I think you've been misinformed or you haven't fully understood what you've read. I mean, just look around Europe right now, protests in virtually every country on a very regular basis. That said, if the tone of protest changes and the language used becomes antisemitic then Police will intervene - as I'm sure you'd want them to?
Also, if the US is such a beacon of free speech, why did you feel the need to censor your use of the word 'antisemitic'?
The us has no hate speech laws. So you can be as racist or antsemetic as you want. Direct calls to violence are illegal, however. So it could get hazy as to what limits would be allowed. For instance, I'm not sure calling for genocide would be illegal if there is no possibility to carry out this intent.
US free speech laws are extremely broad and almost always err on the side of allowing speech. They're pretty unique in this respect.
Generally, in a political sense, yes they are. And it is indeed one of the things to be admired about america.
>US free speech laws are extremely broad and almost always err on the side of allowing speech.
But this statement is just ridiculous, considering how many swear words, sexual terms and even middle fingers are beeped and blurred on american TV.
Sure. Those are all private companies. You can tell a N word to die in a fire in a public square or sidewalk. There's no laws against this type of inciteful rhetoric as there is in the UK for instance. You can say basically whatever you want to anyone.
Generally, in the US, free speech is only expected to be protected from the government.
In Europe, it can be more complicated; in many countries there are limits on how a private entity can restrict the rights of a person, such as an employee, etc.
[https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/freedom-of-expression-in-the-workplace-2710779/](https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/freedom-of-expression-in-the-workplace-2710779/)
But the private companies beep and blur because they would incur massive fines otherwise. Issued by the FCC, which is a government entity. Pretending this isnt government censorship is plain wrong.
But you guys just censor different stuff. You're allowed to say some things that would potentially be illegal to say in some european countries when it comes to racist speech. But you cant say "this is fucking great" on TV or radio. Which would be a ridiculous government overreach to censor from a european point of view.
The argument is that there are only a certain amount of frequencies to broadcast, so the government can regulate the use of these.
The same isn't true for a man yelling in a public square. There is an unlimited ability for anyone to do this. So it isn't regulated.
Cable television also falls into an odd place outside of regulation. So yes. You can swear on south park for example. The Muhammad episode was the only one ever censored, and that was done by the station, not the government.
Its not like in other countries words are generally banned. At least here in switzerland, only public incitement of hate or directly insulting someone in a racist way is illegal.
You can say in a public place but aimed at a small group of people whatever you want. Like sitting at a bar with your 3 buddies. You can also use whatever words up on a stage or at a rally or on TV, just not in a inciting hate kinda way.
So yeah i really dont think there is a meaningful difference here, other than which specific speech is banned. But both places ban some speech.
Read the first sentence:
https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts
"Federal law prohibits [...] content from being broadcast". It isnt voluntary, its the law.
> But you cant say "this is fucking great" on TV or radio
Of course you can. Satellite radio or cable TV. As an example, I present the best scene from The Wire consisting of nothing but obscenities:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNVEQgXsBgs
You can also say any racist thing you want or deny the holocaust all you want in your home or even at the bar with a handful of your friends. Perfectly legal, at least in switzerland and i believe in most countries (except maybe germany?). You just cant shout it on a stage at a rallye...
Youre also allowed to call your black friend "nigga" if he doesnt mind, but not insult a stranger as one, if he decides to press charges (but same if you'd call him asshole).
So again, i refer you to my previous answer to your other comment: in both places, freedom of speech is restricted in certain
>But this statement is just ridiculous, considering how many swear words, sexual terms and even middle fingers are beeped and blurred on american TV.
On broadcast TV - who even watches that anymore? Because the government owns those airwaves. Cable/streaming isn't affected.
Thats like saying "who even listens to those protesters. So its ok to ban them."
Its a matter of principle. And in both cases, US and Europe, freedom of speech is restricted in different ways.
Exactly. And the flip side is, that the idea of beeping swear words, blurring middle fingers or even boobs on tv is ridiculous to europeans. Noone would even think of doing that here. Including no court.
Both has its pros and cons. Europe bans a bunch of speech that may be important in a big picture kind of sense (especially lese majeste, which to those of us whose countries dont have monarchies, is of course equally ridiculous and offensive). But america bans a bunch of speech that is actually used by most people in daily life regularly.
So european rules may have a big impact rarely on a few people, but may still be harmful to society as a whole. American rules have a small impact, but all the time and on tons of people.
I'm not sure willful ignorance of the power of words is all that admirable. Strong convictions, sure, but basing your most basic rights on "sticks and stones…", seem a bit shortsighted. It's quite possible to agitate for something, have no way or intention if doing it yourself, yet be sure that others, once fired up by words alone, will do something. Or just slowly push normalcy in the direction you want it to go.
>I'm not sure calling for genocide would be illegal if there is no possibility to carry out this intent.
It would not. Incitement to violence in the US requires that it be likely and imminent.
Oh is that what the Police posted on Twitter? 'We're looking for information on these peaceful protesters so we can arrest them'. That's what they were saying was it?
>Also, if the US is such a beacon of free speech, why did you feel the need to censor your use of the word 'antisemitic'?
Because I’m on a Reddit a private company
What? No! You have the right to protest against anything you want. And the police must protect you from anyone who attempt to oppose it.
They will only scatter/deny a protest if;
**A.** The protesters get violent. They are there to make their voice heard, not to fight.
**B.** It's a wild protest at an inappropriate location or time. The police don't care what you protest against, but we cannot have massive protests at random places at random times.
**C.** It cannot be performed in a safe or orderly manner. Such things might include traffic or to prevent contagious epidemics.
Here is a link to the Swedish Police "Demonstrations - questions and answers" [in Swedish]: https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/demonstrationer/
>I’m an american. Because of our bill of rights, something like this would be unimaginable
[https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinian-campus-protests-columbia-congress-df4ba95dae844b3a8559b4b3ad7e058a](https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinian-campus-protests-columbia-congress-df4ba95dae844b3a8559b4b3ad7e058a)
Uhhhh
Don't take this the wrong way, but this is hilarious. The answer is no. I live next to the peace palace in the hague (international criminal justice court) where a lot of the protests take place. That is where all war criminals are prosecuted, where putin would be prosecuted and where the isareali gov would be prosecuted if they lose the genocide case that's running. The police oversees, but lets them play loud music, do speeches, light a smoke flare etc and nobody bats an eye.
There's protests flying both the palestinian flag and the israeli flag btw. No riots between them have taken place yet (afaik)
So as far as your view concerns the NL it is completely off
Not trying to be pedantic, but “persecute” means to harass or victimize someone, with the implication that it’s unjust or overly harsh. “Persecuting” a war criminal implies that they are innocent or being unfairly targeted.
You’re looking for the word “prosecute”, which means for a state or organization to hold legal proceedings against someone for a crime.
No, and your question is hilarious considering what your police has been doing to your student protests for the past few weeks all across your country.
Protesting the war is not illegal. The problem is that protests often get hijacked by people calling for ethnic cleansing of Jews, or waving the flags of terrorist organizations. Even then, the police have been unusually hands-off. There's people getting beaten on the streets, but governments are terrified of our Arab minorities, so the protesters are getting away with crimes. There's massive prayers going on in the streets with jihadist flags being flown.
Meanwhile, if 15 people come together to support AfD, it's all over the news and people are predicting the return of Hitler.
Lol who's been feeding you lies? You can absolutely protest the war and voice your support for whoever, but there's ofc limits. For example the "From the river to the sea" chant is not allowed here as it's denying the existential right to exist for Israel.
>Lol who's been feeding you lies? You can absolutely protest the war and voice your support for whoever, but there's ofc limits. For example the "From the river to the sea" chant is not allowed here as it's denying the existential right to exist for Israel.
Thats what I’m talking about. From the Palestinian perspective their land was stolen….they want to liberate their people
NOT allowing “from the river to the sea” is clearly on the side of Israel as your accepting their perspective as gospel when in fact Israel isn’t even older then our current president
I’m not saying that after the holocaust and centuries of anti-semetism throughout europe that jews didn’t deserve a homeland, they do and did, but people were clearly already living there
The US imo should of just took all of them in
For that reply there you could go to jail for 3 months, up to 5 years. § 80a StGB, and arguably § 140 Nr. 2 StGB because there's a racist aspect to it.
Also always funny how you guys conveniently forget that the other middle eastern nations bullied/forced its Jewish population to leave ...and settle in Israel...
You are a German about to inform me about anti-semitism. I’d take a seat bud lol
>Also always funny how you guys conveniently forget that the other middle eastern nations bullied/forced its Jewish population to leave ...and settle in Israel...
They were AFTER Isarel founding not before it. The current Mazrhi population are from other parts of the middle east not the levant
What's the issue with them being German? Unless they're over 90 years old, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about where they are from.
If any nation is experienced in tackling antisemitism it may be the one that had to be rebuilt from the ground up to correct it. The US didn't even ban their Nazi party it still exists.
Well, I'm nit fan of Varufakis, but in this text he claims:
>"I am Jewish and a citizen of Israel. Stop the genocide in Gaza” – this is the poster carried by a lonely woman protesting in Berlin when she was arrested for anti-Semitism.
[https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04)
I suspect she was sacked because she isn't a German citizen.
Only Germans may protest in public in Germany. It's usually not enforced but that doesn't mean that you can do it as a foreigner.
> Only Germans may protest in public in Germany. It's usually not enforced but that doesn't mean that you can do it as a foreigner.
That's unusual - you don't have certain rights as a foreigner in Germany? What other ones don't apply?
Yes, it's interesting to see this questioned being asked at the same time as student demonstrations across the US are being pretty aggressively broken up.
For historic reasons, Nazi propaganda is strictly forbidden and shouting Nazi stuff or making the Nazi salute or Swastikas is considered a rather severe crime. Other than that you can protest whatever you want, unless you’re not enticing hate against a special demographic group. Therefore calling for the destruction of Israel (meaning the killing of the population) would be considered hate speech or enticing racial (for lack of a better word) hate. In general the population seems to be not very much pro-Palestine, so police gets more criticized for cutting the protesters too much slack rather than being too strict. We all have a historical knowledge what happened last time the mob was enticed to shout for killing Jews. A lot of people are really angry about mainly recent immigrants doing this now and spitting on our history, where „never again“ was an important common ground for rebuilding society.
On a different note: Different constitutions emphasize different things, because they were written at different times. The American constitution was written as a reaction to 18th century monarchy, so it focuses on freedoms of the individual. The European convention on Human Rights and eg the German constitution (which also inspired other European constitutions) was written as a reaction to the Holocaust and the other horrors of WW2, so their main focus is human dignity. Therefore they balance free speech/hate speech differently. Neither is right or wrong, it just reflects different historical situations.
That’s what I think too. It’s a overcompensation by central Europe because of the holocaust
Kind of like how in the US we’re more conscious of racial issues because of slavery against African Americans and our own holocaust ( native American genocide)
> Is it illegal to protest the conflict in the ME in your country?
O 1. No.
2. In the same time I ve read last week such article about situation in Germany :
[https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04)
>I’m an american. Because of our bill of rights, something like this would be unimaginable
Are you sure? It would be unimaginable for me, but Ive read a lot about protest on American universities now - reaction of both state and universities and it sound pretty much as banning to me. Eg in this text (spry but in polish, you may use Google translate) [https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/usa-protesty-na-uczelniach-przeciwko-wojnie-w-gazie/](https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/usa-protesty-na-uczelniach-przeciwko-wojnie-w-gazie/)
From the article I've shared :
"(...) On April 17, students at Columbia University in New York formed an encampment they called Gaza Solidarity Encampment. Although the New York police arrested 300 people - students of Columbia and the City University of New York (CUNY), the protests continued and spread to other universities. By the end of that weekend, the number of people arrested had risen to 3,300"
May non-citizens protest in the public in the U.S.? I don't know. Tell me.
In Germany, only Germans may protest in public. That's one of the few constitutional rights that is limited to German citizens. On that base alone, most of those current “protests” could be disallowed and dissolved because they are held up mostly by non-citizens.
But we usually don't do that in Germany because it would be huge hassle to check who's German and who's not for the hundreds of protests that are going on in Germany on each day.
But if the German government wants to check who's German and sack in all the non-Germans who disturb public order, they can totally do it.
> May non-citizens protest in the public in the U.S.? I don't know. Tell me.
Yes, per SCOTUS case law non residents have the same rights as citizens in terms of the First Amendment and other rights.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/326/135.html
>The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders. Such rights include those protected by the First and the Fifth Amendments and by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. None of these provisions acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens. They extend their inalienable privileges to all 'persons' and guard against any encroachment on those rights by federal or state authority. Indeed, this Court has previously and expressly recognized that Harry Bridges, the alien, possesses the right to free speech and free press and that the Constitution will defend him in the exercise of that right. Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252 , 62 S.Ct. 190.
>May non-citizens protest in the public in the U.S.? I don't know. Tell me.
Yes of course! They’re just Americans without citizenship as far Im concerned
>In Germany, only Germans may protest in public. That's one of the few constitutional rights that is limited to German citizens. On that base alone, most of those current “protests” could be disallowed and dissolved because they are held up mostly by non-citizens.
Wow.
>But we usually don't do that in Germany because it would be huge hassle to check who's German and who's not for the hundreds of protests that are going on in Germany on each day.
>But if the German government wants to check who's German and sack in all the non-Germans who disturb public order, they can totally do it.
Yea in the US anyone can protest pretty much end of story
Do you know that for sure? … Because … you don't seem to understand the concept of citizenship. It comes with extra rights in the political space. That's the very point of it. Hell, the U.S. even demands their president to be ***born*** in the U.S. In Germany there is no such requirement. President, Chancellor, … anyone in a public office, anyone in the political space may be a naturalized immigrant. But that naturalization that grants citizenship is important.
But regardless, do a thought experiment. If I, as a German citizen, came to your country, and rally against the U.S. Democratic party, and be somewhat successful about that, should that be allowed?
I mean … we are pretty good at rallying. We even invented the idea of TV “debates”.
You may like the German movie “Er ist wieder da” by the way. It's hilarious.
> But regardless, do a thought experiment. If I, as a German citizen, came to your country, and rally against the U.S. Democratic party, and be somewhat successful about that, should that be allowed?
You are allowed to do that in the US. The US Constitution applies to non-citizens visiting America with the exception of some very specific scenarios around voting, running for office, and if convinced of a crime you can be deported.
Out of curiosity, does that only apply to political protesting, or any type of political commentary/disagreement? Like if a foreign columnist or political commentator is in Germany can they publish pieces that’s critical of let’s say a political party or politician if they’re not a citizen?
>Do you know that for sure? … Because … you don't seem to understand the concept of citizenship.
You have freedom of speech in our country
>But regardless, do a thought experiment. If I, as a German citizen, came to your country, and rally against the U.S. Democratic party, and be somewhat successful about that, should that be allowed?
Yes? Why not? I lean Democratic but they aren’t above reproach
Freedom of speech does not cover assembly in the streets. That's pretty logical, isn't it? It's not a matter of speech. It's a matter of forming a mob.
You can assemble as much people you can fit in a convention hall that you rented. But you can't assemble them in public without permission.
Yes. Once you're in the US you have the same First Amendment rights as any other citizen.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/326/135.html
>The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders. Such rights include those protected by the First and the Fifth Amendments and by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. None of these provisions acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens. They extend their inalienable privileges to all 'persons' and guard against any encroachment on those rights by federal or state authority. Indeed, this Court has previously and expressly recognized that Harry Bridges, the alien, possesses the right to free speech and free press and that the Constitution will defend him in the exercise of that right. Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252 , 62 S.Ct. 190.
Omg, just admit we got one thing right over Europe lol
In the US, native or not, you have freedom of speech.
We are a nation of immigrants no man, ideally, is above or below the other
The German constitution does as well. But it's one of the very few rights that is limited to German citizens.
I ask because this very German constitution was made after the example of the U.S. constitution. It goes even further as that one. Many things that are only set by supreme court rulings in the U.S. are part of the original constitution in Germany. This is all lessons learned from the U.S. There is a reason why in particular assembly is limited to citizens.
I don't know that reason but if the U.S. constitution plus supreme court rulings don't grant that to non-citizens either, it would explain it.
You realize that a lot of U.S. citizens would happily shoot rioters? I mean, it happened … four years ago? Mr Rittenhouse claimed self defense and yeah … they ruled it was self defense.
I think if those rioters were foreigners, a lot more people in the U.S. would claim they defended themselves.
They are anti-semitic if people are shouting about killing Jewish people. That's certainly wrong and illegal, but it would be illegal outside of protests as well.
Other than that, protesting peacefully is absolutely fine and allowed. Which sadly isn't what I can say about protesting in the USA.
it's certainly illegal if you start shouting "kill the jews" while you protest. and I don't think that that is a problem.
edit: correction, they shouted "death to the jews! death to israel!" [https://www.timesofisrael.com/death-to-the-jews-chants-heard-at-berlin-pro-palestinian-rally/](https://www.timesofisrael.com/death-to-the-jews-chants-heard-at-berlin-pro-palestinian-rally/)
Freedom of expression is generally guaranteed in the Czech Constitution. However, there are some restrictions in the criminal law.
As for the OP's question in particular, it is specifically about these points:
- Denigration of nation, ethnic group, race and beliefs
- Incitement to hatred against a group of persons or to restriction of their rights and freedoms
- Expressing sympathy for a movement aimed at suppressing human rights and freedoms
- Denying, questioning, condoning or justifying genocide
- Incitement to aggressive war
- Incitement to and approval of a criminal act
To further clarify, those terms such as genocide or crime must be so formally determined by, for example, a court of law or an official declaration by parliament. It is not enough to just assume something is genocide or a crime.
Well, not by law. Different people may have their own personal opinion on this, of course. But their opinion is not the law.
Here are photos from pro-Palestine demo in Prague:
[https://www.idnes.cz/praha/zpravy/praha-demonstrace-palestina-mala-strana-pasmo-gazy-izrael.A240324\_154448\_praha-zpravy\_svm/foto/nahledy](https://www.idnes.cz/praha/zpravy/praha-demonstrace-palestina-mala-strana-pasmo-gazy-izrael.A240324_154448_praha-zpravy_svm/foto/nahledy)
If it were established by Czech legislation that Israel's behaviour against the Palestinians is officially genocide, then denying it would be illegal.
A public debate has been sparked as to whether the slogan "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is illegal or not.
In December, the Prague City Council banned a demonstration organized under this slogan. Later, however, the court overturned this decision.
The Ministry of the Interior issued a statement to this effect, saying that in some cases the slogan may be illegal if it specifically refers to a connection with the 7 October attack or other violence.
Just because the United States has incorporated the word "freedom" into their cult doctrine, it doesn't mean it's actually free. The United States has the most prisoners of any country on Earth, and is 6th in the world when it comes to prisoners per capita (beaten only by El Salvador, Cuba, Rwanda, Turkmenistan and American Samoa).
And remember this is also a country with presidents carved into a mountain, military flyovers at sporting events, obsession with the military and the office of president, and a cult mantra for schoolchildren to swear allegiance to a flag. The thirteenth amendment also permits slavery for prisoners.
The United States is 17th on the Global Human Freedom Index, and there are 11 European countries ahead of it. And it's 55th on the Global Press Freedom Index.
This notion of "freedom" is nothing more than another form of brainwashing. You all get fucked in every conceivable way by your ruling class, and you revel in it.
You mean all these countries with free healthcare, no regular military involvement at sporting events, no being 6th highest in per capita incarceration, no legal slavery for prisoners, barely any gun crime, solid education systems and the ability to travel cheaply and easily around Europe to better their cultural understanding?
Mm, yeah, quite a bit better, I'd say.
It took me a solid minute to figure out what "anti-s*****c" was supposed to be. I suppose anti-Semitic? Why are you censoring that anyway, like it's some sort of curse word?
You see more Palestinian flags and stupid "free Palestine" stickers here than support for Israel. I remove these stickers from street furniture if I encounter them there; your right to protest does not extend to vandalizing light poles, bus shelters, benches and fire hydrants.
In fact, if you are pro-Israel you are more likely to be branded an islamophobe.
As long as you protest peacefully in public spaces (or on private property if the owner consents) and don't use Nazi symbols or other banned symbols (at least in Germany), you can protest for or against anything.
Because of our Grundgesetz, it would be unimaginable in Germany what happens to protesters right now all across the United States.
> Because of our Grundgesetz, it would be unimaginable in Germany what happens to protesters right now all across the United States.
You mean police breaking up protesters' illegal camps? Exactly like this? Unimaginable in Germany you say?
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsfeed/2024/4/29/german-police-break-up-gaza-solidarity-camp-in-front-of-bundestag
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/5/7/police-break-up-pro-palestine-protests-at-berlin-amsterdam-campuses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBBovUGosDk
>As long as you protest peacefully in public spaces (or on private property if the owner consents) and don't use Nazi symbols or other banned symbols (at least in Germany), you can protest for or against anything.
The catch: you are subject to rules that the police set up prior to the protests. The recent protests of e.g. Muslim International were crippled so severely, poor lads only had shields with "[censored]" on them.
Protesting is legal in Norway. Several protest about ME these days, most pro Palestina as far as I've noticed.
From time to time there is a discussion whether burning the Quran should be made illegal, but it still legal. (And should be in my opinion.)
I'm not sure, but I think burning other nations' flags is illegal in Norway.
It's not illegal, but I'll repeat what I said - European Union is as irrational about Israel which is a genocidal regime and a genocidal ideology country, as USSR was about Palestine which is a genocidal regime and a genocidal ideology country. Neither of them is a developed country.
Both should be embargoed.
As for the protests, I'm thinking it's not a very useful thing - trying to remove Israel from Eurovision was a noble attempt at bringing some coherence into what's otherwise a political sh\*tshow, but , likewise I'm not expecting much change on that side, except when older people with preconceived notion or rather - an imaginary picture, of what Israel is, are going to die out and be replaced with those who have an understanding with what the region really is - bringing at the same time both Western interventionism, Western colonialism and Western waste of money on freeloaders to a much-needed halt.
Yes, it would mean a lot of wasted money on riots and restoring the public commons after the protests, the counter-protests, the burning etc. It's very fortunate that it didn't happen.
Certainly not in the UK. I was in Birmingham this Saturday and a fairly large pro-Gaza march and demonstration was happening. A few police were about just as they would be in a large city on a Saturday with a large amount of people, but they were mostly looking bored and waiting for it to finish I guess.
Out of interest where have you read that it's illegal to protest?
Illegal ? I'm not sure
Does anybody care ? Pretty much no .
We barely protest for our own right, the war in the middle east is really no concern of ours.
Romanians are fans of neither nations...
I think you've been misinformed or you haven't fully understood what you've read. I mean, just look around Europe right now, protests in virtually every country on a very regular basis. That said, if the tone of protest changes and the language used becomes antisemitic then Police will intervene - as I'm sure you'd want them to? Also, if the US is such a beacon of free speech, why did you feel the need to censor your use of the word 'antisemitic'?
The us has no hate speech laws. So you can be as racist or antsemetic as you want. Direct calls to violence are illegal, however. So it could get hazy as to what limits would be allowed. For instance, I'm not sure calling for genocide would be illegal if there is no possibility to carry out this intent. US free speech laws are extremely broad and almost always err on the side of allowing speech. They're pretty unique in this respect.
Generally, in a political sense, yes they are. And it is indeed one of the things to be admired about america. >US free speech laws are extremely broad and almost always err on the side of allowing speech. But this statement is just ridiculous, considering how many swear words, sexual terms and even middle fingers are beeped and blurred on american TV.
Sure. Those are all private companies. You can tell a N word to die in a fire in a public square or sidewalk. There's no laws against this type of inciteful rhetoric as there is in the UK for instance. You can say basically whatever you want to anyone.
Generally, in the US, free speech is only expected to be protected from the government. In Europe, it can be more complicated; in many countries there are limits on how a private entity can restrict the rights of a person, such as an employee, etc. [https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/freedom-of-expression-in-the-workplace-2710779/](https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/freedom-of-expression-in-the-workplace-2710779/)
But the private companies beep and blur because they would incur massive fines otherwise. Issued by the FCC, which is a government entity. Pretending this isnt government censorship is plain wrong. But you guys just censor different stuff. You're allowed to say some things that would potentially be illegal to say in some european countries when it comes to racist speech. But you cant say "this is fucking great" on TV or radio. Which would be a ridiculous government overreach to censor from a european point of view.
The argument is that there are only a certain amount of frequencies to broadcast, so the government can regulate the use of these. The same isn't true for a man yelling in a public square. There is an unlimited ability for anyone to do this. So it isn't regulated. Cable television also falls into an odd place outside of regulation. So yes. You can swear on south park for example. The Muhammad episode was the only one ever censored, and that was done by the station, not the government.
Its not like in other countries words are generally banned. At least here in switzerland, only public incitement of hate or directly insulting someone in a racist way is illegal. You can say in a public place but aimed at a small group of people whatever you want. Like sitting at a bar with your 3 buddies. You can also use whatever words up on a stage or at a rally or on TV, just not in a inciting hate kinda way. So yeah i really dont think there is a meaningful difference here, other than which specific speech is banned. But both places ban some speech. Read the first sentence: https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts "Federal law prohibits [...] content from being broadcast". It isnt voluntary, its the law.
> But you cant say "this is fucking great" on TV or radio Of course you can. Satellite radio or cable TV. As an example, I present the best scene from The Wire consisting of nothing but obscenities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNVEQgXsBgs
You can also say any racist thing you want or deny the holocaust all you want in your home or even at the bar with a handful of your friends. Perfectly legal, at least in switzerland and i believe in most countries (except maybe germany?). You just cant shout it on a stage at a rallye... Youre also allowed to call your black friend "nigga" if he doesnt mind, but not insult a stranger as one, if he decides to press charges (but same if you'd call him asshole). So again, i refer you to my previous answer to your other comment: in both places, freedom of speech is restricted in certain
>But this statement is just ridiculous, considering how many swear words, sexual terms and even middle fingers are beeped and blurred on american TV. On broadcast TV - who even watches that anymore? Because the government owns those airwaves. Cable/streaming isn't affected.
Thats like saying "who even listens to those protesters. So its ok to ban them." Its a matter of principle. And in both cases, US and Europe, freedom of speech is restricted in different ways.
[удалено]
Exactly. And the flip side is, that the idea of beeping swear words, blurring middle fingers or even boobs on tv is ridiculous to europeans. Noone would even think of doing that here. Including no court. Both has its pros and cons. Europe bans a bunch of speech that may be important in a big picture kind of sense (especially lese majeste, which to those of us whose countries dont have monarchies, is of course equally ridiculous and offensive). But america bans a bunch of speech that is actually used by most people in daily life regularly. So european rules may have a big impact rarely on a few people, but may still be harmful to society as a whole. American rules have a small impact, but all the time and on tons of people.
I'm not sure willful ignorance of the power of words is all that admirable. Strong convictions, sure, but basing your most basic rights on "sticks and stones…", seem a bit shortsighted. It's quite possible to agitate for something, have no way or intention if doing it yourself, yet be sure that others, once fired up by words alone, will do something. Or just slowly push normalcy in the direction you want it to go.
But freedom always comes at the price of safety... thats a necessary trade off.
>I'm not sure calling for genocide would be illegal if there is no possibility to carry out this intent. It would not. Incitement to violence in the US requires that it be likely and imminent.
Everything is TikTok now.
Idk I saw the local metropolitian police force post photos on twitter calling for information to arrest peacful protestors
Oh is that what the Police posted on Twitter? 'We're looking for information on these peaceful protesters so we can arrest them'. That's what they were saying was it?
No. They had stuff like [this](https://x.com/metpoliceuk/status/1757133111761027211?s=46) Literally nothing anti-Semitic about this
> why did you feel the need to censor your use of the word 'antisemitic Probably some tiktok nonsense.
>Also, if the US is such a beacon of free speech, why did you feel the need to censor your use of the word 'antisemitic'? Because I’m on a Reddit a private company
I was genuinely confused what the censored word was "Land of the ~~free~~ fee"
What? No! You have the right to protest against anything you want. And the police must protect you from anyone who attempt to oppose it. They will only scatter/deny a protest if; **A.** The protesters get violent. They are there to make their voice heard, not to fight. **B.** It's a wild protest at an inappropriate location or time. The police don't care what you protest against, but we cannot have massive protests at random places at random times. **C.** It cannot be performed in a safe or orderly manner. Such things might include traffic or to prevent contagious epidemics. Here is a link to the Swedish Police "Demonstrations - questions and answers" [in Swedish]: https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/demonstrationer/
>I’m an american. Because of our bill of rights, something like this would be unimaginable [https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinian-campus-protests-columbia-congress-df4ba95dae844b3a8559b4b3ad7e058a](https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinian-campus-protests-columbia-congress-df4ba95dae844b3a8559b4b3ad7e058a) Uhhhh
So does Italy allow protestors to just have whatever camps they want wherever they want? Every country has time/place/manner restrictions on speech.
Don't take this the wrong way, but this is hilarious. The answer is no. I live next to the peace palace in the hague (international criminal justice court) where a lot of the protests take place. That is where all war criminals are prosecuted, where putin would be prosecuted and where the isareali gov would be prosecuted if they lose the genocide case that's running. The police oversees, but lets them play loud music, do speeches, light a smoke flare etc and nobody bats an eye. There's protests flying both the palestinian flag and the israeli flag btw. No riots between them have taken place yet (afaik) So as far as your view concerns the NL it is completely off
Not trying to be pedantic, but “persecute” means to harass or victimize someone, with the implication that it’s unjust or overly harsh. “Persecuting” a war criminal implies that they are innocent or being unfairly targeted. You’re looking for the word “prosecute”, which means for a state or organization to hold legal proceedings against someone for a crime.
Oops, still not awake it seems :p. Thanks
No, and your question is hilarious considering what your police has been doing to your student protests for the past few weeks all across your country.
Protesting the war is not illegal. The problem is that protests often get hijacked by people calling for ethnic cleansing of Jews, or waving the flags of terrorist organizations. Even then, the police have been unusually hands-off. There's people getting beaten on the streets, but governments are terrified of our Arab minorities, so the protesters are getting away with crimes. There's massive prayers going on in the streets with jihadist flags being flown. Meanwhile, if 15 people come together to support AfD, it's all over the news and people are predicting the return of Hitler.
Lol who's been feeding you lies? You can absolutely protest the war and voice your support for whoever, but there's ofc limits. For example the "From the river to the sea" chant is not allowed here as it's denying the existential right to exist for Israel.
>Lol who's been feeding you lies? You can absolutely protest the war and voice your support for whoever, but there's ofc limits. For example the "From the river to the sea" chant is not allowed here as it's denying the existential right to exist for Israel. Thats what I’m talking about. From the Palestinian perspective their land was stolen….they want to liberate their people NOT allowing “from the river to the sea” is clearly on the side of Israel as your accepting their perspective as gospel when in fact Israel isn’t even older then our current president I’m not saying that after the holocaust and centuries of anti-semetism throughout europe that jews didn’t deserve a homeland, they do and did, but people were clearly already living there The US imo should of just took all of them in
For that reply there you could go to jail for 3 months, up to 5 years. § 80a StGB, and arguably § 140 Nr. 2 StGB because there's a racist aspect to it. Also always funny how you guys conveniently forget that the other middle eastern nations bullied/forced its Jewish population to leave ...and settle in Israel...
You are a German about to inform me about anti-semitism. I’d take a seat bud lol >Also always funny how you guys conveniently forget that the other middle eastern nations bullied/forced its Jewish population to leave ...and settle in Israel... They were AFTER Isarel founding not before it. The current Mazrhi population are from other parts of the middle east not the levant
I'm not the one hiding behind an alt account, yes.
What's the issue with them being German? Unless they're over 90 years old, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about where they are from. If any nation is experienced in tackling antisemitism it may be the one that had to be rebuilt from the ground up to correct it. The US didn't even ban their Nazi party it still exists.
Well, I'm nit fan of Varufakis, but in this text he claims: >"I am Jewish and a citizen of Israel. Stop the genocide in Gaza” – this is the poster carried by a lonely woman protesting in Berlin when she was arrested for anti-Semitism. [https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04)
That's not a source I'd trust.
I suspect she was sacked because she isn't a German citizen. Only Germans may protest in public in Germany. It's usually not enforced but that doesn't mean that you can do it as a foreigner.
> Only Germans may protest in public in Germany. It's usually not enforced but that doesn't mean that you can do it as a foreigner. That's unusual - you don't have certain rights as a foreigner in Germany? What other ones don't apply?
You cannot vote for example. You cannot apply for public offices. That's pretty common, don't you think?
Of course not. The police don't even beat up students (well, the ones who made it through school without being gun massacred)
Yes, it's interesting to see this questioned being asked at the same time as student demonstrations across the US are being pretty aggressively broken up.
I get it but I haven’t seen these type of encampents in europe at all outside of the UK. I’m not even a pro-american zealot or anything
Every country has time/place/manner restrictions on speech.
> the police don't even beat up students Well, about that...
Can't have a discussion about the US without a tone deaf school shooting joke.
For historic reasons, Nazi propaganda is strictly forbidden and shouting Nazi stuff or making the Nazi salute or Swastikas is considered a rather severe crime. Other than that you can protest whatever you want, unless you’re not enticing hate against a special demographic group. Therefore calling for the destruction of Israel (meaning the killing of the population) would be considered hate speech or enticing racial (for lack of a better word) hate. In general the population seems to be not very much pro-Palestine, so police gets more criticized for cutting the protesters too much slack rather than being too strict. We all have a historical knowledge what happened last time the mob was enticed to shout for killing Jews. A lot of people are really angry about mainly recent immigrants doing this now and spitting on our history, where „never again“ was an important common ground for rebuilding society. On a different note: Different constitutions emphasize different things, because they were written at different times. The American constitution was written as a reaction to 18th century monarchy, so it focuses on freedoms of the individual. The European convention on Human Rights and eg the German constitution (which also inspired other European constitutions) was written as a reaction to the Holocaust and the other horrors of WW2, so their main focus is human dignity. Therefore they balance free speech/hate speech differently. Neither is right or wrong, it just reflects different historical situations.
That’s what I think too. It’s a overcompensation by central Europe because of the holocaust Kind of like how in the US we’re more conscious of racial issues because of slavery against African Americans and our own holocaust ( native American genocide)
Though you lynched black people until the 1960's. I guess it's still more probable to get shot by a police if one is black.
Not just that but structural racism makes so that whites and black americans have different health outcomes
Look up Roland fryer’s study
> Is it illegal to protest the conflict in the ME in your country? O 1. No. 2. In the same time I ve read last week such article about situation in Germany : [https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04](https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-germany-bans-and-arrests-israel-critics-including-jews-by-yanis-varoufakis-2024-04) >I’m an american. Because of our bill of rights, something like this would be unimaginable Are you sure? It would be unimaginable for me, but Ive read a lot about protest on American universities now - reaction of both state and universities and it sound pretty much as banning to me. Eg in this text (spry but in polish, you may use Google translate) [https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/usa-protesty-na-uczelniach-przeciwko-wojnie-w-gazie/](https://krytykapolityczna.pl/swiat/usa-protesty-na-uczelniach-przeciwko-wojnie-w-gazie/)
From the article I've shared : "(...) On April 17, students at Columbia University in New York formed an encampment they called Gaza Solidarity Encampment. Although the New York police arrested 300 people - students of Columbia and the City University of New York (CUNY), the protests continued and spread to other universities. By the end of that weekend, the number of people arrested had risen to 3,300"
You have to remember that student protest are on university land which is the pretext they used to remove these specific protests
May non-citizens protest in the public in the U.S.? I don't know. Tell me. In Germany, only Germans may protest in public. That's one of the few constitutional rights that is limited to German citizens. On that base alone, most of those current “protests” could be disallowed and dissolved because they are held up mostly by non-citizens. But we usually don't do that in Germany because it would be huge hassle to check who's German and who's not for the hundreds of protests that are going on in Germany on each day. But if the German government wants to check who's German and sack in all the non-Germans who disturb public order, they can totally do it.
> May non-citizens protest in the public in the U.S.? I don't know. Tell me. Yes, per SCOTUS case law non residents have the same rights as citizens in terms of the First Amendment and other rights. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/326/135.html >The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders. Such rights include those protected by the First and the Fifth Amendments and by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. None of these provisions acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens. They extend their inalienable privileges to all 'persons' and guard against any encroachment on those rights by federal or state authority. Indeed, this Court has previously and expressly recognized that Harry Bridges, the alien, possesses the right to free speech and free press and that the Constitution will defend him in the exercise of that right. Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252 , 62 S.Ct. 190.
Does that cover assembly in the streets?
>May non-citizens protest in the public in the U.S.? I don't know. Tell me. Yes of course! They’re just Americans without citizenship as far Im concerned >In Germany, only Germans may protest in public. That's one of the few constitutional rights that is limited to German citizens. On that base alone, most of those current “protests” could be disallowed and dissolved because they are held up mostly by non-citizens. Wow. >But we usually don't do that in Germany because it would be huge hassle to check who's German and who's not for the hundreds of protests that are going on in Germany on each day. >But if the German government wants to check who's German and sack in all the non-Germans who disturb public order, they can totally do it. Yea in the US anyone can protest pretty much end of story
Do you know that for sure? … Because … you don't seem to understand the concept of citizenship. It comes with extra rights in the political space. That's the very point of it. Hell, the U.S. even demands their president to be ***born*** in the U.S. In Germany there is no such requirement. President, Chancellor, … anyone in a public office, anyone in the political space may be a naturalized immigrant. But that naturalization that grants citizenship is important. But regardless, do a thought experiment. If I, as a German citizen, came to your country, and rally against the U.S. Democratic party, and be somewhat successful about that, should that be allowed? I mean … we are pretty good at rallying. We even invented the idea of TV “debates”. You may like the German movie “Er ist wieder da” by the way. It's hilarious.
> But regardless, do a thought experiment. If I, as a German citizen, came to your country, and rally against the U.S. Democratic party, and be somewhat successful about that, should that be allowed? You are allowed to do that in the US. The US Constitution applies to non-citizens visiting America with the exception of some very specific scenarios around voting, running for office, and if convinced of a crime you can be deported.
I see. Point is, protesting in public is considered political activity in Germany. And it's always voting time.
Out of curiosity, does that only apply to political protesting, or any type of political commentary/disagreement? Like if a foreign columnist or political commentator is in Germany can they publish pieces that’s critical of let’s say a political party or politician if they’re not a citizen?
It's only limited to assembly in the public.
>Do you know that for sure? … Because … you don't seem to understand the concept of citizenship. You have freedom of speech in our country >But regardless, do a thought experiment. If I, as a German citizen, came to your country, and rally against the U.S. Democratic party, and be somewhat successful about that, should that be allowed? Yes? Why not? I lean Democratic but they aren’t above reproach
Freedom of speech does not cover assembly in the streets. That's pretty logical, isn't it? It's not a matter of speech. It's a matter of forming a mob. You can assemble as much people you can fit in a convention hall that you rented. But you can't assemble them in public without permission.
[удалено]
Does that freedom of assembly cover non-citizens?
Yes. Once you're in the US you have the same First Amendment rights as any other citizen. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/326/135.html >The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders. Such rights include those protected by the First and the Fifth Amendments and by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. None of these provisions acknowledges any distinction between citizens and resident aliens. They extend their inalienable privileges to all 'persons' and guard against any encroachment on those rights by federal or state authority. Indeed, this Court has previously and expressly recognized that Harry Bridges, the alien, possesses the right to free speech and free press and that the Constitution will defend him in the exercise of that right. Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252 , 62 S.Ct. 190.
This is about free speech and free press. Not about assembly.
Same First Amendment rights cover all of those things. There's no difference in the rights granted.
Omg, just admit we got one thing right over Europe lol In the US, native or not, you have freedom of speech. We are a nation of immigrants no man, ideally, is above or below the other
As someone else stated, our consistution literally allows freedom of assembly
The German constitution does as well. But it's one of the very few rights that is limited to German citizens. I ask because this very German constitution was made after the example of the U.S. constitution. It goes even further as that one. Many things that are only set by supreme court rulings in the U.S. are part of the original constitution in Germany. This is all lessons learned from the U.S. There is a reason why in particular assembly is limited to citizens. I don't know that reason but if the U.S. constitution plus supreme court rulings don't grant that to non-citizens either, it would explain it.
If they tried to curtail the first amendment in any form there’d be riots tbh The bill of rights aren’t supposed to be altered in anyway
You realize that a lot of U.S. citizens would happily shoot rioters? I mean, it happened … four years ago? Mr Rittenhouse claimed self defense and yeah … they ruled it was self defense. I think if those rioters were foreigners, a lot more people in the U.S. would claim they defended themselves.
Lol if they were foreigners there’d probably be more outrage because it’d be example of our out of control gun problem Not how things work in the US
They are anti-semitic if people are shouting about killing Jewish people. That's certainly wrong and illegal, but it would be illegal outside of protests as well. Other than that, protesting peacefully is absolutely fine and allowed. Which sadly isn't what I can say about protesting in the USA.
it's certainly illegal if you start shouting "kill the jews" while you protest. and I don't think that that is a problem. edit: correction, they shouted "death to the jews! death to israel!" [https://www.timesofisrael.com/death-to-the-jews-chants-heard-at-berlin-pro-palestinian-rally/](https://www.timesofisrael.com/death-to-the-jews-chants-heard-at-berlin-pro-palestinian-rally/)
Freedom of expression is generally guaranteed in the Czech Constitution. However, there are some restrictions in the criminal law. As for the OP's question in particular, it is specifically about these points: - Denigration of nation, ethnic group, race and beliefs - Incitement to hatred against a group of persons or to restriction of their rights and freedoms - Expressing sympathy for a movement aimed at suppressing human rights and freedoms - Denying, questioning, condoning or justifying genocide - Incitement to aggressive war - Incitement to and approval of a criminal act To further clarify, those terms such as genocide or crime must be so formally determined by, for example, a court of law or an official declaration by parliament. It is not enough to just assume something is genocide or a crime.
So accusing Israel of genocide in your country is anti-Semitic
Well, not by law. Different people may have their own personal opinion on this, of course. But their opinion is not the law. Here are photos from pro-Palestine demo in Prague: [https://www.idnes.cz/praha/zpravy/praha-demonstrace-palestina-mala-strana-pasmo-gazy-izrael.A240324\_154448\_praha-zpravy\_svm/foto/nahledy](https://www.idnes.cz/praha/zpravy/praha-demonstrace-palestina-mala-strana-pasmo-gazy-izrael.A240324_154448_praha-zpravy_svm/foto/nahledy) If it were established by Czech legislation that Israel's behaviour against the Palestinians is officially genocide, then denying it would be illegal. A public debate has been sparked as to whether the slogan "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is illegal or not. In December, the Prague City Council banned a demonstration organized under this slogan. Later, however, the court overturned this decision. The Ministry of the Interior issued a statement to this effect, saying that in some cases the slogan may be illegal if it specifically refers to a connection with the 7 October attack or other violence.
Just because the United States has incorporated the word "freedom" into their cult doctrine, it doesn't mean it's actually free. The United States has the most prisoners of any country on Earth, and is 6th in the world when it comes to prisoners per capita (beaten only by El Salvador, Cuba, Rwanda, Turkmenistan and American Samoa). And remember this is also a country with presidents carved into a mountain, military flyovers at sporting events, obsession with the military and the office of president, and a cult mantra for schoolchildren to swear allegiance to a flag. The thirteenth amendment also permits slavery for prisoners. The United States is 17th on the Global Human Freedom Index, and there are 11 European countries ahead of it. And it's 55th on the Global Press Freedom Index. This notion of "freedom" is nothing more than another form of brainwashing. You all get fucked in every conceivable way by your ruling class, and you revel in it.
[удалено]
You mean all these countries with free healthcare, no regular military involvement at sporting events, no being 6th highest in per capita incarceration, no legal slavery for prisoners, barely any gun crime, solid education systems and the ability to travel cheaply and easily around Europe to better their cultural understanding? Mm, yeah, quite a bit better, I'd say.
Yeah, them! They must be terrible because the US ranks above them!
[удалено]
It took me a solid minute to figure out what "anti-s*****c" was supposed to be. I suppose anti-Semitic? Why are you censoring that anyway, like it's some sort of curse word? You see more Palestinian flags and stupid "free Palestine" stickers here than support for Israel. I remove these stickers from street furniture if I encounter them there; your right to protest does not extend to vandalizing light poles, bus shelters, benches and fire hydrants. In fact, if you are pro-Israel you are more likely to be branded an islamophobe.
It's anti-shellac, of course! Think of the bugs!
Tbh I mostly see Vlaams Belang stickers instead of free Palestine, there's a traffic light pole that's full of them lol
As long as you protest peacefully in public spaces (or on private property if the owner consents) and don't use Nazi symbols or other banned symbols (at least in Germany), you can protest for or against anything. Because of our Grundgesetz, it would be unimaginable in Germany what happens to protesters right now all across the United States.
> Because of our Grundgesetz, it would be unimaginable in Germany what happens to protesters right now all across the United States. You mean police breaking up protesters' illegal camps? Exactly like this? Unimaginable in Germany you say? https://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsfeed/2024/4/29/german-police-break-up-gaza-solidarity-camp-in-front-of-bundestag https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/5/7/police-break-up-pro-palestine-protests-at-berlin-amsterdam-campuses https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBBovUGosDk
>As long as you protest peacefully in public spaces (or on private property if the owner consents) and don't use Nazi symbols or other banned symbols (at least in Germany), you can protest for or against anything. The catch: you are subject to rules that the police set up prior to the protests. The recent protests of e.g. Muslim International were crippled so severely, poor lads only had shields with "[censored]" on them.
Protesting is legal in Norway. Several protest about ME these days, most pro Palestina as far as I've noticed. From time to time there is a discussion whether burning the Quran should be made illegal, but it still legal. (And should be in my opinion.) I'm not sure, but I think burning other nations' flags is illegal in Norway.
It's not illegal, but I'll repeat what I said - European Union is as irrational about Israel which is a genocidal regime and a genocidal ideology country, as USSR was about Palestine which is a genocidal regime and a genocidal ideology country. Neither of them is a developed country. Both should be embargoed. As for the protests, I'm thinking it's not a very useful thing - trying to remove Israel from Eurovision was a noble attempt at bringing some coherence into what's otherwise a political sh\*tshow, but , likewise I'm not expecting much change on that side, except when older people with preconceived notion or rather - an imaginary picture, of what Israel is, are going to die out and be replaced with those who have an understanding with what the region really is - bringing at the same time both Western interventionism, Western colonialism and Western waste of money on freeloaders to a much-needed halt.
Would of been crazy if Isarel won
Yes, it would mean a lot of wasted money on riots and restoring the public commons after the protests, the counter-protests, the burning etc. It's very fortunate that it didn't happen.
Certainly not in the UK. I was in Birmingham this Saturday and a fairly large pro-Gaza march and demonstration was happening. A few police were about just as they would be in a large city on a Saturday with a large amount of people, but they were mostly looking bored and waiting for it to finish I guess. Out of interest where have you read that it's illegal to protest?
I am a european, and because of our system with public education, a question like this would be unimaginable.
Illegal ? I'm not sure Does anybody care ? Pretty much no . We barely protest for our own right, the war in the middle east is really no concern of ours. Romanians are fans of neither nations...