Strasbourg Court: Communist Red Star is OK (!)

Remove all ads!

We don't talk about debate tactics. Even the international law recognizes the prohibition of discrimination.

For those who think this is all about arguing -- you would talk differently if your family was cut to little pieces -- or tortured for years in prisons or camps -- by a dictatoric regime. The problem with you, "forum fighters", is that you reached a level that is far from reality. And when a tragedy happens with your family -- then your eye is opened, but it's too late...

Darion, Shaman: the topic is about Red Star as the symbol of Communism. E.g. as in the symbol of Heineken, it's clearly in a specific context, as an element of a composite symbol -- therefore, it is unambigiously not a dictatoric regime symbol.

 

Baronius, this isn't about how bad the communists were - that is beside the point. You were pointing out a specific case, and that case is about freedom of expression and whether Hungarian law properly reflects the European Convention of Human Rights.

It also involved a communist symbol, but that isn't relevant to the convention since expression is free irrespective of whether you like it's content or not. That's why freedom of expression is an inalienable right, and not something generously granted by a winning party. Freedom of expression means having to accept listening to stuff you don't like.

As for your "argument": On the one hand you say that Heinecken is different because it is a symbol in a specific context, but that the communist star is a symbol for evil and thus must be banned. What eludes you: In this verdict it wasn't about using a red star to endorse communism either - to the contrary: the poster was anti-Nazi, anti-Communist and anti-EU at the same time. That ought to be clear from the specific context to thinking persons. The reason why the Hungarian law was found incompatible with the convention is that it ignored specific context, or dangerousness, and banned the use of the symbol outright.

Naturally, to you it is about commies and their dictatorial regime anyway. IMO it simply demonstrates that you cannot address the topic rationally. Not that that was news.

 

You're still chewing on the wrong photo I accidently linked to (and corrected later).
On the other hand, the initial topic is about a case where the person was punished for a Red Star -- and not for any poster. Of course, you're free to chew whatever you wish.

 

*sigh* Surely you jest *sigh* You DO recall the title of this thread - to remind you, it reads: "Strasbourg Court: Communist Red Star is OK (!)".

A few things, repeated, just for you, in an easily digestible format:

(a) the Court didn't say that.
(b) the Court certainly didn't mean that when they wrote their verdict.
(c) Incidentally the pic I am chewing on is the one the case the title refers to is about.
(d) You don't get what they're getting at anyway.

With your initial argument in smouldering ruins, not that you had a good case to make in the first place, you just decided to change the subject to something you like better, which is the wider issue of Communism.

Alas, who am I to judge. What looks like smouldering ruins to me may be a palace for the unfortunate, much preferable over a cave.

Baronius, you are well advised to read the following lines carefully and to give them, to the best of your ability, some thought:

Spoiler

From CASE OF VAJNAI v. HUNGARY (Application no. 33629/06):

They are right. You are not being rational. This is my last post in this thread. There is nothing left to say.

 

I can only repeat the same: Europe still doesn't understand the crimes of Communist regimes. Legal tricking and law interpretation does not matter, and is pretty discreditable and hipocritical as long as the same isn't done for the Nazi Swastika.

Sure, the judges perhaps should not be blamed, because then the law is bad. (Which people such as Ragusa simply cannot imagine -- they seem to think the law is perfect by definition. But I say: laws can be bad, truly bad.)

Yes, and it didn't and doesn't refer to the case with the EU flag poster. It refers to a person who wore a Red Star. Even the very first line of my post (which has been there from the beginning, without any editing) refers to a news page that reads:

It will be hard I think

 

Who would have guessed you'd write something so stupid so quickly that I am compelled to respond against my better judgement, only a mere two or so hours later. You're a force of nature as far as half-witted, involuntary hilarity is concerned.

Yes, what would we Europeans know about communism. Take Germany for instance, we know nothing about communism, or tyranny in general for that matter. No Sir. Nothing. What-so-ever. Same for the others. Prague spring? Berlin uprising? Nonsense. The Cold War was all about Hungary. The Hungarians, no - You! - alone have a correct understanding of the matter.

 

It's lovely how you try to justify yourself when you break your own promise (i.e. that you wouldn't post any more in the thread). And the best justification, of course, is blaming the other one. Great performance.

Oh, I don't doubt you know much. And you forgot much. It's sad that the memories and true understanding are replaced with self-styled pedant online-forum fighters who know jack about reality, about economic and social processes. Leave the office for a few days. Watch a bit world. Travel to South Africa. Travel to Hungary. It will be fruitful.

 

I read the file the Stasi had compiled on my father, you joker. Shut the f*** up.

 

We all have our own stories and wounds, and I didn't doubt that in your case either (you mentioned your father earlier in another thread).

But the way you insist to laws, even when laws are bad, shows that theoretical correctness and idealistic approach are more important to you than humane approach. The red star case reflects it: if used as a Communist symbol, it can hurt the feelings of many people. No court can deny that. No matter how many insensitive rough idiots talk about the freedom of speech to me regarding the Red Star (as a Communist symbol), when people were tortured, humiliated and slaughtered by Communist regimes.

 

Good grief

 

People were slaughtered or hurt by many things. Nazi's or Commies are but one group.

How many people died because of religion; because of Oil; skin color; because of Liberation or democracy; by corporate greed, by politics and so on.

The world is beyond healing and there is no end in sight.
Labeling sets some mind at ease but doesn't address the root of the problem.

 

These things aren't strongly associated to graphical symbols.

And an additional point: the wounds of Communist and Nazi regimes are fresh yet; time heals many things to a certain extent, but these wounds are fresh. There are people alive who directly experienced them on their skin.

And a final point: the Nazi and Communist regimes performed a centralized, industrialized humiliation and violence on innocent people. Not a distributed, abstract concept such as corporate greed or politics.

Feedom of speech is only free as long as it doesn't hurt someone else's freedom.

 

And how exactly does wearing a red star hurt someone's freedom?

 

More precisely, "...doesn't hurt someone else's rights". This is what I should have written.

 

It doesn't.

 

Do you have own, genuine thoughts as well, or have you become the spokesman of the Strasbourg Court?

 

So, in that sense, what's the difference between Holocaust Denial and wearing a Nazi Swastika?

Ragusa fully agrees with the law against Holocaust Denial (i.e. which considers it as a criminal offence), in an older topic, he mentioned it's an attack against the Constitution etc. So then the question is: how is someone hurt by holocaust denial?...

...it's an opinion, after all -- doesn't hurt anyone, just like the Red Star or Swastika you wear. People are free to have opinions, aren't they? Just like they're free to wear any symbol (e.g. swastika)?

 

Baronius,
they make a reasonable argument that represents the state of law. That is why it is relevant. You need to find a compelling counter argument for that. Frankly, I don't think you can do that, even if you wanted to.

So you disagree with the court? So what. Who cares. I already said that opinions don't become legitimate only be merit of being held. You're boastfully ignorant and vainglorious and so far had little to contribute but your increasingly less entertaining histrionics. Why should your opinion count anything?

 

These things aren't strongly associated to graphical symbols.

And an additional point: the wounds of Communist and Nazi regimes are fresh yet; time heals many things to a certain extent, but these wounds are fresh. There are people alive who directly experienced them on their skin.

And a final point: the Nazi and Communist regimes performed a centralized, industrialized humiliation and violence on innocent people. Not a distributed, abstract concept such as corporate greed or politics.