Bad news in France. P.S. This is how governments operate

[Mudhammam]

[Chad32]

So people were arrested for sympathizing with the murderers? I'm a little broken on this. I suppose they have a right to say what they want, but they're also assholes and siding with free speech hating terrorists is not a good thing.

[Mudhammam]

Government can't nor should it try regulate which people are allowed to be dicks.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

'can't' I think informs the conclusion as to why government shouldn't be trying.

You can't legislate against thoughts, even though here in the UK the current Government is doing its utmost to try. Not unless you want thought crimes to be a thing.

It should, rather, be doing its utmost to facilitate the ability to criticise those dicks, though, and to call out those dicks.

[Minimalist]

All governments seem to have the same routine.

[FatAndFaithless]

The only speech worth protecting is the speech that people might not like or agree with.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

The only speech worth protecting is the speech that people might not like or agree with.

There is a contradiction, however, in governmental MOs and indeed the possible raison d'etre for a government.

On the one hand, the government's primary focus is the welfare of its citizens (or at least should be. Which is itself a contradiction, perhaps...), thus it should be preventing those that would harm this notion from operating, which in turn means it's preventing the welfare of its citizens.

FUCK.

and hence the discourse of politics is born.

[Dystopia]

This is common procedure in European countries. *Justfrenchpeoplestuff

[FatAndFaithless]

The only speech worth protecting is the speech that people might not like or agree with.

There is a contradiction, however, in governmental MOs and indeed the possible raison d'etre for a government.

On the one hand, the government's primary focus is the welfare of its citizens (or at least should be. Which is itself a contradiction, perhaps...), thus it should be preventing those that would harm this notion from operating, which in turn means it's preventing the welfare of its citizens.

FUCK.

and hence the discourse of politics is born.

It's a gray murky line to be sure, but in most cases I think it's pretty clear if someone is expressing support for an idea versus recommending a course of action (as weasely of a difference that may seem). Of course governments are about as tactful and precise as a gorilla holding a hand grenade, but I like to speak about free speech in the theoretical ideal.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

There is a contradiction, however, in governmental MOs and indeed the possible raison d'etre for a government.

On the one hand, the government's primary focus is the welfare of its citizens (or at least should be. Which is itself a contradiction, perhaps...), thus it should be preventing those that would harm this notion from operating, which in turn means it's preventing the welfare of its citizens.

FUCK.

and hence the discourse of politics is born.

It's a gray murky line to be sure, but in most cases I think it's pretty clear if someone is expressing support for an idea versus recommending a course of action (as weasely of a difference that may seem). Of course governments are about as tactful and precise as a gorilla holding a hand grenade, but I like to speak about free speech in the theoretical ideal.

Word.