Military Review

Mythological freedom of speech: tales of the West and East

90
Mythological freedom of speech: tales of the West and East
Source: ru.globalvoices.org


In accordance with the constitution


In recent decades, Russia has regularly faced accusations of restricting freedom of speech and strict censorship. This is especially true for human rights defenders from Ukraine and other states that are not very friendly to us. However, even the most superficial review of what is happening in the world with freedom of speech makes us look at this from a completely different point of view.

It’s worth starting not with the light of democracy, but with the states, let’s say, of an alternative social system. For example, the People’s Republic of China.

The main object of censorship in the Middle Kingdom is, of course, the Internet. The country's population is more than 1 billion, and therefore, timely monitoring of information received by users from smartphones and computers is considered a priority in China. Here, at the beginning of the XXI century, the world's most powerful Internet filter, the Great Chinese Firewall, was launched, blocking many global information resources. YouTube and Facebook do not work, and Apple, in order not to be expelled from such a large market, had to transfer to the authorities an array of user data from the Chinese iCloud segment. The latter example illustrates very well the capitalist approach to freedom of speech and censorship: where financial interests make it neglected, companies are willing to do it. Of course, a black market for access from the VPN mode exists, but the penalties for this are appropriate. So, for help in circumventing the Great Chinese Firewall, you can get up to 5 years of real imprisonment.

Now in the PRC more than 50 thousand employees follow what users write on social networks and instant messengers. Naturally, special attention is paid to accounts with a large audience. Blogger Wang Jiangfen was arrested for making ironic jokes about Xi Jinping all over the country, and Neihan Duanzi was blocked after comparisons between the Chinese leader and Winnie the Pooh.

At the same time, it is important to understand that in the PRC such a order of things was laid down in the country's Constitution since 1954. Article 35 of the main document, in particular, states that Chinese citizens enjoy freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, procession, and demonstration. But ... The realization of this right is stipulated by a ban on the publication of materials detrimental to the "unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the PRC", as well as contrary to the "basic principles of the PRC Constitution," that is, a commitment to the socialist path and the leading role of the Communist Party. With the same reservations, the right of citizens to criticize and make proposals regarding the activities of any state body or official is realized. As is clear from this text, the state can be very flexible in assessing freedom of speech in society.

Now in China, a new process of forming an individual social credit is developing, which consists of indicators of loyalty of a citizen of the Communist Party. All statements on the Internet or on other sites, compromising or, conversely, praising the current system, will play in plus or minus the “social karma” of the citizen. This will also add information from the court, law enforcement agencies and the nature of the content downloaded from the Internet. What can the government offer trustworthy citizens? Soft loans, prestigious places in universities and work in the public sector, as well as the best schools for children. Those who are on the black list are even planned to be restricted on trips abroad. All these measures should stimulate the formation of internal self-censorship among Chinese citizens. Actually, if a person simply does not go to dubious sites and write vulgarities about the great comrade Xi, then the Great Chinese firewall will not be needed. As French journalist Emmanuel Pierre said, “the highest form of censorship is the emergence of self-censorship.”

Games with the law


Probably in the United States, a country with a rich democratic history, there are all prerequisites for the development of ideal freedom of speech. Of course, but with small reservations that are not directly contrary to the US Constitution. Thus, the First Amendment of the Main Law states the prohibition of the adoption of laws that impede freedom of speech. Example: in 2009, the authorities were not able to directly block the infamous WikiLeaks resource, as the blocking was challenged in court, but one of the largest providers in the country, Amazon subsequently blocked access to the site. Naturally, a private company did this under pressure from the state. Formally, the First Amendment to the Constitution was not violated. In addition, the government can very freely interpret the First Amendment, which indicates the possibility of limiting the form of manifestation of freedom of speech. What does it mean? This means that when crowds of people take to the streets demanding, for example, the resignation of President Trump, they will not be dispersed for democratic will, but for disturbing public order. Which, in fact, has happened repeatedly in the USA. One need only recall the anti-globalists in Times Square. This trick is freeing the hands of the authorities.


Source: rbc.ru

In the United States, however, reverse distortions are possible. In the history of the country there is a case with members of the Ku Klux Klan, who in 1969 demanded "revenge" on Americans of Jewish and African descent. It would seem that this is a clear reason to condemn racists and Nazis! But the Supreme Court justifies the representatives of the Ku Klux Klan, again referring to the First Amendment. In it, in particular, it is indicated that the reasons for restricting self-expression may be “the promptness of such actions” and “these actions may become their likely result”. That is, following the logic of the US Supreme Court, the Kuklklan’s leaders most likely did not call for immediate revenge on Jews and African Americans, so their freedom of speech should not be restricted. If a racist called in a square in front of the crowd to a similar one and would immediately have lynched someone, then the First Amendment would not have been able to protect him. Although, I think, in this story it was not without obvious sympathy from the Supreme Court to the racist community of the United States.

Another interesting legal aspect of life in the USA is very interesting. Since the time of the “witch hunt”, which is in no way consistent with freedom of speech, there are many restrictions in the laws. So, in California, teachers cannot talk about communism in the classroom, even with the goal of simply introducing the student to this teaching. Also in this state, a communist will not be taken to the civil service. We must pay tribute, in 2008 lawmakers tried to repeal these acts, but Governor A. Schwarzenegger vetoed the changes.

We go further - to the state of Tennessee. It turns out that in this region a person who "calls for the overthrow of the American form of government" cannot work as a teacher. They don’t want to see communists in state agencies in Texas, Georgia, and in Florida they can be banned from fishing like that. Next, open the West Virginia Code and see, probably, the most democratic law in the whole USA:
“It is unlawful for any person to own or display any red or black flag, or to display any other flag, emblem, device or sign of any kind expressing sympathy or support for ideals, institutions or forms of government that are hostile, unfriendly or antagonistic to the form or the spirit of the constitution, laws, ideals, and institutions of this state or the United States. ”

Does this legislative act violate freedom of speech or expression? Of course! Moreover, for non-compliance faces criminal liability - from 1 year to 5 years. A very good argument in disputes with American opponents regarding democracy in Russia.

German experience


Perhaps in the European Union there are examples of manifestations of freedom of speech in society and the absence of censorship? After all, there were suicidal cartoons in the history of the Prophet Mohammed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten and the French Charlie Hebdo. Until now, many consider these artistic attacks almost manifestations of absolute freedom of speech. However, here censorship has a certain impact on the notorious freedom of speech.

Back in 2009, the German parliament passed a bill to create certain barriers on the Internet. And all would be fine, but the Bundestag deputies did not take into account the opinion of more than 130 thousand burghers who signed the protest petition. And a few years later, a rule appears “requiring telecommunication companies to store some user data for 10 weeks.” And again, contrary to the petitions signed by tens of thousands of German citizens.


Source: rubaltic.ru

A special German case is Western case law in relation to freedom of speech. I propose to consider examples of what is prohibited in Germany on the basis of precedents of court decisions. Particular attention is drawn to the fact of criminal prosecution for such misconduct, even if in the form of a fine. The fact is that in Germany a person with such a fine remains a “felon”, although he has not spent a single day in prison.

So, why in a developed European state can one boom under an article? Firstly, for naming Germany as a “lawless state,” “ideological dictatorship,” as well as for asserting that the country “willingly obeys Jewish orders.” Secondly, the state cannot be called the "republic of the dough", "the corrupt shed" and the "stall selling Coca-Cola." One involuntarily recalls the domestic “liberals” who with impunity all too often call Russia “giant gas station”. Thirdly, the prohibitions concern the artistic work of the Germans. It is impossible to draw the coat of arms of the land of Hesse, on which a lion is depicted in a police helmet on his head and a bloodied rod in his claws. Drawings and photo collages in which a federal eagle is depicted behind a prison bars are prohibited. There are more curious moments. The image of a federal eagle as a skeleton or neck, as well as hoisting the national flag in a pile of horse shit as a protest against neo-Nazis is criminally punishable. The above prohibitions are formulated on the basis of decisions of courts of both regional and federal levels from 1952 to 2002.

All of the above leads to seditious thoughts. Perhaps the textbooks on which countries with developed democracies try to teach Russia freedom of speech should finally be rewritten? And in some cases, throw it away.
Author:
90 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. parusnik
    parusnik 14 May 2020 15: 15 New
    +9
    All of the above leads to seditious thoughts. Perhaps the textbooks on which countries with developed democracies try to teach Russia freedom of speech should finally be rewritten? And in some cases, throw it away.
    ..... Indeed, it’s somehow ridiculous, the Western bourgeoisie teach Russian bourgeois freedom of speech and democracy .. smile
    1. Basil50
      Basil50 14 May 2020 17: 56 New
      +4
      So in Europe there is the most terrible democratic regime, in its original sense.
      Initially, democracy is the power of landowners who, by necessity * are also owners of slaves, since, well, not democrats, really dig in the ground or bathe among * production capacities * to create wealth.
      For freedom of speech in foreign countries in Europe they have always fought, because in their own countries everything was fine with * freedom *, it was completely controlled and controlled.
      United Europe includes kingdoms, countries with Nazi ideology, countries that own colonies, and all this is solemnly declared * a stronghold of democracies *.
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 14 May 2020 23: 11 New
        +3
        So in Europe there is the most terrible democratic regime, in its original sense.
        ... Well, yes, we still have a young democracy, it is not at stake .. And they still teach us! laughing Still blows ... the time will come wink
    2. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 14 May 2020 18: 17 New
      +1
      Quote: parusnik
      All of the above leads to seditious thoughts. Perhaps the textbooks on which countries with developed democracies try to teach Russia freedom of speech should be rewritten .....
      ..... Indeed, it’s somehow ridiculous, the Western bourgeoisie teach Russian bourgeois freedom of speech and democracy .. smile
      so it’s time for ours to read Soviet textbooks best of all and to understand that the Western ones always got stuck, found fault with our country, whatever it is called! !!!!!
  2. Virus-free crown
    Virus-free crown 14 May 2020 15: 18 New
    +5
    You can briefly, in a nutshell - what is the article about ?! repeat
    1. parusnik
      parusnik 14 May 2020 15: 19 New
      +8
      The whole article is in the last paragraph ... smile
      1. Diver-SP
        Diver-SP 14 May 2020 17: 18 New
        +7
        Quote: parusnik
        The whole article is in the last paragraph ... smile

        This paragraph has long been known when the USSR and the educational system collapsed ..
        All of the above leads to seditious thoughts. Perhaps the textbooks on which countries with developed democracies try to teach Russia freedom of speech should finally be rewritten?

        You need to read Lenin; everything is written and described there.

        That's how it is now in a world without the USSR!
        1. sniperino
          sniperino 15 May 2020 09: 30 New
          +3
          Quote: Diver-SP
          That's how it is now in a world without the USSR
          The USSR sold capital without any power except that which was in the heads of the party bosses of the CPSU. Of course, not only with them, but without them the deal would not have taken place.
          1. Santjaga_Garka
            Santjaga_Garka 18 May 2020 15: 22 New
            0
            It was with the power of capital that they sold it, only he ruled over the minds of the party clique and many of the people.
      2. Santjaga_Garka
        Santjaga_Garka 18 May 2020 15: 20 New
        0
        So under the last paragraph it was necessary to sum up the evidence base *)
    2. Stas157
      Stas157 14 May 2020 15: 52 New
      14
      Quote: Crown without virus
      You can briefly, in a nutshell - what is the article about ?! repeat

      The fact that the lack of freedom of speech and democracy is, they say, good.

      When the USSR was destroyed, censorship was told to us - that’s bad.
      When destroyed, they say - censorship is good.

      But there was at least socialism. People simply robbed under the hypocritical speech of freedom.
      1. Svarog
        Svarog 14 May 2020 16: 06 New
        +3
        Quote: Stas157
        But there was at least socialism.

        When socialism is censorship, this is normal, since the state guarantees the population of the country jobs, free medicine, education .. in a word, the state is for citizens. But when capitalism, and censorship at the same time, is already slavery, since a person lives in an environment where the one who has more money is stronger and if he does not even have the opportunity to criticize and resent, then slavery is obtained.
        1. Krasnodar
          Krasnodar 14 May 2020 20: 22 New
          -5
          Quote: Svarog

          When socialism is censorship, this is normal, since the state guarantees the population of the country jobs, free medicine, education .. in a word, the state is for citizens. But when capitalism, and censorship at the same time, is already slavery, since a person lives in an environment where the one who has more money is stronger and if he does not even have the opportunity to criticize and resent, then slavery is obtained.

          Sigapur. However, the social guarantees and living standards of the working people of capitalist, totalitarian Singapore and the USSR in its best years are two big differences, and not in favor of the Union hi
          1. Oyo Sarkazmi
            Oyo Sarkazmi 15 May 2020 09: 42 New
            +4
            Quote: Krasnodar
            However, the social guarantees and living standards of the working people of capitalist, totalitarian Singapore and the USSR in its best years are two big differences.

            In the Soviet Union, we could spit on the street, be late for work, have a drink in the workplace — and work without much straining.
            Try it in Singapore, then what now.
            1. Krasnodar
              Krasnodar 15 May 2020 10: 04 New
              +1
              Quote: Oyo Sarkazmi

              In the Soviet Union, we could spit on the street, be late for work, have a drink in the workplace — and work without much straining.
              Try it in Singapore, then what now.

              I agree )).
            2. Okinawa
              Okinawa 17 May 2020 08: 47 New
              +2
              God, how right you are! Even on the street do not bark and do not get drunk at work! Soulless capitalist creatures. Here Lenin - that is yes!
          2. Santjaga_Garka
            Santjaga_Garka 18 May 2020 15: 26 New
            0
            It is only necessary to compare the microstate, which is located extremely successfully in the entire set of factors and has never been under sanctions and the huge country in the north of which was initially not allowed to develop, there would have been no intervention, Western pressure and the Second World War - we would have lived differently now.
            1. Krasnodar
              Krasnodar 18 May 2020 22: 31 New
              +1
              Or Germany, which, though due to its own fault, was once gouged economically, the second time it was bombed into the Stone Age
      2. Diver-SP
        Diver-SP 14 May 2020 17: 23 New
        +3
        Quote: Stas157
        Quote: Crown without virus
        You can briefly, in a nutshell - what is the article about ?! repeat

        The fact that the lack of freedom of speech and democracy is, they say, good.

        When the USSR was destroyed, censorship was told to us - that’s bad.
        When destroyed, they say - censorship is good.

        But there was at least socialism. People simply robbed under the hypocritical speech of freedom.

        We believed Ivana the glossy covers of Western magazines .. Typically, "beautiful" wanted to live .. Here she is the beauty of capitalism .. !!!! Everything is in the know, well, someone in Moscow lives well and even very much!
        And we again tighten our belts and can’t do anything already ..
      3. Vlad world
        Vlad world 17 May 2020 09: 18 New
        0
        Well, yes, socialism - and some have already lived under communism.
        Well, robbed. but under socialism it was. Of the 100 rubles of Russia's income (RSFSR), 30 rubles went to the aid of the starving people from the Baltic states, Asia, and the Caucasus.
    3. Octopus
      Octopus 14 May 2020 15: 55 New
      +8
      The author writes how they hang blacks there.

      Partly he is right. For freedom of speech now is really not the best time.

      It’s worth starting not with the light of democracy, but with the states, let’s say, of an alternative social system. For example, the People’s Republic of China.


      With China, everything has long been clear.

      Probably, in the United States, a country with a rich democratic history, there are all prerequisites for the development of ideal freedom of speech.


      While holding on. Although, of course, with difficulty.

      the authorities were not able to directly block the infamous WikiLeaks resource, as the blocking was challenged in court, but one of the largest providers in the country, Amazon subsequently blocked access to the site. Naturally, a private company did this under pressure from the state.


      Lies. Amazon did not block access to the site, but denied it hosting. Yes, after the Senate request. But the Senate request is not an executive document. Therefore, the Amazon when refusing work did not refer to him, but to a violation of the rules of the service. Wikilix continued to host on other resources.

      One need only recall the anti-globalists in Times Square. This trick is freeing the hands of the authorities.


      The usual fraud in Russia. "Authorities" - this is usually the municipal authorities. Attached is a picture of the 2013 incident at the University of California. The jamb of the university administration, the head of the university apologized to the students. The police should not have been on campus at all.

      Does this legislative act violate freedom of speech or expression? Of course! Moreover, for non-compliance faces criminal liability - from 1 year to 5 years.


      In the United States there is no single criminal law, and at the state level there is a huge amount of legal vestiges. But since there is a court in the States, most of these icebergs are safely bypassed. Although, of course, incidents happen.

      And the law, of course, is correct, only too soft. Supporters of the Soviet regime where it does not exist should be treated exactly by the methods of the Soviet regime.

      Back in 2009, the German parliament passed a bill to create certain barriers on the Internet.


      Yes, in Europe, freedom of speech has always been in the context of a deep fascist tradition. Now it is being attacked from several sides at once:

      1. Totalitarian liberalism. Ban on an extremely broadly understood hat speech.
      2. Copywriting. Strike System.
      3. Protecting the innocence of children from x-video. In an alliance with mitushnitsami - wrestlers with the objectification of women. It would seem that this is only a problem of masturbation (and who is not masturbation?) But no. The mass movement against anonymity on the Internet (first - anonymous payments, and then anonymity in general) - started from there, from protecting the kids. Not to mention the very idea that the state has the right to regulate something there on the Internet. Here Mizulina is completely in trend.

      Indeed, this whole coalition has made great strides in the EU in the fight against freedom of speech, and not only against it.
      1. Kronos
        Kronos 14 May 2020 16: 02 New
        +3
        Well, then the liberal broke angrily croaking that the freedom of speech should not be spread to the Communists
        1. unaha
          unaha 14 May 2020 16: 15 New
          +2
          Why exactly is a "liberal" and in what place is "evil"? And most importantly, what's wrong? If the "communists" (or rather, all those who, having received power by all means, try to stay with it) all the way oppressed this very freedom of speech, then apparently they don’t need it))) The same applies to all current initiators "prohibit , restrict, deanonymize. "
          1. Kronos
            Kronos 14 May 2020 16: 16 New
            +2
            Communists oppressed freedom no more than others
            1. unaha
              unaha 14 May 2020 16: 21 New
              +2
              Yes, the Communists have no questions at all - it's a thing of the past)
              There are much more complaints about United Russia.
            2. nikvic46
              nikvic46 14 May 2020 17: 01 New
              +5
              Kronos. Today. And what, the Communists robbed you of your work? You do it like in a poem. "I got up early from a hangover. There’s not a damn in my pocket. And my hands are shaking. What did the Communists bring to?" When you don’t have confidence in tomorrow, you don’t need free speech.
              1. A.TOR
                A.TOR 14 May 2020 20: 11 New
                0
                If you do not have “freedom of speech”, then you do not have the opportunity (tools) to assert your rights.
                If you cannot defend your rights, then you will not have confidence in the future
                1. Kronos
                  Kronos 14 May 2020 20: 30 New
                  +1
                  They defend their rights in courts or at rallies, and freedom of speech has nothing to do with force
                  1. A.TOR
                    A.TOR 14 May 2020 21: 22 New
                    0
                    If there is no freedom of speech, then there will be no fair courts (for you).
                    But "power" - this is another stage, to avoid it and need freedom of speech. Otherwise, you get into a fight. In some places in the world they understood this - after long fights - and switched to the practice of talking.
                    Unless otherwise, you will have nothing: neither rights, nor confidence.
            3. Krasnodar
              Krasnodar 14 May 2020 20: 27 New
              -2
              Quote: Kronos
              Communists oppressed freedom no more than others

              That's right. They just lied bespontovye.
        2. Octopus
          Octopus 14 May 2020 16: 21 New
          +5
          Quote: Kronos
          Well, that liberal broke

          ))
          And I'm not a liberal.
          Quote: Kronos
          freedom of speech should not be communist

          Must. For example, I respect this word very much.
          To the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee to Comrades Malenkov, Khrushchev, Molotov, Voroshilov, Kaganovich, Mikoyan, Pervukhin, Bulganin and Saburov.

          Dear comrades, they want to kill me without trial and investigation after a 5-day detention, without a single interrogation. I implore you all to prevent this, I ask for immediate intervention, otherwise it will be too late. Directly by phone must be warned.

          Dear comrades, I urge you to appoint the most responsible and strict commission for a rigorous investigation of my case, to be led by Comrade Molotov or Comrade Voroshilov. Does a member of the Presidium of the Central Committee not deserve to have his case carefully examined, charged, demand an explanation, questioned witnesses. From all points of view, this is good for business and for the Central Committee. Why do it the way it’s done now: they put him in the basement, and nobody finds out or asks for anything. Dear comrades, the only and only correct way to resolve this is to execute him without a trial and clarification of a case against a member of the Central Committee and his comrade after 5 days in prison in the basement.
          1. Vladimir_2U
            Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 16: 57 New
            0
            Quote: Octopus
            Must. For example, I respect this word very much.

            And as a letter to L.P. Beria correlates with freedom of speech?
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 14 May 2020 17: 07 New
              +3
              Well, here uv. Kronos was interested in freedom of speech for the Communists. I am completely in favor, the Communists should be able to speak freely. As it was under communism.
              I thought for a long time how I would go to court, how I would behave in court, and came to the conclusion that the only opportunity and clue for life was to tell everything truthfully and honestly. Yesterday, in an interview with me, Beria said: “Do not think that you will be shot. If you confess and tell everything honestly, your life will be saved. ”

              After this conversation with Beria, I decided: it is better to die, but to die honestly and tell the truth to the court. At the preliminary investigation, I said that I was not a spy, I was not a terrorist, but they did not believe me and they applied the most severe beatings to me. During the twenty-five years of my party life, I honestly fought with enemies and destroyed enemies. I also have such crimes for which I can be shot, and I will speak about them afterwards, but I did not commit the crimes that I was charged with with the indictment in my case and did not blame them.
              1. Vladimir_2U
                Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 17: 11 New
                -1
                Well then, I wish to those like you, who you are there - "not a liberal" or someone else, freedom of speech and further adventures like those of the authors of the letters you cited.
                1. Octopus
                  Octopus 14 May 2020 17: 12 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Vladimir_2U
                  Well then, I wish to those like you, who you are there - "not a liberal" or someone else, freedom of speech and further adventures like those of the authors of the letters you cited.

                  Thank you.
                  1. Vladimir_2U
                    Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 17: 14 New
                    +1
                    Always welcome.
    4. Aleksandre
      Aleksandre 14 May 2020 17: 12 New
      +1
      Quote: Crown without virus
      You can briefly, in a nutshell - what is the article about ?! repeat

      Briefly: "democracy" and "freedom of speech" are toxic goods for export, not for their own use.
    5. Normal ok
      Normal ok 15 May 2020 01: 58 New
      -2
      Quote: Crown without virus
      You can briefly, in a nutshell - what is the article about ?! repeat

      About how "they have there" everything is bad. Assuming that "we are the best."
  3. eklmn
    eklmn 14 May 2020 15: 19 New
    +2
    Eugene, the author, for which the goalkeeper was fined 1,4 million rubles?
    He did not call for “overthrow” or “change” !!!
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. knn54
    knn54 14 May 2020 15: 27 New
    +4
    "Paradoxically: to tell the truth, I have to board a plane and fly to Moscow. And I tell my colleagues in Russia: you are mistaken that there is freedom of speech in the West. No one is free!"
    Giulietto Chiesa
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 May 2020 15: 34 New
      +3
      Quote: knn54
      Giulietto Chiesa

      Absolutely normal saying for a European socialist. They are with Comrade Stalin liked to go to Moscow and tell the truth from here about the vices of Western society.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 14 May 2020 17: 48 New
        +4
        Quote: Octopus
        They are with Comrade Stalin liked to go to Moscow and tell the truth from here about the vices of Western society.

        Here, too, anyone can go to Red Square and shout "Down with Reagan!" - and for this, too, there will be absolutely nothing!
        © smile
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 14 May 2020 18: 16 New
          +6
          I like another story more.
          Romain Rolland: ... a law has recently been published to punish juvenile delinquents over 12 years old. The text of this law is not well known; and even if he is famous, he raises serious doubts. It seems that the death penalty is looming over these children. I well understand the motives that make it necessary to inspire fear with irresponsibility to those who want to use this irresponsibility. But the public does not understand. It seems to her that this threat is being carried out or that judges, at their discretion, can carry it out.
          .
          Stalin:
          Now let me answer your comments on the law on punishments for children from 12 years of age. This decree has a purely pedagogical significance. We wanted to frighten them not so much hooligan children as organizers of hooliganism among children. It should be borne in mind that in our schools separate groups of 10-15 people were found. hooligan boys and girls who aim to kill or corrupt the best pupils and students, drummers and drummers. There were cases when such hooligan groups lured girls to adults, they were soldered there and then prostitutes were made of them. There have been cases when boys, who are well in school and are drummers, such a group of hooligans drowned in a well, inflicted wounds on them and terrorized them in every possible way. At the same time, it was found that such hooligan children's gangs are organized and sent by gangster elements from adults. It is clear that the Soviet government could not pass by such outrages. The decree is issued in order to intimidate and disorganize adult bandits and protect our children from hooligans
  6. ALARI
    ALARI 14 May 2020 15: 39 New
    +5
    Freedom of speech is when this word can change something; in the West, therefore, words are afraid. It's different with us, say what you want, your word does not affect anything. Therefore, there is no such tight control.
    1. AK1972
      AK1972 14 May 2020 16: 30 New
      +3
      I recalled an old joke.
      Reagan says to Brezhnev: "We have freedom of speech in the USA, but you do not have it in the USSR, for example, everyone can go to the White House and shout - Reagan - fuck (oh!) Homosexual!". Brezhnev: "Well, you surprised. Here, too, anyone can go to Red Square and shout - Reagan is a homosexual!"
      1. ALARI
        ALARI 14 May 2020 16: 35 New
        0
        Namely, but you can still catch in a lie, theft, incompetence, catch by the hand and beat with numbers, all this will be nonsense and compote.
    2. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 14 May 2020 17: 17 New
      -1
      Quote: ALARI
      Freedom of speech is when this word can change something, in the West, therefore, words are afraid
      Well, this is according to Western films and TV shows.
      1. Krasnodar
        Krasnodar 14 May 2020 20: 42 New
        -2
        Why - Nixon flew out because of Watergate))
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 15 May 2020 02: 46 New
          +2
          Oooo when that was! ))) But Clintonsha, despite the extremely suspicious deaths of opponents, voiced in the press, even survey they didn’t call the prosecutor, it seems. )))
  7. shubin
    shubin 14 May 2020 15: 41 New
    +3
    Here, at the beginning of the XNUMXth century, the world's most powerful Internet filter, the Great Chinese Firewall, was launched, blocking many global information resources.

    China, in truth, is a great country! They already had Internet at the beginning of the 20th century! wassat
  8. tatra
    tatra 14 May 2020 15: 42 New
    -2
    Against whom are the enemies of the Communists in the West, in Europe, on the territory of the USSR, all 100 years after the October Revolution, waging their evil, aggressive, deceitful, hypocritical information wars? Firstly, against dissenters, against those who dare, you see, do, speak, write what the enemies of the Communists do not like. And secondly, and against each other, when one of them, like Yanukovych and Putin, dared to do, say and write something that the enemies of the Communists did not like. And because of their fantastic arrogance, they still insolently call the Soviet Communists the totalitarianists, when it is they themselves who are the evil totalitarianists.
  9. bk316
    bk316 14 May 2020 15: 54 New
    +8
    Liberty owl in the literal sense is fake freedom.
    This is an ersatz of freedom of information.

    Obtaining reliable information is really an important thing, because only on the basis of information can we make the right decisions.
    And freedom of speech is freedom to splash out your ideas (in most cases delusional) into the information field and report news (in most cases fake). As a result, freedom of speech is expected. turned into freedom of lies. And this in turn restricts the truly necessary freedom - freedom of access to information.
    1. Oleg Zorin
      Oleg Zorin 14 May 2020 16: 41 New
      +2
      Interesting idea. It is worth considering it dialectically
      1. unaha
        unaha 14 May 2020 16: 53 New
        0
        “the right decisions can be made only on the basis of information” - for example, a satellite was launched, but after launching into orbit, it was not possible to contact it. It is reported: "The satellite was launched, it was successfully put into orbit" - the information is reliable and access to it is free, right? But without "freedom of speech" the information may not be complete and making decisions on its basis is mildly reckless.
        1. bk316
          bk316 15 May 2020 12: 32 New
          +1
          But without "freedom of speech" information may not be complete and decision-making on it
          basis to put it mildly recklessly.

          And with "freedom", it will be GUARANTEED FALSE. Think incomplete or false information is better.

          In your example there will be 1000 sources referring to each other and God knows that there was a nuclear installation on this satellite and now the fuel will fall on everyone’s head. IMAWEAL.
          1. unaha
            unaha 15 May 2020 12: 34 New
            0
            Both are bad. Can we somehow agree that the option to receive both complete and reliable is not ruled out? ))) Even if not in one message and not from one source)
    2. BREAKTHROUGH READY
      BREAKTHROUGH READY 14 May 2020 17: 28 New
      0
      And freedom of speech is freedom to splash out your ideas (in most cases delusional) into the information field and report news (in most cases fake).
      what is nonsense, and what a sound idea and objective news everyone decides for himself (based on trial, error and life experience). In the end, there is an effective ability to filter and manage information. Censorship makes people completely defenseless and vulnerable.
      1. bk316
        bk316 15 May 2020 12: 29 New
        +1
        In the end, there is an effective ability to filter and manage information.

        You do not have such an opportunity. When the source was 2 State Departments and official channels of the USSR, this could be done. When thousands of sources began, a citizen can no longer do this. After a short time (quite a very short one), AI bots will become sources, AND ALL KAYUK EVEN SPECIALS WILL NOT BE ABLE.
        But many people prefer think like you. This is the position of the ostrich. It leads to disastrous consequences. To whom it is interesting get the report about information bunkers.
    3. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre 14 May 2020 19: 13 New
      +1
      Liberty owl in the literal sense is fake freedom.
      Every solitary confinement cell has complete and absolute freedom of speech. So what? Is it easier for a prisoner? laughing
  10. To be or not to be
    To be or not to be 14 May 2020 16: 12 New
    +2
    “You cannot live in society and be free from society”
    "Party organization and party literature" - an article by V. I. Lenin. It was first published in the newspaper New Life No. 12 dated November 13 (26), 1905 under the pseudonym N. Lenin. In the 5th edition of the PSS of V.I. Lenin, the article is given in Volume 12 on pages 99-105.
  11. Keyser soze
    Keyser soze 14 May 2020 16: 22 New
    +4
    Perhaps the textbooks on which countries with developed democracies try to teach Russia freedom of speech should finally be rewritten? And in some cases, throw it away.


    No author ..... no ...

    At this moment, about 5 thousand people are protesting in front of our Parliament, shouting that the Premiere is a girl with low social responsibility and no one will beat them for UTB.

    I can easily write on the Premier’s Facebook page that his mother sinned with a Neanderthal and therefore he’s so smart and they don’t put me in Siberia for it.

    So you, the author, are studying and studying ... if you want of course. Otherwise, the authorities will always flog laws for themselves, and if you come to terms with your children, what future awaits your children?
    1. Mitroha
      Mitroha 14 May 2020 19: 09 New
      +3
      I can easily write on the Premier’s Facebook page that his mother sinned with a Neanderthal and therefore he’s so smart and they don’t put me in Siberia for it.

      I, too, can easily do this, and they will not send me to Siberia. As in Bulgarian, "sinned with a Neanderthal"? laughing
      1. Keyser soze
        Keyser soze 14 May 2020 20: 03 New
        +3
        As in Bulgarian, "sinned with a Neanderthal"? laughing


        Banned if I write :))))

        There is such a joke with us - If you hit with all your strength with a hammer and don’t hit the nail, and you don’t know Serbian or Bulgarian in your finger, then you just have nothing to say ... laughing drinks
  12. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 14 May 2020 17: 04 New
    +1
    one must distinguish between freedom from sin and freedom for sin ...
  13. Courier
    Courier 14 May 2020 17: 12 New
    +3
    In the United States, there is freedom of speech, but most importantly, there is such a thing as reputation.
    Almost all officials at the municipal level, sheriff, prosecutor and judge elected posts.
    One wrong word, and a person flies from a post.
    You can sue the State, the county, the governor, the police, the billionaire, and win.
    In the USA, an official is more likely a loser than a boyar.

    What's bad about it?
    1. Revival
      Revival 14 May 2020 17: 43 New
      -1
      That's right!
      It is impossible to imagine with us.

      (Russian newspaper 28.04.2020/12/02 XNUMX:XNUMX).
      Shooting ranges in the US opened contrary to quarantine
      A group of activists for the right to use weapons in the US in a judicial proceeding has opened shooting ranges in spite of the quarantine introduced in the country. According to The Hill, previously firearms in Virginia sued the local governor, who banned all non-vital enterprises, including shooting galleries, during the coronavirus epidemic.
      The defendant was the head of Virginia Democrat Ralph Northam. Its plaintiffs accused of violating their constitutional rights and won this process.
      In accordance with the decision of the state district judge announced yesterday, Virginia shooting ranges will now work even during the COVID-19 pandemic, since local authorities cannot violate the basic rights of American citizens. In particular, we are talking about the second amendment to the country's constitution guaranteeing the right to arms to US citizens.
  14. Revival
    Revival 14 May 2020 17: 17 New
    0
    It follows from the author’s examples that “there”, especially in Germany, criticism of certain attributes of the state and the praise of certain ideas are criticized, while criticism of specific persons (positions) in power is prohibited, and these are different things.
  15. nikvic46
    nikvic46 14 May 2020 17: 22 New
    +1
    We got freedom of speech under Gorbi. And immediately the accident in Chernobyl, in rivers and at sea, on the railway. That is, people didn’t live that way. At the factory we talked a little about politics. Not out of fear. It happened at meetings such passions flared up, for words that would have now been paid a huge fine. NOT because of fear. People besides politics had many interests. Now everyone is grouped on the Internet and insanely happy. We have an old Chalu offspring. She licks any power in everything places. I did not suffer from them. But the former party organizers, with whom they drove unshakably th friendship personally seen how disgusting is chelovek.Eti dregs in 1991 prsto terrorized Communists, which recently molilis.Pro power of words not mine govorit.To is now happening on the Internet is fornication cockroaches.
  16. depressant
    depressant 14 May 2020 17: 24 New
    0
    Freedom of speech is a matter of professional interest from psychotherapists and law enforcement if the word is unrequited. They do not interfere in the dialogue. The psychotherapist avva 2012 is present among us. Who is the law enforcement officer? wassat
  17. Operator
    Operator 14 May 2020 20: 05 New
    -2
    Quote: Octopus
    There is no single criminal law in the United States, and at the state level there is a huge amount of legal vestiges

    There is no need to fake - in the USA there is a federal law (Constitution, suddenly), which contains the right to freedom of speech and the violation of which is prosecuted under the criminal law. Nevertheless, the US Attorney General put a bolt on the facts of gross violation of the Constitution in the laws of individual states regarding freedom of speech (free dissemination of information about communism, Clintonsha forgery, etc., etc.).

    Respect to the author of the article - did not know that with freedom of speech, Germany (who loves to teach others) is also full of seams.

    PS If anything - I am not against the restrictions on freedom of speech, I am against your fakes, that in the West they are pooping flowers.
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 May 2020 21: 00 New
      +2
      Quote: Operator
      in the USA there is a federal law (Constitution, suddenly), which contains the right to freedom of speech and the violation of which is prosecuted under the criminal law.

      All in one pile.
      Quote: Operator
      US Attorney General Bolt on Constitutional Violations

      This does not apply to the prosecutor general. This is the competence of the sun.
      Quote: Operator
      in the laws of individual states regarding freedom of speech

      And many who were shot in Virginia under this case in the last 30 years?
      Quote: Operator
      did not know that with freedom of speech and in Germany

      This is strange. In the EU in general and in Germany in particular, there have always been problems with freedom of speech.
  18. Virus-free crown
    Virus-free crown 14 May 2020 21: 16 New
    -1
    By and large, there is no “freedom of speech” anywhere repeat
    starting with family laughing I would try in childhood to tell my father honestly and openly what I think about the methods of his upbringing - I couldn’t sit on the ass for a couple of weeks - for starters bully
  19. Operator
    Operator 14 May 2020 22: 00 New
    -1
    Quote: Octopus
    in Germany in particular there have always been problems with freedom of speech

    Those. You say that Frau Merkel (who has taught Russians human rights for decades) is yap? laughing
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 May 2020 22: 16 New
      +3
      Quote: Operator
      Frau Merkel (who has been teaching Russians human rights for decades)

      Frau Merkel?

      Dear Frau, the Komsomol party organizer, which already turned out to be in 90 Christian democrat. What questions can there be?

      Quote: Operator
      yap?

      100% Komsomol functionary. The Bundesrepublic was not ready for this.
      1. Liam
        Liam 14 May 2020 23: 19 New
        +1
        Quote: Octopus
        who already in the 90th year turned out to be a Christian democrat.

        And when was a resident of the former GDR supposed to become a Christian democrat?
        Quote: Octopus
        Bundesrepublic

        The Bundesrepublic under her leadership experienced an unprecedented economic rise and became a European hegemon
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 14 May 2020 23: 36 New
          +2
          Quote: Liam
          And when was a resident of the former GDR supposed to become a Christian democrat?

          It depends on whether this resident sat under Honneker. in dachau like adenauer in prison or not. If you didn’t sit, then never. Since he is obviously not a Christian Democrat.

          Quote: Liam
          The Bundesrepublic under her leadership experienced an unprecedented economic rise and became a European hegemon

          )))
          You can talk a lot about the successes of Germany over the past 20 years and the role in them personally of Frau Chancellor. Let's agree for now that the Germans know better.
          1. Liam
            Liam 14 May 2020 23: 49 New
            +2
            Quote: Octopus
            If not sitting

            Under the communists, probably 99% of East Germans, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, Hungarians did NOT sit. How to be poor and who to choose in power)
            Quote: Octopus
            the Germans know better

            That's it. From what year did they choose her? Her current rating is somewhere close to 80%.
            She brilliantly led the country through a pandemic and did not sit out in the bunker.) God grant each country such a non-Christian non-democrat led
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 15 May 2020 00: 00 New
              +1
              Quote: Liam
              .How to be poor and whom to choose in power)

              Some kind of strange argument. It seems that in the late 80s in the GDR there were many who wanted to join the FRG? Consequently, the political system of Germany and without the former communists was quite viable.
              Quote: Liam
              East Germans, Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, Hungarians

              The listed nations have different situations, sorry.
              Quote: Liam
              That's it. From what year did they choose her? Her current rating is somewhere close to 80%.

              As far as I remember, the Germans choose not Frau Chancellor, but CDU / CSU, which Frau comes with. Again, I would not want to discuss whether the Germans vote right or wrong. That would be a little too presumptuous.
              Quote: Liam
              She brilliantly led the country through a pandemic and did not sit out in the bunker.) God grant each country such a non-Christian non-democrat led

              That is, the German government turned out to be more competent than the Italian government? Or some other country with the Fuhrerbunkers? Incredible achievement.
              1. Liam
                Liam 15 May 2020 00: 11 New
                +1
                Quote: Octopus
                the political system of Germany and without the former communists was quite viable.

                However, this political system somehow very quickly gave itself over to the former Komsomol member. Either the system is stupid or the Komsomol member, without a background and sponsors in the party, was worth it.
                Quote: Octopus

                These nations have different situations, sorry

                In this case, there is no difference. The whole establishment is the former non-seated Komsomol members.
                Quote: Octopus
                the German government was more competent than

                Italy, France, Spain, Great Britain, Sweden, Belgium, Holland, USA. This is counting only the players in their league. Pretty good for the former Komsomol member.
                Quote: Octopus
                Incredible achievement.

                Are you talking about introducing self-isolating pseudo-quarantine at 1000 infected per day and forced exit after 40 days at 12.000? Yes, it’s a difficult achievement. Unless Bolsonaru will get better)
                1. Octopus
                  Octopus 15 May 2020 00: 52 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Liam
                  Either the system is stupid or the Komsomol, without the background and sponsors in the party, was worth it.

                  Both.

                  A distinctive feature of people who have formed in countries of totalitarian ideologies is the complete absence of any ideas about ethics. A person who has such ideas in such a country at best acts as the heroine of Akhedzhakova from the film "Garage". In the average case, in the role of the hero of Vysotsky from the film "Two Comrades Served." But there were worse roles.

                  Naturally, a person without ethical restrictions can be a very effective politician, if we consider efficiency as re-election. Which proves, incidentally, the same sidelord of the Führerbunker.

                  In turn, the political system of Germany in the late 80s was already rotten, and was not ready to carry out decommunization in the same format in which denazification was previously carried out.

                  Quote: Liam
                  In this case, there is no difference. The whole establishment is the former non-seated Komsomol members.

                  )))
                  No. The same Valenza sat under the Communists for a year. Together with Lech Kaczynski.

                  Once again. I fully admit that people who collaborated with the communists can vote. I even admit, albeit less willingly, that they can be elected from the Communists, although it would be better not to the Bundestag, but to the municipalities - for example, from the green Communists, since the red Communists in Germany are prohibited. But to be Christian democrats Communists cannot, by definition. Whether Frau Merkel lied 15 years before the 90th year, or 30 years after the 90th year (or all this time) - she should not have put an immature liar as chancellor.
                  Quote: Liam
                  This is if you count only the players in your league. Pretty good for the former Komsomol member.

                  You are now seriously convincing me that if there is water in the tap - Fuhrer Chancellor poured it there?
                  Quote: Liam
                  Are you talking about introducing self-isolating pseudo-quarantine at 1000 infected per day and forced exit after 40 days at 12.000?

                  Are you seriously telling me about the Russian government as evidence of the compliance of Frau Mergel with his current position? What do you want in Ukraine? - someone would tell you.
    2. Virus-free crown
      Virus-free crown 14 May 2020 22: 18 New
      -1
      Quote: Operator
      Quote: Octopus
      in Germany in particular there have always been problems with freedom of speech

      Those. You say that Frau Merkel (who has taught Russians human rights for decades) is yap? laughing

      Well, if you suddenly don’t know - in Germany for “High Hitler” you’ll be in Turm at the time))) according to their law drinks I categorically support them in this !!! hi but there is no “freedom of speech" in general terms laughing
  20. itis
    itis 14 May 2020 22: 29 New
    -1
    in Germany, an administrative fine is simply spent (40-60 marks per day). everyone is happy. and the state and the population inhabiting it. freedom (from an economic and not only point of view) was clearly and abruptly expressed by Marx. it’s free TIME that you can spend on yourself at your own discretion. therefore an eight-hour work day. eight more to sleep and eight to work for the community. they got scribbles with a pen on paper, got their program !! plus to the author for the question raised
  21. The comment was deleted.
  22. Radikal
    Radikal 14 May 2020 23: 07 New
    -1
    At the same time, it is important to understand that in the PRC such a order of things was laid down in the country's Constitution since 1954. Article 35 of the main document, in particular, states that Chinese citizens enjoy freedom of speech, press, assembly, association, procession, and demonstration. But ... The realization of this right is stipulated by a ban on the publication of materials detrimental to the "unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the PRC", as well as contrary to the "basic principles of the PRC Constitution," that is, a commitment to the socialist path and the leading role of the Communist Party.

    I regret that such an article in 1954 did not have time to be included in the Constitution of the USSR! There was no one. The leader was killed .... sad
  23. Radikal
    Radikal 14 May 2020 23: 11 New
    -1
    Quote: Krasnodar
    Quote: Svarog

    When socialism is censorship, this is normal, since the state guarantees the population of the country jobs, free medicine, education .. in a word, the state is for citizens. But when capitalism, and censorship at the same time, is already slavery, since a person lives in an environment where the one who has more money is stronger and if he does not even have the opportunity to criticize and resent, then slavery is obtained.

    Sigapur. However, the social guarantees and living standards of the working people of capitalist, totalitarian Singapore and the USSR in its best years are two big differences, and not in favor of the Union hi

    Dwarf state why compare? You would still Monaco dragged .... lol
  24. Radikal
    Radikal 14 May 2020 23: 12 New
    -1
    Quote: parusnik
    The whole article is in the last paragraph ... smile

    In my opinion - in the 5th. hi
  25. WayKheThuo
    WayKheThuo 14 May 2020 23: 50 New
    -1
    Freedom of speech is primarily a tool in the hands of those in power. Moreover, in the right hands, this tool allows you to swap "under the carpet" any, that is, absolutely any information, be it true, half-truth, or outright lie.
    Freedom of speech in combination with the information revolution has led to a catastrophic depreciation of the printed word, and indeed of any audio or visual presentation of information, as well as human thoughts, feelings, ideas, displayed in the public information field.
    I can safely liken freedom of speech, in its Western version, to a huge swamp. You can throw any kind of informational stone there - ripples will go on the muddy stream, but will disappear almost instantly, drowning in a sea of ​​white informational noise, consisting of cooking, sex, cats and even BG knows what.
    As for China - people follow the path of their ancestors - they build a wall. Just as the Great Wall did not protect them from the Steppe, so a firewall of any complexity and effectiveness will not protect against penetration of external ideas contrary to the CCP's policy, because any wall can be destroyed, but this number will not pass with a swamp.
    Personally, I think - the stronger the government, the greater the level of freedom of speech in a given country. From my point of view, if there is any, that is, absolutely any question in the country that can be discussed at an open debate, this is the first sign of a strong government that is not only not afraid of criticism, but also knows how to correctly and reasonably answer it.
    Are there any such countries? I dont know. Apparently - there are very few of them, because it is common for people to invent, to some extent, and then “enclose” sacred cows, which in reality turn out to be not only sacred, but not even cows. But we must remember that a country in which there are fewer ungulates mentioned is more likely to prevail in an ideological war.
    Accordingly, I believe that our government’s policy of supplanting discussions on the Web, and filling the television broadcast with SKM brand products (Solovyov’s-Kiselyov’s-Mikhalkov’s) can lead to very unpleasant consequences, because bringing hot topics to the public domain allows release the accumulated steam to the whistle.
    Nevertheless, we must admit, in comparison with the dub of the late Soviet flood, our authorities are simply virtuosos of the ideological struggle, but to the West it is still like the moon.
    I think so.
  26. saygon66
    saygon66 15 May 2020 01: 37 New
    +1
    -Real freedom of speech is when you can talk about absolutely everything, and absolutely everyone doesn't give a damn about these conversations! laughing
  27. nikvic46
    nikvic46 15 May 2020 05: 46 New
    0
    All the same, phrases such as “freedom of speech” and “democracy” were created by people with pure thoughts. But as often happens, the power of the rich uses their own minds. Freedom of speech should create a healthy outlook on events in the world and in society. But how it turns out, we see with a look without glasses.
  28. Operator
    Operator 15 May 2020 19: 37 New
    0
    Quote: Octopus
    Frau - Komsomol party organizer

    Remove the cross (there were Komsomol members in the Komsomol) or put on cowards (the chancellor is an official and his opinion is consistent with state policy).

    PS Especially for the illiterate - after graduating from the University of Leipzig, Merkel did not join any of the GDR parties (all of a sudden).
  29. ben.reis
    ben.reis 23 May 2020 13: 11 New
    0
    EU totalitarian union and no