Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. Wow, such democracy.

Wow, such democracy.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
germany
38 Indlæg 29 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • prefec2@norden.socialP prefec2@norden.social

    @lyrial @aral it is true. When one is below 45 years and wants to leave for more than 3 months, one requires a permit. Whether that would hold up before the supreme court is to be seen. For that they have to enforce it and one guy must sue.

    It is a disgrace.

    heptasean@social.tchncs.deH This user is from outside of this forum
    heptasean@social.tchncs.deH This user is from outside of this forum
    heptasean@social.tchncs.de
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #22

    @prefec2 It's not new, though. It's the same rules that already were in place for us before 2011. @lyrial @aral

    fnordinger@mastodon.socialF 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • aral@mastodon.ar.alA aral@mastodon.ar.al

      Wow, such democracy. Much freedom of movement.

      #germany #eu

      bws@social.linux.pizzaB This user is from outside of this forum
      bws@social.linux.pizzaB This user is from outside of this forum
      bws@social.linux.pizza
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #23

      @aral i REALLY wonder why this is now so a big thing. The EXACT same rule applied up until 2011. so 15 years later introducing it back is suddenly the end of the world?
      Also there are no fines/penalties specified if you don't do it...

      drwhozee@troet.cafeD 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • heptasean@social.tchncs.deH heptasean@social.tchncs.de

        @prefec2 It's not new, though. It's the same rules that already were in place for us before 2011. @lyrial @aral

        fnordinger@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
        fnordinger@mastodon.socialF This user is from outside of this forum
        fnordinger@mastodon.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #24

        @HeptaSean You’re wrong. Before the beginning of this year, this was only necessary in times of military tension or defence. Now the permission is necessary at all times.

        @prefec2 @lyrial @aral

        heptasean@social.tchncs.deH 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • fnordinger@mastodon.socialF fnordinger@mastodon.social

          @HeptaSean You’re wrong. Before the beginning of this year, this was only necessary in times of military tension or defence. Now the permission is necessary at all times.

          @prefec2 @lyrial @aral

          heptasean@social.tchncs.deH This user is from outside of this forum
          heptasean@social.tchncs.deH This user is from outside of this forum
          heptasean@social.tchncs.de
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #25

          @Fnordinger No, _you_ are wrong. The restriction to tension and defence was only _introduced_ in 2011. For most of us older people, the exact same rule was in place the whole time up until 2011. @prefec2 @lyrial @aral

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • mvsde@mastodon.socialM mvsde@mastodon.social

            @lyrial @aral Here’s the German law (in German, but auto-translate probably works fine). The relevant section starts with (2).

            https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/__3.html

            maik73@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
            maik73@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
            maik73@mastodon.social
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #26

            @mvsde @lyrial @aral Read the complete Text please.
            https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/BJNR006510956.html
            "Die §§ 3 bis 52 gelten im Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall."
            "Sections 3 to 52 apply in the event of tension or defense."
            And this is currently not the case.

            stephie_hamburg@norden.socialS grootinside@troet.cafeG 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • anarchiv@todon.nlA anarchiv@todon.nl

              @aral I'm genuinely beginning to wonder if this applies to me, I've been residing in another country for more than five years but I still have German citizenship.

              patrick@gruene.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
              patrick@gruene.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
              patrick@gruene.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #27

              @anarchiv @aral it probably does not apply to anyone who doesn't have permanent residency in Germany. The requirement is limited by this:

              "ohne dass die Voraussetzungen des § 1 Absatz 2 bereits vorliegen."

              §1 Abs. 2 WPflG:
              "Die Wehrpflicht ruht, solange Wehrpflichtige ihren ständigen Aufenthalt und ihre Lebensgrundlage außerhalb der Bundesrepublik Deutschland haben, wenn Tatsachen die Annahme rechtfertigen, dass sie beabsichtigen, ihren ständigen Aufenthalt im Ausland beizubehalten."

              anarchiv@todon.nlA 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • aral@mastodon.ar.alA aral@mastodon.ar.al

                Wow, such democracy. Much freedom of movement.

                #germany #eu

                rbuzz@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                rbuzz@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
                rbuzz@mastodon.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #28

                @aral step into good direction. Have it in 1938, history would look much better.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • patrick@gruene.socialP patrick@gruene.social

                  @anarchiv @aral it probably does not apply to anyone who doesn't have permanent residency in Germany. The requirement is limited by this:

                  "ohne dass die Voraussetzungen des § 1 Absatz 2 bereits vorliegen."

                  §1 Abs. 2 WPflG:
                  "Die Wehrpflicht ruht, solange Wehrpflichtige ihren ständigen Aufenthalt und ihre Lebensgrundlage außerhalb der Bundesrepublik Deutschland haben, wenn Tatsachen die Annahme rechtfertigen, dass sie beabsichtigen, ihren ständigen Aufenthalt im Ausland beizubehalten."

                  anarchiv@todon.nlA This user is from outside of this forum
                  anarchiv@todon.nlA This user is from outside of this forum
                  anarchiv@todon.nl
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #29

                  @patrick @aral
                  Herzlichen Dank 🙂

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • bws@social.linux.pizzaB bws@social.linux.pizza

                    @aral i REALLY wonder why this is now so a big thing. The EXACT same rule applied up until 2011. so 15 years later introducing it back is suddenly the end of the world?
                    Also there are no fines/penalties specified if you don't do it...

                    drwhozee@troet.cafeD This user is from outside of this forum
                    drwhozee@troet.cafeD This user is from outside of this forum
                    drwhozee@troet.cafe
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #30

                    @bws @aral Well, yes and no. The old rule only applied when the defense state had been declared, now it applies always. There was a rule that if you were eligible for service that you had to notify that you were moving abroad — but that was just that, a notification, not seeking permission.

                    In any case not seeking permission does not carry a punishment with it, it seems. So…

                    bws@social.linux.pizzaB 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • maik73@mastodon.socialM maik73@mastodon.social

                      @mvsde @lyrial @aral Read the complete Text please.
                      https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/BJNR006510956.html
                      "Die §§ 3 bis 52 gelten im Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall."
                      "Sections 3 to 52 apply in the event of tension or defense."
                      And this is currently not the case.

                      stephie_hamburg@norden.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      stephie_hamburg@norden.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                      stephie_hamburg@norden.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #31

                      @Maik73
                      Please read the next sentence after §2(2)

                      »(3) Außerhalb des Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfalls gelten die §§ 3, 8a bis 20b, 25, 32 bis 35, 44 und 45.«

                      @mvsde @lyrial @aral

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • drwhozee@troet.cafeD drwhozee@troet.cafe

                        @bws @aral Well, yes and no. The old rule only applied when the defense state had been declared, now it applies always. There was a rule that if you were eligible for service that you had to notify that you were moving abroad — but that was just that, a notification, not seeking permission.

                        In any case not seeking permission does not carry a punishment with it, it seems. So…

                        bws@social.linux.pizzaB This user is from outside of this forum
                        bws@social.linux.pizzaB This user is from outside of this forum
                        bws@social.linux.pizza
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #32

                        @DrWhoZee @aral nope, "the old rule" was only in action from 2011-2026. before 2011 it was exactly as it is now again.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • maik73@mastodon.socialM maik73@mastodon.social

                          @mvsde @lyrial @aral Read the complete Text please.
                          https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/wehrpflg/BJNR006510956.html
                          "Die §§ 3 bis 52 gelten im Spannungs- oder Verteidigungsfall."
                          "Sections 3 to 52 apply in the event of tension or defense."
                          And this is currently not the case.

                          grootinside@troet.cafeG This user is from outside of this forum
                          grootinside@troet.cafeG This user is from outside of this forum
                          grootinside@troet.cafe
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #33

                          @Maik73 @mvsde @lyrial @aral

                          That's the old version. It was replaced by the recent decision.
                          The current version deleted that "apply of tension or defense".
                          Source:
                          https://www.fr.de/politik/genehmigung-drastische-wehrpflicht-aenderung-maenner-die-deutschland-laenger-wollen-brauchen-zr-94248132.html?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub

                          Artikel-Zitat:
                          "Das bedeutet schlicht, dass die Regelung des Paragraphen 3 nun grundsätzlich immer gilt."

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • ali@leftist.networkA ali@leftist.network

                            @aral
                            Under a capitalist society, freedom of movement can only refer to the movement of capital, and by extension, maybe, goods.

                            But never people.

                            And since now Western Empire sees irregular migration as a form of hybrid warfare, it is even worse.

                            It is not even "you can't move", it is "your movement is an act of war."

                            misusecase@twit.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                            misusecase@twit.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                            misusecase@twit.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #34

                            @ali @aral Capitalism didn’t invent the practice of countries restricting the movements of their internal populations. It was in fact pretty common in feudalism (think serfs) or countries with Chinese-style imperial bureaucracy (where you needed a pass to travel between provinces).

                            threetails@plush.cityT 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • ali@leftist.networkA ali@leftist.network

                              @aral
                              Under a capitalist society, freedom of movement can only refer to the movement of capital, and by extension, maybe, goods.

                              But never people.

                              And since now Western Empire sees irregular migration as a form of hybrid warfare, it is even worse.

                              It is not even "you can't move", it is "your movement is an act of war."

                              gerd_brodowski@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                              gerd_brodowski@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                              gerd_brodowski@mastodon.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #35

                              @ali @aral

                              Irregular migration?!? Please define "irregular".

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • aral@mastodon.ar.alA aral@mastodon.ar.al

                                Wow, such democracy. Much freedom of movement.

                                #germany #eu

                                hatter@metasocial.comH This user is from outside of this forum
                                hatter@metasocial.comH This user is from outside of this forum
                                hatter@metasocial.com
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #36

                                @aral Can't just write 'bone spurs' under the amount on a cheque payabe to the enlistment officer in germany, I guess.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • misusecase@twit.socialM misusecase@twit.social

                                  @ali @aral Capitalism didn’t invent the practice of countries restricting the movements of their internal populations. It was in fact pretty common in feudalism (think serfs) or countries with Chinese-style imperial bureaucracy (where you needed a pass to travel between provinces).

                                  threetails@plush.cityT This user is from outside of this forum
                                  threetails@plush.cityT This user is from outside of this forum
                                  threetails@plush.city
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #37

                                  @MisuseCase @ali @aral Capitalism was an imperfect transition from feudalism that can readily backslide once a ruling class establishes itself.

                                  misusecase@twit.socialM 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • threetails@plush.cityT threetails@plush.city

                                    @MisuseCase @ali @aral Capitalism was an imperfect transition from feudalism that can readily backslide once a ruling class establishes itself.

                                    misusecase@twit.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    misusecase@twit.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    misusecase@twit.social
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #38

                                    @threetails @ali @aral Well, maybe.

                                    The point is that not every bad and oppressive thing is a product of capitalism. Some of those things predate capitalism or just plain don’t depend on it.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • jwcph@helvede.netJ jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
                                    Svar
                                    • Svar som emne
                                    Login for at svare
                                    • Ældste til nyeste
                                    • Nyeste til ældste
                                    • Most Votes


                                    • Log ind

                                    • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                    • Login or register to search.
                                    Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                    Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Hjem
                                    • Seneste
                                    • Etiketter
                                    • Populære
                                    • Verden
                                    • Bruger
                                    • Grupper