EU considers plans to outlaw racism

[Kyle]

You already do. Poldermodel, legalising drugs, legalising prostitution, legalising euthanasia, etc. Plus read my comment below. This legaslation is nothing new.

In other words, when you can't solve problems, you give into them.

[Lonestar]

And in what continent do those countries lie?

Well, they ain't Dutch....

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Lonestar


Well, they ain't Dutch....

how do you know for sure?

Holland and Germany are located very close together

about the law.. bubble..POP!

one person raised a legitimate question though. How do we stop EU laws we don't like since the EU seems "distant".

Answer: through your government. And in the near future through the European Parliement.

The EU being distant is a problem for the EU too and it tries to solve it more than it did before.

Anyone who is interested should check out the belgian PM's initiatives on that one.

[History049]

OK, please go ahead and outlaw racism. I'll watch as the leaders of European countries get thrown into jail

[Imran Siddiqui]

I believe a lot of Americans were against the KKK march.

It'd still be allowed .

Look, THOUGHTCRIME... Orwell might have been right... just a few years off .

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Stefu
paiktis, what I see as the most distressing is that even if this doesn't go through, it still might be shade of things to come in brand spankin' new unified Europe. Only way to do something like that would be US-style loose federation, IMHO.

Not really. It seems to me like the product of a rushed "brainstorming" session...
It also seems like it is a "nice" political tool to "prove" who is less xenophobe than the other amongst the buerocrats of Brussels. But the last say is to the 15 ministers (AND the Parliement).

Well, this would at least get the support of two of big three (France and Germany) and quite a lot follows from France and Germany. Then there are countries ruled by Social Democrats or other such prties, which, IIRC, still make up the majority of European countries. (Mmm, are the new governments up already in Norway and Denmark? I'm not sure.)

Social democrats are not the same throughout Europe. They hold very similar values but not all believe in the same means to promote them. (IIRC 11 out of 15 states have social democrats in power).

Well, even the basic ideals aren't all that hot - lose of free speech and all that - and compromise implementation wouldn't be that hot an idea, either. And if you don't comply, you're a big mean racist and we won't play with you.

How does this law (THAT SUCKS BIG TIME) prevents you from speaking your mind? (maybe I missed something?)

They still couldn't go *too* far from the basic ideals of the legislation.

It depends on the form of adoption that will be chosen. If it is a reccomandation the member states don;t even have to do anything about it.
Also since the law is about the "harseness" of penalties, the national courts do have a big say INMHO.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by paiktis22
How does this law (THAT SUCKS BIG TIME) prevents you from speaking your mind? (maybe I missed something?)

For instance, I could potentially have you thrown in jail for your "xenophobic" sentiments against Americans if the law passes. Mark L as well.

[faded glory]

Well.....not scared for Europe yet, wait a few years. As stupid people like MarkL continue to put there misguided faith in the EU.


Wont be long....they should start suspending national constitutions and banning other political partys. Hey, why not!? Nobody complained when they banned the Nazis and the Racists because they were simply unpopular political views (amazing..they consider themselves "democratic"?). So they might as well keep going...which they probably will.

[Bereta_Eder]

Ah! But here's the thing: I don't have any xenophobia against Americans

About the US government, sure.

BTW, I meant to edit the very phrase you quoted but too late now

I read carefully the article.

Stefu could you please provide a link to where you got this from?
It seems ultra anti - EU (I can guarantee it's british - no problem though ) and I have questions about it's objectivety and portraying of the facts. It seems VERY overblown out of proportion.

Having said that, I repeat that it sucks big time and will not pass.

Some "brilliant" EU mind tried to play holier than thou without being able to see beyond his/her noise...


Society will vomit this law like poison (if it is agreed upon, written, finilized then brought up for the green light of the council and then voted in favor by the parliement - see how far this is?)

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Wraith
--"Ordinary crimes would carry heavier penalities if they are motivated in any way by racism or xenophobia"

Won't this cause most of the population of France major problems?

Wraith
Warning: Whimsical when bored

(godamn it here's the quote again )


SOrry Wraith you got it wrong.

French are chauvinistic but not xenophobic. There's a difference,

According to the latest Europole only 7% of the french youth is xenophobic. (answered yes to the question: do you want immigrants to go back from where they came from).

That's the smallest percentage in the EU. Actually they are the less xenophobic.

[Goingonit]

I'll have to quote a *gasp* libertarian friend of mine: "your right to swing your fist stops at my nose".

Untill they try to hurt me, all those racist ****s can do whatever they want. It's not fine with me, it's just that I can't (or shouldn't) be able to abridge their rights to protect my brain from hearing bad things.

[Bereta_Eder]

I quote the wise penguinator:

They need to sort out the rules of the problem, not gestures towards crushing the symptoms. It is stupid. Education is the answer, not legislation of what would probably be unenforcable laws, and ones that could cause a lot of resentment.

That's what I think too.

[Wraith]

--"French are chauvinistic but not xenophobic. There's a difference,"

Yes, but how many countries have laws (strong suggestions?) regarding the use of foreign-import words?

If not the French, then the French Goverment would be in big trouble.

Wraith
You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you odd

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Wraith
--"French are chauvinistic but not xenophobic. There's a difference,"

Yes, but how many countries have laws (strong suggestions?) regarding the use of foreign-import words?

If not the French, then the French Goverment would be in big trouble.

Wraith
You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you odd

*Holds up hand*

Me! Me!

[Saint Marcus]

Ok, before I go into detail to address the comments made here, let me explain the law as it exists here in Holland.

These laws have existed for decades. Nothing new here.

Freedom of speech exists here, but there's one condition. It isn't allowed to make hatefull remarks about certain specific groups (minorities mostly) in public will not be allowed. You won't get thrown in jail for that though, just a fine.

Some examples of things that happen(ed) here in Dutch politics)

Saying that all foreigners should be put in camps is an offense.

Saying in public that you think Holland is too crowded and you want to severely limit the admitance of foreigners in Holland, is not an offense.

Saying that being gay is as bad as stealing, is an offense. Fine $200.

Saying the Holocaust never happened is an offense.

NOTE: This also only applies to things said in public. As long as you keep it private it is allowed.

NOTE2: This is the Dutch situation



I re-read the article. Makes no sense at all really.

It was not clear yesterday how the law would affect radical Islamic groups that openly promote anti-Semitic and anti-Christian views.

An act of anti-semetism and anti-christianity by Islamic groups is an offense.

Nor was it clear how it would apply to political parties opposed to mass immigration, such as Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Blok, and the Danish People's Party, all of which have become serious political forces.

Being oposed to mass immigration isn't an offense.

The law could potentially cover many stand-up comedians, and even Anne Robinson, who, during an appearance on BBC television this year, described the Welsh as "irritating".

A comedian saying Welsh are irritating isn't an offense.
A comedian saying Hitler was a great man and the holocaust never happened is an offense, unless said in a clearly non-serious way.

The proposals, which will require the unanimous backing of all 15 states, are aimed at ending the patchwork of different laws across the European Union and establishing a common definition that can be used by all judges.

This is of course a good thing.

The commission appears to have adopted the most restrictive code - Germany's - as the basis for the rest of the EU.

Germany only acts strongly against pro-Nazi sentiments (not a surprise). In other situations they aren't any worse or better than Dutch or French laws. Belgian laws are somewhat looser, but still have restrictions.

Nigel Farage MEP, the party's chairman, said: "I'm morbidly xenophobic about this new country called the European Union, so if that is covered by this law then I'm most certainly xenophobic and I could be extradited anywhere.

And someone is taking that comment seriously?


Obvious conclusion: article is extremely anti-EU, filled with obviously false or extremely stupid remarks, and it's all a lot of fuss about nothing. Note that the article also states Germany already has those type of laws, so why are so many people here on OT suddenly so shocked? It's a law that exists for 50 years!

[Roland]

Sounds like something from the telegraph. If that is the source ->

If it is from a serious source: there were some ideas floating around about harmonizing laws in that field, or at least improve extradition procedures. I'm not aware of a commission proposal in that field though. Also a search of eur-lex and the EP monitor yielded nothing.

As to our american friends, thank you for your worries, but you should really worry about Ashcroft and co, not about some possible braineggs being laid by some bureaucrats here.

[faded glory]

Saying that being gay is as bad as stealing, is an offense. Fine $200

You call that free?????

Clueless Morons

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Roland
As to our american friends, thank you for your worries, but you should really worry about Ashcroft and co, not about some possible braineggs being laid by some bureaucrats here.

You don't think that we can do both?

[Roland]

I think I found it. Search words didn't get the pdf-file, but from the index this should be it.

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/...1_0664en01.pdf

Now this is a bit technical, but needed to understand what it means:

I agree that it is too broad and needs a good deal of trimming back. Looks like they put together a laundry list. Namely I see little purpose in expanding holocaust denial laws - whether countries adopt them is mostly an issue of historical background. Or "public insults", that's just silly.

What is nonsense though is *****ing about the lack of specifics or the open terms. It is a proposal for a framework decision that has no direct effect (Art 34 para 2 b) EUT); it needs to be transposed into national law where the level of specification required in penal law has to be met. This also goes for justifications etc.

The judicial review issue is a bit complex under Art 35 TEU, but the ECJ has jurisdiction over the validity of the framework decision, and the ECHR has jurisdiction over national measures implementing it (esp considering recent case law namely the Matthews judgement).

[Roland]

"You don't think that we can do both?"

Oh you can, I've just seen little outcry over his measures....

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Mark L
I believe a lot of Americans were against the KKK march.

It would still be allowed to go foward. I see no legitmate reason why Europe has to be so backwards in that regard.

How many people are held in custody without proper reasons? None/very few.

Quite a few of them actually. The law actually allows the police to hold people without charge based on nothing more than mere suspicion.

So why the fuss now?

I've always thought that Europe was backward and Orwellian in this regard and it saddens me to see the US taking a page from her play book in some respects.

[Roland]

"I've always thought that Europe was backward and Orwellian in this regard and it saddens me to see the US taking a page from her play book in some respects."

It is a cultural difference just as it is a bit strange for us to imagine a right to bear arms or to have an abortion as fundamental rights.

The US approach is to have theoretically no content control on speech. This "radical" approach only has a counterpart maybe in the freedom of science or art, but not in speech in general. Just as you can have reasonable searches and seizures, you can have content limitations on speech ranging from defamation over commercial speech limits for attorneys or doctors to propagating racism.

[Stefu]

Well, all right, all right,it is from Telegraph. Still, while the proposal's not as bad as I first thought, it still is pretty crappy. Let's hope nothing comes out of it.

And MarkL, some people might actually not want Germany, France and related countries to force others to suffer from their WW2 traumas, too.

[Chris 62]

Just as I had forseen, my two favorite European appologists tried to spin doctor their way out of this, one by airely dismissing it as "no big deal" (but we all know it is) and the other by trying to twist it into a USA is culturally different, so you don't understand. (sorry Mein herr,we get it just fine. )
There is a REAL reason why we call ourselves the land of the free, and your EU NEVER will!

Originally posted by Mark L
Ok, before I go into detail to address the comments made here, let me explain the law as it exists here in Holland.

Watch those spinning wheels!

These laws have existed for decades. Nothing new here.

So you say you have had thought police for years?
Amazing.

Freedom of speech exists here, but there's one condition. It isn't allowed to make hatefull remarks about certain specific groups (minorities mostly) in public will not be allowed. You won't get thrown in jail for that though, just a fine.

And you call THAT freedom of speech?
Here you can say what you like, people may hate you for it, but you won't be fined for it.
Some "Freedom" you have there.

Some examples of things that happen(ed) here in Dutch politics)

Lead on!

Saying that all foreigners should be put in camps is an offense.

You would be either laughed at or mocked in the USA for such a statement.
Are you such a weak people you need laws to govern how you think?

Saying in public that you think Holland is too crowded and you want to severely limit the admitance of foreigners in Holland, is not an offense.

Do they issue you a manuel, so you know what is offensive and finable, and what is not?

Saying that being gay is as bad as stealing, is an offense. Fine $200.

Here, we call that an opinion, and a stupid one at that.
So tell me, how is this better than the facsism you all fear so greatly?

Saying the Holocaust never happened is an offense.

Here we call that stupidity, but it's still not an offense.

NOTE: This also only applies to things said in public. As long as you keep it private it is allowed.

So you can be a dirty little racist pig, just so long as no one knows about it?

NOTE2: This is the Dutch situation

Is the rest of Europe this bad off?
Who else over there has this "thought police" state thrust upon them?

I re-read the article. Makes no sense at all really.

Yes, from what you say, you ALREADY have the things they are proposing.

An act of anti-semetism and anti-christianity by Islamic groups is an offense.

It would have to be a physical act for it to be a crime in the USA.

Being oposed to mass immigration isn't an offense.

Well, at least SOMETHING is allowed.

A comedian saying Welsh are irritating isn't an offense.
A comedian saying Hitler was a great man and the holocaust never happened is an offense, unless said in a clearly non-serious way.

Do you have people who enforce these matters?
Inspectors that monitor performances to insure they are up to standards?
Do the people report these "offensive" comedians to the authorities?
Who determines it said "in a clearly non-serious way"?

This is of course a good thing.

Not much else here seems to be.

Germany only acts strongly against pro-Nazi sentiments (not a surprise). In other situations they aren't any worse or better than Dutch or French laws. Belgian laws are somewhat looser, but still have restrictions.

Thought police throughout the region, very sad....

And someone is taking that comment seriously?

To us in the USA, what you accept as nothing is monsterous.
A trampling of basic human freedoms, but hey, it's your country, do as you like.

Obvious conclusion: article is extremely anti-EU, filled with obviously false or extremely stupid remarks, and it's all a lot of fuss about nothing. Note that the article also states Germany already has those type of laws, so why are so many people here on OT suddenly so shocked? It's a law that exists for 50 years!

Well, as I said, in the USA, such laws are an abomination.
We are suprised you love to critisize the USA, when you live in a horrid police state.

And now, from the alps straight to us...

It is a cultural difference just as it is a bit strange for us to imagine a right to bear arms or to have an abortion as fundamental rights.

Yes, but at least we don't try to regulate the thoughts of our citizens.
We can't imagine how you could be backward enough to NOT want said rights, as you say, cultural differences I suppose.

The US approach is to have theoretically no content control on speech. This "radical" approach only has a counterpart maybe in the freedom of science or art, but not in speech in general. Just as you can have reasonable searches and seizures, you can have content limitations on speech ranging from defamation over commercial speech limits for attorneys or doctors to propagating racism.

Sounds like a justifacation to me.
We seem to accept that words won't destroy us, it seems that Europe doesn't accept that, and seeks to regulate it's people's feelings.
Quite sad, really.

[Caligastia]

Well said Chris, the fact that people in europe accept garbage like this does not bode well for the future of europe. This is the kind of thing that motivated people to leave europe for america, and they still havent sorted themselves out.

Stay tune for the new dark ages in europe if this kind of thing continues.

[faded glory]

Amen Chris


Mark L...why is it ok to ban certain political elements? Cause you dont agree with them? Who's to say one day the majority wont agree with you? Alas my friend, the Coin flips.... And you will then be on the recieving end of such totalitarian laws you are now trying to justify.


Sad...

As Chris mentioned, we just laugh at Nazi's, KKK, and Communist's. we dont nee to ban them. We simply create an atmosphere where there views are'nt taken serouisly and there idea's are laughed at.


KKK marches.....NAACP organizes a bunch of people to throw tomatoes at them. Thats how it works

[Saint Marcus]

Difference of culture and history. If the USA was invaded and raped by Nazis you'd feel different too.

Just like now people are arrested in the US for "supposed" but totally unproven ties to Bin Laden. How free is that?

Here we can smoke pot, but not carry guns.
Here prostitution, abortion and euthanasia is legal, but being a neo-nazi is not.

Difference of culture and history. If WW2 had never happened these laws would never exist. And like I said, it isn't thought police. You can think what you want, you can speak privately about anything, but you can't say clearly offensive and morally wrong statements in public. If you do you won't get locked away US/Nazi-style...you just get a fine. A fine, that's it.

Also really funny how Americans here say we now live in a police state when people in the USA are being arrested left and right for no good reasons, and the laws this thread is about have existed since the end of WW2.

And please note that this is not some totalitarian regulation since most people here agree that they are right and just. It's a democracy after all, the people have spoken.

[Dr Strangelove]

What about the recent French law requiring that 50% of all political candidates be women?

Oh, and then there was the initiative in Norway to abolish the stand up urinal in men's bathrooms.

[drake]

prostitution, dope and euthanasia!

Wow, you guys do have it all

Also really funny how Americans here say we now live in a police state when people in the USA are being arrested left and right for no good reasons

Really? Thats news! Only people that got arrested in the "911 crackdown" were people that had ties in some manner to terrorism or had violated immigration laws

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Mark L
Difference of culture and history. If the USA was invaded and raped by Nazis you'd feel different too.

Hardly, we are made of sterner stuff than to sucomb to our fears of ideas.

Just like now people are arrested in the US for "supposed" but totally unproven ties to Bin Laden. How free is that?

Private info on your part?
There are no such cases.

Here we can smoke pot, but not carry guns.

So you can slowly kill yourself, yet be totally helpless if attack.
Big advantage.

Here prostitution, abortion and euthanasia is legal, but being a neo-nazi is not.

Good plan, makes the ills of society leagal, since you obviously had no better plan.

Difference of culture and history. If WW2 had never happened these laws would never exist. And like I said, it isn't thought police. You can think what you want, you can speak privately about anything, but you can't say clearly offensive and morally wrong statements in public. If you do you won't get locked away US/Nazi-style...you just get a fine. A fine, that's it.

Ha ha ha ha, child, nobody gets a fine or locked away for what they think, nor must we hide behind closed doors to think!

Also really funny how Americans here say we now live in a police state when people in the USA are being arrested left and right for no good reasons, and the laws this thread is about have existed since the end of WW2.

Show ONE case of that.
You can't because it more of your "facts".

And please note that this is not some totalitarian regulation since most people here agree that they are right and just. It's a democracy after all, the people have spoken.

How can you tell?
If they don't like what you say, it's against the law!