[flagged]
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/its-not-fr...
A post is either relevant or not, regardless of when account was created.
However, I have noticed that in other comment sections, such as those on „Der Spiegel“, some people attempt to dismiss the opinions of users with recently created accounts as well.
The more disturbing issue is the ECHR's ruling.
> As an European it was always hard for me to understand American culture. What was fascinating for me is that they like bragging about their freedom which was weird for me, because I didn't think that I have any less freedom than them. I always thought 'What is the difference'. However after this game I finally understand it. NA is just so fucking free.
It's a popular copypasta that gets used in esports discussions whenever an EU team beats an NA team harshly.
"NA" as term in esports just refers to teams primarily based in the US or Canada.
> A copypasta is a block of text that is copied and pasted across the Internet by individuals through online forums and social networking websites. Copypastas are said to be similar to spam as they are often used to annoy other users and disrupt online discourse.
> She stands accused of "insulting the president of the republic" and will stand trial on June 20 in Saint Omer, the prosecutor said.
It's called defamation.
Nothing to see here.
EDIT: insult here must be read using its most informal meaning (offense sufers the same destiny), not the legal one. We have different wording for the two circumstances "ingiuria" for the legal term which has been depenalisedd years ago and "insulto" to mean offending someone.
Saying to someone "pedophile" is both an insult (a personal attack) and can be defamation, if the person is not a pedophile.
The system is designed to be highly protective of the presumption of innocence, a judge must decide if the circumstances need to be solved in a trial by another judge or the case can be dismissed because there isn't enough substance to call it defamation.
So every depiction of EU being swift to put people in jail for their opinions is highly exaggerated.
"Offending" someone is meaningless. Anyone can claim they were offended by anything, but that doesn't automatically make the thing illegal or injurious.
Insults != defamation
[Edit] Ref: https://news.yahoo.com/french-woman-faces-trial-insulting-16...
>>That’s not the case in France for example.
I'm pretty sure you can say fuck trump or fuck biden in France and nothing would happen to you, in public or otherwise.
you picked a poor example though, insulting the French head of state hasn't been a crime for a decade now:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/25/insulting-fren...
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/eu-alphabet-privacy-idCNL5N2...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/25/insulting-fren...
also: most EU countries have laws that protect public speech and especially people's representatives from being prosecuted for expressing their opinions.
I’m increasingly convinced that LLMs are being used to spread propaganda
You can also go in jail for "insult to religious feelings".
In the UK people get fined for offensive tweets, including saying things like "men are not women".
In France people are facing trials for insulting Macron: https://news.yahoo.com/french-woman-faces-trial-insulting-16...
And they can shoot you.
Just like any authoritarian police state.
EDIT: freedom of speech is not related only to offending the president or saying good things about Hitler, it also mean I can talk and eventually argue with a police officer in EU without worrying that they will arrest me or shoot me. It means I can take a picture of a firemen's truck without the camera being seized by the police (it happened to me in Florida) and no way of talking to them that there's no need to abuse of their power, you can actually delete photos from cameras.
etc etc
authoritarianism and control works best when it's not in the law, but in the people habits.
France's "hate speech" laws, which prohibit speech that is deemed to be insulting, threatening, or discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or sexual orientation. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_France)
Germany's NetzDG law, which requires social media platforms to remove content that is deemed to be hate speech or fake news within 24 hours of being notified. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Enforcement_Act)
The United Kingdom's Official Secrets Act, which makes it a criminal offense to disclose certain types of information deemed to be sensitive to national security. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Secrets_Act)
Spain's "gag law," which restricts protests and demonstrations, and imposes fines for offenses such as insulting police officers. (source: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/3/1/spanish-gag-law-...)
Hungary's law against promoting migration, which criminalizes the publication or broadcast of materials that are deemed to promote illegal migration. (source: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/20/hungary-passes...)
Belgium's Holocaust denial law, which makes it a criminal offense to publicly deny, minimize, or justify the Holocaust. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Holocaust_denial_law)
Sweden's "hets mot folkgrupp" law, which prohibits speech that is deemed to be hate speech or incitement to violence against certain groups of people, such as ethnic minorities or LGBT individuals. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_Action_League_of_S...)
Italy's "Lodo Alfano" law, which made it a criminal offense to publish transcripts of intercepted conversations, even if they exposed wrongdoing by public officials. (repealed)
Greece's "insulting the state" law, which makes it a criminal offense to insult the Greek flag, national anthem, or state symbols.
Austria's law against defamation of religions, which makes it a criminal offense to insult or denigrate the religious beliefs of others. (source: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24739183)
Finland's law against ethnic agitation, which prohibits speech that is deemed to incite hatred or discrimination on the basis of ethnicity or national origin.(source: https://poliisi.fi/en/hate-crimes)
Poland's "Holocaust law," which criminalizes the attribution of Nazi crimes to the Polish state or people. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amendment_to_the_Act_on_the_In...)
Portugal's "apology for terrorism" law, which makes it a criminal offense to justify, glorify, or condone terrorism.
Romania's law against insult and defamation, which imposes fines or imprisonment for speech that is deemed to insult, defame, or threaten individuals or groups.
Slovakia's law against extremism, which prohibits the distribution of materials that promote extremist ideologies or activities.
Switzerland's anti-racism law, which makes it a criminal offense to publicly incite hatred or discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or religion.
The Netherlands' law against discrimination, which prohibits speech or acts that are deemed to discriminate against individuals or groups on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or other characteristics.
Norway's law against hate speech, which prohibits speech that is deemed to incite hatred or discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation. (source: https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/equality-and-diversity/...)
In Poland you cannot insult the president: https://www.politico.eu/article/poles-legal-jeopardy-insulti.... You can also go in jail for "insult to religious feelings". (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offending_religious_feelings_(...)
They shoot to kill over a thousand times a year.
If any of those EU countries had such stats, they would shutdown the police entirely for abuse of violence.
Fortunately, we are civilized and it never happened.
Anyway you are wrong about the Lodo Alfano in Italy, which I know very well being Italian. The law has been active for a few months before being declared unconstitutional.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lodo_Alfano
I wonder how wrong you are for every other country
EDIT:
wrong on the French law too
"On 18 June 2020, the French Constitutional Council struck down core provisions of the law."
and probably on many others
I have no time to check them all, but I already have the feeling that most of them suffer from the same selection bias of the Italian and French one.
EDIT 2:
the article talking about the Spanish law is no different
Hasel was not arrested for insulting the Spanish monarchy, but for saying that the police and the monarchy were responsible of torture and for spreading terrorism in his lyrics.
Hasel has a criminal history and had already been arrested two times already for resisting to the police (which is a crime in most western countries) and housebreaking.
He knew he was going to be arrested because he had been found guilty in a trial that he could have won, but never showed up.
So he barricaded himself inside a university building.
I wonder how it would have ended in other freer countries...
The application of the law has in the meantime been changed to allow for more dissuasive measures instead of repressive ones.
And I must say that I despise the way Spanish police works, but in this case they did what they were supposed to do: they arrested someone who had been condemned for a crime by a regular court.
Having actual free speech would solve that (and a lot of other problems).