I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.

[kevinashworth@mastodon.social]

@tante No, no, we all are sovereign and as we become more and more gloriously sovereign if it just so happens that this is exactly what allows the power-hungry extremists to take full control over everything and harm all the sovereign individuals, well, that is just a coincidence that no sovereign-minded citizen could have possibly foreseen.

[hollinger@mastodon.social]

@tante Not everything what is called sovereign is from afd. It would be a good start, if they would be souvereign

[gsc@mathstodon.xyz]

@tante and so if the AFD says they are proclaiming freedom we also stop using that word? 'Rechtsstaat' is bad, because fascists are 'rechts'? What is the plan here going forward?

[orb2069@mastodon.online]

@larsmb

What we get for letting the social media platforms/newspapers become the default dictionary - fascist/regressive types squirm/buy their way in and start weaponizing it. Been a problem with PBS/NPR in the US for a while.

1984 was not supposed to be a doubleplusgood manual, ffs.

@tante

[esoteric_programmer@social.stealthy.club]

@tante would digital self-determination be better? but yeah, why is that term right wing coded? I'm not familiar with this issue

[floe@hci.social]

@bsdphk @tante agreed, that's my term of choice as well.

[mcneely@indieweb.social]

@tante Did you mean that AfD is co-opting the term or that's the term digital sovereignty itself is originally conceived as a tool of right wing parties? At this point that the term digital sovereignty is pretty well embedded in the policy scene these days judging by my podcast feed.

[debacle@framapiaf.org]

@tante

Yes, but… I'm not prepared yet for a linguistic dance around all words, that might be used by the wrong people in a wrong meaning. It would feel like a Sisyphean task, because they occupy and abuse new words all the time.

But maybe we should use #digitalSovereignty for the state-level meaning, and e.g. #digitalAutonomy for collective and individual meaning? I used to use the first term for both, and that's blurring things.

[vintage_pizza@defcon.social]

@cascheranno @tante im not going to invent a new lexicon because some slobbering rightoid makes words sound scawwy. That’s some soft ass shit, these people literally want you dead

[janet@weirder.earth]

@anna @beandreams @tante In what relates to the legal process of decolonisation, according to the UN “self determination” was often a necessary step: meaning giving a population a chance to determine whether they wanted full sovereignty or some form of autonomy within another nationstate. (The ILO developed further frameworks for decisions on economic development based on this one.)

But the phrase can be a bit confusing in the neoliberal era because of the word “self” which in this context isn’t individual at all.

[zeh@mstdn.io]

@hadon @skaphle @jwildeboer @tante
I'm always talking about not being dependent on corporations. American, european, whatever. My "we" is always people, proletarians, never a nation.

[rogerparkinson@mastodon.nz]

@tante it's important that information used by your government is held on servers that come under your government's jurisdiction. This is information about taxes, justice, socialized health care etc. Without that another regime can take control of it in ways you don't like and you can't, for example vote them out of office cos it isn't a country you have a vote in.

But another meaning of digital sovereignty is more personal. It's important that, where possible, your own data (eg family photos) is held on machines you control. This prevents other people using it in ways you don't like.

Neither of these requirements is specifically right wing, though right wing people may want them just like the rest of us.