Alvise votes for Chat Control: mistake or strategy?
Alvise Pérez voted in favour of Chat Control 1.0 in the European Parliament. Only 314 of 720 MEPs rejected the measure. Mistake or controlled-opposition strategy?
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Alvise votes for Chat Control: the mistake that wasn't
Last Tuesday, the European Parliament held a key vote on the Chat Control 1.0 proposal, designed to scan private messages for child sensual abuse material. The measure, originally set to expire in 2026, would be extended until 2028. Blocking it required an absolute majority of 361 votes against. Only 314 MEPs voted no. Among those who didn't, the vote in favour by Luis "Alvise" Pérez, a non-attached MEP and self-proclaimed defender of privacy, set off every alarm.
The parliamentary move nobody expected
The vote was not on approving Chat Control, but on a motion to reject it. Failing to reach the 361 votes needed for rejection, the proposal was automatically approved. "Premium shell game," one analyst summed up on social media. The key detail: most pogre and liberal groups voted against, but conservatives and the far right —with the exception of Vox— abstained or voted in favour. Alvise's vote, from an MEP who presents himself as an anti-establishment outsider, proved decisive.
Incompetence or controlled opposition?
Explanations are divided. Some argue Alvise misunderstood the question: as a non-attached MEP (not belonging to any parliamentary group), he may have confused the direction of the vote. "He can't even press a button," people quipped. Others point to a deliberate strategy: "If he wanted to, just like he wanted to donate his salary." The MEP promised during his campaign to donate his salary and fight mass surveillance; since arriving in Brussels, he has been absent from key votes, and now this slip-up.
The incident recalls other "mistakes" that benefited the majority. The opposition sees a pattern: figures from so-called "controlled opposition" who play the role of diverting votes while supporting the system's policies. "Almost every party has a couple of figures to make mistakes and get their way," one commenter noted.
The shadow of Chat Control 2.0
The extension of Chat Control 1.0 is only the prelude. In September, the CSAR (Chat Control 2.0) will be voted on, which includes scanning encrypted messages and will be mandatory for all platforms. Privacy advocates warn this opens the door to unprecedented mass surveillance. Meanwhile, citizens who don't use alternative encryption tools —GrapheneOS, Signal, XMPP— are left exposed.
"Anyone with the slightest common sense should feel pavor," one user wrote. But the damage is done: Alvise's vote, whether by mistake or by design, has paved the way for a form of control he claimed to be fighting.
Last Tuesday, the European Parliament held a key vote on the Chat Control 1.0 proposal, designed to scan private messages for child sensual abuse material. The measure, originally set to expire in 2026, would be extended until 2028. Blocking it required an absolute majority of 361 votes against. Only 314 MEPs voted no. Among those who didn't, the vote in favour by Luis "Alvise" Pérez, a non-attached MEP and self-proclaimed defender of privacy, set off every alarm.
The parliamentary move nobody expected
The vote was not on approving Chat Control, but on a motion to reject it. Failing to reach the 361 votes needed for rejection, the proposal was automatically approved. "Premium shell game," one analyst summed up on social media. The key detail: most pogre and liberal groups voted against, but conservatives and the far right —with the exception of Vox— abstained or voted in favour. Alvise's vote, from an MEP who presents himself as an anti-establishment outsider, proved decisive.
Incompetence or controlled opposition?
Explanations are divided. Some argue Alvise misunderstood the question: as a non-attached MEP (not belonging to any parliamentary group), he may have confused the direction of the vote. "He can't even press a button," people quipped. Others point to a deliberate strategy: "If he wanted to, just like he wanted to donate his salary." The MEP promised during his campaign to donate his salary and fight mass surveillance; since arriving in Brussels, he has been absent from key votes, and now this slip-up.
The incident recalls other "mistakes" that benefited the majority. The opposition sees a pattern: figures from so-called "controlled opposition" who play the role of diverting votes while supporting the system's policies. "Almost every party has a couple of figures to make mistakes and get their way," one commenter noted.
The shadow of Chat Control 2.0
The extension of Chat Control 1.0 is only the prelude. In September, the CSAR (Chat Control 2.0) will be voted on, which includes scanning encrypted messages and will be mandatory for all platforms. Privacy advocates warn this opens the door to unprecedented mass surveillance. Meanwhile, citizens who don't use alternative encryption tools —GrapheneOS, Signal, XMPP— are left exposed.
"Anyone with the slightest common sense should feel pavor," one user wrote. But the damage is done: Alvise's vote, whether by mistake or by design, has paved the way for a form of control he claimed to be fighting.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (73 replies).
More summaries
-
European Parliament Approves Mass Chat Scanning Without Judicial Warrant
The European Parliament passed Chat Control 1.0, allowing mass scanning of private messages. Spanish PP and PSOE backed the measure despite majority opposition.
-
Alvise Pérez: A Year On, No Salary Raffle, No Revelations
A year after joining the European Parliament, Alvise Pérez admits he has not raffled his salary or exposed the frauds he promised. His voters remain silent.
-
Ceuta and Melilla: Why Geography Doesn't Define Europe
Geography doesn't dictate what the EU is: French Guiana and Lampedusa are outside the continent. The Ceuta debate reignites this question.
-
Sol Campout: Elite Spokespeople and Suspicions of Manipulation
Spokespeople for the Sol campout against the housing crisis reportedly attended United World College and Comillas, according to disseminated data.
-
Milei's Argentina: fewer medicines in the shopping basket
A video shows an Argentine woman buying two medicines instead of four. Is it propaganda or a reflection of Milei's austerity? Data and analysis.
-
The penalty fueling conspiracy theories: who really wins from a World Cup?
The controversial Spain vs France penalty at the World Cup has sparked conspiracy theories pointing to economic interests and globalist smokescreens.