European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1364

On April 19 2022 23:06 plasmidghost wrote:

I've heard similar claims in numerous European countries, but are there any actual sources to back this up? All my interactions with immigrants in places like Amsterdam, Brussels, and Paris, especially Muslim immigrants, as an out trans woman have always been very respectful and nice

On April 19 2022 21:42 Godwrath wrote:
So what is going to be Moohdoo, ban hateful speech or not. The comparison between someone burning animes to the burning of a book which some people deem sacred is so idiotic that you should be ashamed.

That doesn't justify the looting, but the outrage itself, if It isn't properly punished, is more than comprensible.

On April 20 2022 00:00 plated.rawr wrote:

The signal needs to be "if you start shit, youre responsible for the consequences."

If a woman calls her husband a worthless shit head who doesn't make enough money and can't support their family, should she not complain if he hits her? When are you saying violence is an appropriate reaction to speech?

On April 20 2022 00:04 Mohdoo wrote:


The point is that a book being considered too sacred to burn is extremely culturally regressive and does not belong in modern society. We can't punish other people for burning books, regardless of how much someone particularly likes the stories contained within it. We do not have any reason to treat a stack of Dragonball manga any differently than a stack of Qurans. Treating them equivalently is a mark of a modern society and Sweden should be proud that they have kept up that level of dignity for so long. They should prioritize keeping it.



If a woman calls her husband a worthless shit head who doesn't make enough money and can't support their family, should she not complain if he hits her? When are you saying violence is an appropriate reaction to speech?

On April 19 2022 22:28 Laurens wrote:


There is no law against burning the quran, so how do you want it punished? Punished by who?
The comparison works perfectly fine. They can think the book is sacred and at the same time act reasonably when some far-right nutcase burns a copy. No need to start a riot over it and throw molotov coctails in public transport.

On April 20 2022 00:58 Mohdoo wrote:
I think both of you are letting your disdain for far right dickheads distort your view of what is being fought and what is being protected. People can defend the right thing for the wrong reasons. If this far right dick head was just doing it to financially profit, it would not make him any less on the more ethical side of the debate whether any book can ever be considered sacred enough to justify violence.

It feels like both of you are ignoring the fact that this situation is becoming a referendum on whether sacrilege should be punishable or not.

I am Peruvian and there is nothing that someone could do to disrespect Peruvian culture that would make me burn cars. That is a reflection of the fact that my culture is elevated and more ethical when compared to the people burning cars. When someone is deciding "who should I let immigrate into my country?", the question of whether they have a car-burning trigger is apparently something worth considering.

Fundamentally, it feels like neither of you are paying proper respect for the fact that car burning as a response to sacrilege is something that really should be 0% tolerated and no one who thinks that's appropriate should be allowed into the country. This guy can be right for the wrong reasons and still be right.

I don't think Quran burning can be considered a form of violence. I reject the idea that Quran burning can be considered throwing the first punch in any ethical context. A core component of the values Sweden defends is that Quran burning is not throwing the first punch.

On April 20 2022 01:42 Simberto wrote:


Agreed. People doing a thing just to rile someone up are dickheads, no question there.

But people who start burning cars because someone did a thing that upsets their cultural sensibilities, but which doesn't really have any real-world effect onto them, are even more problematic.

I am German, and i really like our constitution. I think it protects some very important values. If someone started buying books of the Grundgesetz and burn them, I'd think that they are an idiot and a dickhead. I would not start rioting.

A very important part of civilized life is accepting that people may do stuff that you think is dickish, and you just have to accept that as long it doesn't actively impacts you. You don't get to dictate how other people deal with their stuff. You have a right to demand that your copies of a book don't get burned. You don't have a right to demand that no copies of a book get burned. Just because you consider something holy does not mean you get to demand that everyone else thinks the same.

It is also tactically stupid. The best way to dig the water from under the far-right assholes who try to further their agenda by showing your violence is to prove them wrong. Let them have their stupid book-burning and either ignore it or have a peaceful counter-protest. Show that you are more civilized then them. That way, they look like idiots. If you react violent, it starts to look as if they have a point to a lot of people.

In Germany, religious defamation is covered by Article 166 of the Strafgesetzbuch, the German criminal law. If a deed is capable of disturbing the public peace, defamation is actionable. The article reads as follows:[51]

§ 166 Defamation of religious denominations, religious societies and World view associations
(1) Whoever publicly or by dissemination of writings (§ 11 par. 3) defames, in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace, the substance of the religious or world view conviction of others, shall be fined or imprisoned for up to three years.
(2) Whoever publicly or by dissemination of writings (§ 11 par. 3) defames, in a manner suitable to disturb the public peace, a church established in Germany or other religious society or world view association, or their institutions or customs, shall be punished likewise.

On April 20 2022 01:49 mahrgell wrote:


You like the Grundgesetz, but how about the Strafgesetzbuch?

In Germany these kinds of Quran burnings are illegal and would lead to prison sentences...


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law

The intent to disturb public peace is clearly given here, so there wouldn't be a long discussion here...

On April 19 2022 23:06 plasmidghost wrote:

I've heard similar claims in numerous European countries, but are there any actual sources to back this up? All my interactions with immigrants in places like Amsterdam, Brussels, and Paris, especially Muslim immigrants, as an out trans woman have always been very respectful and nice

On April 20 2022 00:00 plated.rawr wrote:
Same shit's been happening in Norway, altough with less violent counterreactions than in Sweden. The recipe is the same - racist far-right shitheads exploit our culture for and respect of free speech and desire for open discourse by hosting "appeals" or political markings, aimed precisely at agitating the muslim population. Since the antidemonstrants frequently end up getting pissed by the targeted hate from the appealants, the demonstration hosts get police protection - which gets caught in the crossfire.

Result is far-right talking points - "look at violent muslims" and "they hate free speech" and "poor injured cops" - all which people who are not really paying attetion to the situation, swallow eagerly. After all, there was a demonstration, sure, ugly things were said sure, but that doesnt excuse violence - and especially not against public servants. Or so goes the general logic.

Its all stupid. The far-right agitators are deliberately using the legal and cultural framework to target and harass a minority with little governal and political representation. They have no way of stopping the harassment - the only recourse is dealing with the shit yourself. Or so goes the general reaction.

Id want western legalese to admit its legal, moral and cultural institutions to be flawed, and such behaviour against a "defenseless" minority to be unacceptable. Otherwise, the provocations will keep using the western legal institutions to shield their hate.

Jail anyone involved with violence. Then combine and apply the combined sentencing from the violence on the provocateurs.

The signal needs to be "if you start shit, youre responsible for the consequences."

On April 20 2022 04:17 Starlightsun wrote:


That seems like a fair analysis of this situation, and of the broader problems with the far right and their bigotry and hatred. But I think it also bears analysis whether the basic values of that religious minority, like those of the far right, are also problematic. Valuing the words and laws of a long dead prophet over all things, including other people's lives and property, is something that imo should be discouraged and unwelcome in modern society. It's hard for me to see people who hold those beliefs as being merely passive and reactive, even if they are a minority and are being targeted by unsavory actors. I feel the same about fundamentalist Christians over here though they're less of a minority.

On April 20 2022 01:34 plated.rawr wrote:
The point is that someone acting from a position of power exploiting the institutions of power to harass a minority that cannot defend itself against said harassment. This is a flaw of the institutions being used, and must be remedied.

This is not about free speech, unquestionable religion or unbreakable taboos. The quran is just an easy-to-use tool to cause agitation. Anything else would be used if it was more effective in provoking the target of hatred. I personally believe that nothing is sacred or above being critiqued, questioned or made fun of. That said, I also believe in personal responsibility for any words and actions you utter, with the consequence of responsibility scaling with relative power to those your words and actions affect.

On April 20 2022 07:33 plated.rawr wrote:

Absolutely. Just because people sharing origin, culture or religion are a minority, it does not give them a free pass in forcing their beliefs on others. That's a part of the power dynamic though - what makes a minority powerless to prevent oppression from the majority (or someone exploiting the framework of the majority), also makes them powerless in forcing their views to be followed by the majority. Since they cannot force anyone to follow their views (without breaking the laws of the lands - this is about following and exploiting the letters of the law, after all), their views are of less importance on a damage-to-society or fucking-with-basic-human-decency-level. Their views absolutely needs to be confronted and exposed, however that does not in any way legitimize exploitation of the tools of the majority for harassment, agitation and oppression of the minority.

There's always a discussion of what fits in legitimate ideological discourse of course, but how the far-right dickheads exploit vulnerabilities of western laws and norms to harass, agitate and spread hate is in no way a part of this.

Bottom line though, is that those with the power in the situation also sit with responsibility to wield the power responsibly - both by protecting those being oppressed, and by preventing those wanting to oppress others - even if the same group would fit on both sides in different situations. It's not about taking sides, its about the wielders of the laws of the land getting the stupid dicks trying to mess shit up for others to sit down and shut up.

Of course, there's governments that do poorly at this, either by incident, negligence or by design, but in the nordic European liberal tradition at least, there's a goal in equality of opportunity and humanity for all.

On April 20 2022 12:25 Mohdoo wrote:


What you are effectively saying is that Sweden should adopt sacrilege laws as a give and take for Muslims being treated poorly. That is not a good solution. If Muslims are treated poorly, Sweden should find ways to treat Muslims better. Saying "Ok so since we treat you bad, you get to burn cars every so often is our concession" is just creating more problems and more resentment.

These riots and car burnings will not make things better. The lives of Muslims all across Europe are made worse by the people lighting cars on fire. They are not providing some kind of push back that will limit far right rhetoric.

Is it that you think the far right will say "yikes, didn't realize they'd burn cars. I ought to stop being mean. My bad!"??? I can't imagine you really think that. This really just feels like you are really mad at far right folks and you are saying "enemy of my enemy is my friend" rather than examining what this situation is really leading to. If I was a far right shit head, and I wanted to get Sweden to hate Muslim immigrants, I would be cheering in happiness over these riots. This provides an amazing amount of ammunition to use against immigrants.

Let me ask you directly: Do you think these riots have a net positive or net negative impact on the lives of Muslims living in Sweden?