At one point, they were close to joining the EU.
At one point, they were close to joining the EU.
Turkey doesn't even recognize Cyprus, an EU member. It will be braindead for Cyprus to not veto Turkey. Saying Turkey was "close" to join EU is a really long stretch.
This is a worldwide phenomenon of "too much" democracy (populism) vs. weak republics/administrative states/similar with increasing corruption plus manufactured consent to have more of it, funded by hamfisted billionaires.
Turkey sits right at the access point between EU and all the Central Asian countries with a lot of oil. This made Turkey an "attractive" nation for the EU economically. Socially though they just are not there.
That five-year gap tells you Cyprus couldn’t have been the first roadblock for Turkey’s talks; the island only became an issue once it was already inside the club.
When Turkey finally sat down for formal accession talks in October 2005, the Cyprus dispute had wrapped itself around every single chapter, turning a one-on-one quarrel into a full-blown EU-level veto.
I don't think they were really that close to joining - too much bad blood ((invasions and stuff) with Austria, Italy , etc.
That being put aside, despite flaunting acceptance and democracy as their foremost goal, EU leaders surely knew not compromising on Turkey's accession would stray them farther of the EU in every way possible. And if that helps with a potentially bigger migrant crisis, so much the better.
I respectfully disagree given the basic fragility of the Suez Canal system along with the fact that Egypt is not growing into a major world power on the back of their governance of this canal.
https://www.wsj.com/world/europe/europe-crackdown-free-speec...
> Journalist posted a fake image online of the interior minister holding a sign that read “I hate freedom of opinion” and was subsequently handed a seven-month suspended prison sentence. A woman who posted images of politicians with painted-on Hitler mustaches and called a minister a terrorist was fined about $690.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy?wprov=sf...
European countries have their own dogmas and hypocrisy, only draw the line at different topics (especially where everyone had their grandparents traumatized in a war started by the Grok's favorite character).
None of the examples you gave are actually examples of speech being restricted. Its people (sometimes politicians) freely voicing their opinions on others speech, that is not restriction.
No.
They've taken the stance that parents get to decide what books their kids see.
Other parents are free to make a different decision.
Do you really think that there's a "right" to force others to read books that you choose?
So why draw the line at books depicting gay couples, rather than literally all books? Because this has nothing to do with the ban, except for being a “family-friendly” bullshit justification.
That's not how the Supreme Court works. They are selective about the cases they hear. Especially looking at a 6-3 ruling with this court it's clear to see this was an ideological selection.
Given that, it really does seem that the court ruled 6-3 in favor of the plaintiffs who are trying to draw a line around gay couples because the court is trying to draw a line around gay couples.
> Do you really think that there's a "right" to force others to read books that you choose?
Do I really think that public schools have a right to assign reading of certain books for classes? Is this even a real question? How do you think English classes work?
> A German right-wing journalist posted a fake image online of the interior minister holding a sign that read “I hate freedom of opinion” and was subsequently handed a seven-month suspended prison sentence. A woman who posted images of politicians with painted-on Hitler mustaches and called a minister a terrorist was fined about $690.
...
> In France, a woman spent 23 hours in custody for giving French President Emmanuel Macron the middle finger. (She was acquitted after arguing she had pointed her finger in the air and not directly at the president.) Denmark passed a new law outlawing “improper treatment” of religious texts after a series of incidents in recent years when Quran burnings sparked an angry response. A landmark trial began in May for two men accused of burning a Quran at a folk festival in front of an audience.
...
> In March last year, Stefan Willi Niehoff, a 64-year-old former soldier and retired truck driver, reposted an image he had seen shared on X that showed then-Economy Minister Robert Habeck with the words “Schwachkopf Professional,” which translates to “professional idiot” and was a take on the logo from cosmetics brand Schwarzkopf Professional. Then he forgot about it. Months later, Niehoff was awakened by a ring at the door at 6:15 a.m. to find two plainclothes police officers demanding to search his home.
These are EU countries. Despite Brexit it is apparent that EU and the UK are still on the same page when it comes to curtailing free speech and expanding the surveillance state.
I mean yeah, EU certainly has a long, long, LONG list of problems, but let's not lose sight of the big picture.