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 days ago

      When was he born? Not everyone knows all the “secret” signs for stuff. How 18 is A.H or how 81 is H.A (Hells Angels) 1% biker clubs have surprisingly much of such codes. 8 is also the number of Khorne in the Warhammer fantasy/sci-fi setting. And before we start with that there are surprisingly few Nazis who play, but the few are very vocal.

      Years ago I saw a guy in a crocery store in Norway wearing a “Combat18 Böhmen” hoodie. Buying ingredients for tex-mex taco incidentally. And when I pointed him out to my wife, she said that you are probably the only one in here to know this, and spot him for what he is.

      So if Andy was born in 1988 I hope it’s why he has 88 in his username.

        • phx@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 days ago

          Yeah, birth years are super common in usernames (and password, don’t use it there). Bob Smith finds his preferred username is taken so becomes BobSmith79 or BobSmith88 or whatever because it’s easy an easy enough variation to remember.

          You can find patterns/relations in almost anything if you reach for something, kinda like the “six degrees of separation” thing even if there’s a more reasonable answer

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        When was he born? Not everyone knows all the “secret” signs for stuff.

        I don’t care when he was born. Who puts their birth year in their username? “Here, internet. Here’s one less piece of information you need to steal my identity!”

        No. “ItS mY bIrF YeEr” is just what nazi shit says when they get called out on being nazi shit.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          Yes, a public figure, whose data can be discovered in few minutes, considers his birth year a secret. Also nobody ever used the birth year in their username on the internet.

          Also ANDY = 1 + 14 + 4 + 25 = 44, which is half of 88 and contains 14, another nazy symbol. He is trying to pass it off as his name, but who uses their name on the internet? I will check the cabala now, because I am sure there is more.

          God, I hope Nick Fury is already grouping the avengers, because Hydra is really making a move here.

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            If you don’t want people to think you’re a nazi, don’t say good things about trump with 88 sitting right there for everyone to see in your username.

            The account is 2 days old. He knew what he was doing.

        • lenz@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          Tbf I’ve put my birth year in my username before when I was a kid who knew next to nothing about privacy. I’ve seen other people do this too. So it’s not totally implausible. But yeah it is a bad look for Andy regardless.

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            Tbf I’ve put my birth year in my username before when I was a kid who knew next to nothing about privacy. I’ve seen other people do this too. So it’s not totally implausible.

            It’s one thing when you’re a naive kid or a clueless boomer. It’s quite another when you’re the ceo of a privacy-focused company.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          He’s my generation. That’s what we did in the dawn of the internet when web email was new and shit. Everybody has “coolname87” “dogshit89”, “hipguy88” as their username. It’s not such a wild idea.

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            10 days ago

            He’s younger than me, but there was a broad age range that all caught the internet around the same time. I’m aware that this is how it was once done. Usernames are longer now, allowing for greater creativity.

            And this goober still uses his first name and an obfuscated 2 digit number? Yeah, he didn’t choose it because it’s his birth year.

        • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          11 days ago

          Look, I can’t comment on the significance of binary 88 in this instance with any confidence, but a lot of people use their birth year in their username.

          Is it stupid? Absolutely, alongside demonstrating a total lack of any creativity whatsoever. But it’s 100% a thing.

          Edit: Lol, will also note the first ‘people also search’ suggestion coming up when Googling Andy Yen is “When was Andy Yen born”, and in the 5 seconds of drunken searching I still haven’t seen a birth date.

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            Look, I can’t comment on the significance of binary 88 in this instance with any confidence, but a lot of people use their birth year in their username.

            A lot of people who like trump were coincidentally totally born in 1988.

            • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 days ago

              To be clear, I’m not arguing that people don’t put 88 as a clear dog whistle to white supremacists/general Nazi bullshit. This is more to the comment “who puts their birth year in their username?” bit specifically. The answer is a lot of people.

              I also am not excusing Yen for his pro-Trump comments - that was fucking bullshit and I’m deeply disappointed - I’m just saying the YOB thing is a thing, but also coincidentally I also can’t seem to find a source to prove if he’s also doing the YOB thing or something else.

              Note to self: Limit Lemmy to 3 beers max, particularly where Trumpian bullshit is involved. And thank god for autocorrect. Apologies, I really should not be interneting right now.

              • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 days ago

                To be clear, I’m not arguing that people don’t put 88 as a clear dog whistle to white supremacists/general Nazi bullshit.

                To be clear, anyone who supports trump is already nazi-adjacent enough to get no benefit of the doubt, and I don’t buy the “It’s my birth year” shit from any of them. Even if they were born in 1988, that’s not the reason 88 is in their username.

                I also don’t believe that someone whose entire personality centers around cannabis has “420” in their username because they were born on April 20th. I don’t believe that some fratboy who is constantly making horny comments has “69” in his username because he was born on June 9th, either.

                • davel@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  88 is so much worse that I wouldn’t even compare then to the anodyne 420 & 69 examples.

              • HowManyNimons@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 days ago

                If I were born in 1988 I would not put an encoded “88” in my username. I wouldn’t want people to think I was dogwhistling.

      • KingRandomGuy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        He’s apparently said he was born in 1988. In another thread others mentioned that would make him 21 when he started his PhD, which checks out.

  • The Spectre@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    Just a reminder that democrats funded a genocide and police brutality. Democrats are no better than Republicans.

    • x0x7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      And also a reminder that Switzerland flirted with actual nazism. Remember that whole “neutral” during WWII thing. That was really finlandization of Switzerland from western powers. They operated inside the German economic block.

      So telling a swiss company that Trump is a nazi and association with anything even 0.0000001% a nazi would be outside of what you’d expect for a Swiss is kind of funny.

      The only thing Nazi-like about Trump is his support of Israel committing a genocide against people who are in the way of Israel’s Lebensraum.

    • a Kendrick fan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      Why is this getting downvoted? It is a well known truth that the Democrats funded the Palestinian Genocide

  • Petter1@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    As swiss person I have to meet and talk to this guy, he can not be that stupid!

    We definitely have something like the republicans party, it is called SVP (Schweizerische Volkspartei). SVP uses exactly the same tactics as republicans, like anti “woke”, anti regulation, anti common media, pro hate-speech(“anti censorship”), etc.

    We just not have a single party to counter it, like democrats, but like 10 parties with little nuances.

    We have some small parties besides SVP “on the republican site” but those tend to be irrelevant. Maybe, the anti corona party has a some relevance, still, but I guess their power is sinking.

    I personally support the pirate party, which mainly stands for privacy, no matter if left or right, but the party it self is leading to the left (democratic) side.

    At least, that is how I understand our situation here.

    • Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      I am sure he is very smart about a lot of things. Unfortunately US politics are not one of those things. I also suspect he is not that good at business considering he just alienated a lot of his customers.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 days ago

      That’s fascinating that you have so many parties. Do parties not have a lot of power at the “federal” level? Also curious if you have coalitions between similarly aligned parties!

      • Petter1@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        We have two “Räte“ like groups that write the laws depending on the constitution (they give new laws back and forth until an agreement is found, and after agreement there can be a referendum made with enough signatures from the people that are allowed to vote, which then leads to a vote where the people who are allowed to vote have to confirm the new law). One of these “Rat” is a Voting where all people allow to vote choose which party gets how much seats in this “Rat” and in the same voting you choose people to place on this seats. (It is a bit complicated and here at the choosing of seats. Partys can work together and “combine lists” meaning that they collect seats together and split it up after). In the other “Rat” there are a defined number of people per Kanton (the states of switzerland) and those are chosen by each Kanton in their own way. Kantons are relatively free on how to organise their government, but most have a similar mechanism as what is done in federal level.

        The Bundesrat (aka 7 presidents of switzerland) are chosen by the people in the Rat (I would have to check if both Rat get to say something, or if it is only the one with the lists). We have some unwritten laws in choosing the 7 persons in the Bundesrat. The general consensus is, that we have to ensure most diversity possible (political, gender, and all the other things), but of course, here we have discussions all the time as well.

        ☺️feel free to ask more

      • lemonSqueezy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        This is how parliamentary governments work, they figured out how to resolve the bug in the US system that always tends towards two major parties. However the two-party system, so I’ve read, is actually a tad bit more resistant to the fascism bug, as parliamentary systems can have outright fascist parties winning a minority of the vote eventually grow big enough to take over and end the system entirely.

      • letum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        They do have power. But it is split between around 4-5 bigger parties. Our federal council (similar to the President uf the US) is split into 7 persons, where the biggest parties get one or to seats. Like the mentioned SVP has “only” 2 seats and next big party the social Democrats have 2 seats as well.

        What’s nice in our system(in my opinion), there is no “The winner takes it all”. Because our federal government is split between alot of parties, not one can “rule” alone. For every thing the want to pass, they need the support of multiple parties.

        I wouldn’t say we have ruling coalitions like you see in germany, but they do work-together if they have same goal.

  • ShareMySims@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    I can’t be the only one who struggled to read that, and for general accessibility purposes since I’m already here:

    Image ID:

    andy1011000 Proton CEO posted:

    “People honestly seem to forget that I live in Switzerland, where Republican/Democrat doesn’t mean anything, and Trump isn’t even on our ballot to be voted for…”

    Onyx376. replied:

    “The point is that fighting for a more just and equal society is not just about fighting for the fundamental right to privacy but also for all other fundamental rights, including individual rights and life. When you, as the CEO of a company that starts from these principles, nod positively to whatever action a political figure like Trump, who is known for always flagrantly putting his private interests ahead of those of his own nation, makes speeches about eliminating minorities, hurting their rights as citizens and flirting with Nazi movements, it is understandable that members of the privacy community are disappointed as this reveals a little about who is being the face of a company that should follow contrary principles. But now we really know what “freedom” means to you.”

  • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Andy will one day find out that, in the eye of the magat beholder, he is nothing but yellow. I hope he enjoys getting spent as the token he has become.

  • Victor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    Tangential: shouldn’t it be “Naziism”? Like, in “Nazi” the “i” belongs to “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei”, or the “Natio—” part. But shouldn’t there be another “i” that goes with the “ism” suffix, so “Naziism”? Am I thinking about it in the wrong way?

  • TypicalHog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Calling Trump a Nazi is the same as calling an average Lemmy user a communist. Or calling Kamala a communist.

          • VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 days ago

            No it is not :( When you make a wild statement you have to prove it. You cannot just say random things then call a troll anyone that tries to understand

            • TwiddleTwaddle@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 days ago

              I dont have to prove shit to you and you aren’t trying to understand. If you wanted to understand that trump is a fascist or Kamala isn’t any any way a communist, you can find PILES of jourlism and academic works discussing those topics - you just have to leave the right-wing news media bubble.

              Your entitlement to my time and this space as a place where you can demand proof for basic political concepts is the absolute definition of sealioning.

              • VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 days ago

                Are you high?

                When did I say anything about Kamala being a communist? You’re the one stating facts you cannot prove, I never stated such thing (since it’s obviously false).

                Your biased opinion is not a “basic politcal concept”. And I doubt there is any reliable journal that would use those simplistic antagonizing views.

                What makes you think I would look at right wing news media shit? I wouldn’t be here lol. You need to understand that not agreeing with you is different than being fascist and that being fascist is different than being nazi, maybe you should learn about basic political concepts.

                Anyway, asking for source for a random claim is not entitlement but legitimate behavior and arguing against it is arguing in favour of disinformation.