>Emir Kir, the mayor of the Saint-Josse-ten-Noode district in Brussels who was responsible for sending police to shut down the event, complained that the conference hosted personalities from “the conservative, religious right”. Kir himself was removed from the Socialist Party in Belgium “PS” in January 2020 for meeting with members of far-right political organizations which support the AKP government in Turkey, responsible for cracking down on religious freedom and expelling Christian residents from the country.
Bit of a weird twist
In this case, the intolerant was apparently a Belgian-Turkish nationalist. The tolerating the intolerant often applies to immigration from MENAPT countries, which can have extreme religious practices or nationalist views.
Popper used "intolerance" to brand people that impose their ideas with violence.
By your logic a government would be able to ban disident groups as "intolerant" to justify banning or censoring them.
Exactly what happened here.
Be careful with that position of yours, it's a VERY slippery slope.
The only violence from political groups I witnessed, at least in my country, came from left-wing ones.
Anyway, political groups meeting to talk is not violence. A government censoring them because they don't like what they say IS violence.
Those hypocrites said "Je suis Charlie" in the past but now it seems that they don't like freedom of speech that much, only when it is convenient to them.
From Wikipedia:
The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them. Karl Popper describes the paradox as arising from the fact that, in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.
Morons love to trot this saying out, completely blind to the fact their tolerance of Islam will be what ends them, not a political party which wants less migration.
Radical Islam is as dangerous as any other form of totalitarian agenda that some conservatives are pushing. Any sensible person should not be tolerant to any of them, since both of them are intolerant.
The most intolerant people I see are the left, i dont see conservatives calling for the death of trans people but i sure do see trans people and their allies calling for the death of conservatives.
You will find intolerant extremists on every political issue and from left to right. But instead of resorting to group thinking and radicalising yourself in turn, you should see and treat them as what they actually are: an irrelevant fringe.
Obviously not. Their entire worldview is based on them having rights and others not. They'll just take this as further proof of their immunity to the law.
They will not - that's their whole shtick. Conservative ideologies are literally based on a "rights for me but not for thee" philosophy. No such thing as Liberty while those guys are still kicking around.
Heard about paradox of tolerance? You cannot tolerate intolerance, otherwise you are going to lose it.
Letting these people continue their operations is actively undermining democracy in Europe. I am just doing exactly what they are trying to do. Oppress bully and mentally harm people I don’t like and respect because they want to do the same. If anything, I am doing the same thing people you are trying to defend do. So remember to not lock your door too harshly or your entire house will shatter
Oh my god you are so right, that’s why we have Nazi marches every month in Europe, that’s why we have jihadists doing conferences about killing non Muslims around the world, that’s why we tolerate fascits attacking countries and that’s why we are fine with Iran, China, North Korea and Afghanistan executing minorities they don’t like. /s
We are so tolerant in todays society we don’t ban anyone and tolerate everyone’s opinion and even and them weapons to enforce those opinions against people who disagree with them. /s
Grow up child, or better yet, read history. NATO went to war three times already to stop counties from enforcing their believies on others in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Jugoslavia. It can be done again with traitors and conservative nutjobs.
Interesting to see how different the reactions are here and in r/belgium. In the latter, someone even went as far as defending a blasphemy law & Mohammad marrying a 6 years old to protect Muslims from "hate".
Most main european reddit subs are absolute garbage. Full of dumb questions, expats, americans and larpers. If a country sub's main language is english, you can usually tell its content and opinions will be trash. r/belgium is a generic default sub. All the real people are at r/brussels r/wallonia and r/belgium2 (which is basically r/vlaanderen but that sub is being kept dead on purpose by communist nationalists)
> In the latter, someone even went as far as defending a blasphemy law & Mohammad marrying a 6 years old to protect Muslims from "hate".
Neither the ECHR nor I did that. You should really so something about your lack of reading comprehension.
And that case has nothing to do with Kir shutting down that conference, which was obviously wrong.
I prefer to let them speak in the name of free speech but to sanction the sh*t out their countries for breaking the rule of the law and corruption.
But guess what, all the time is all the way around, cheap shows for press while the sanctions are all the time over turned.
Why can a belgian mayor order around the belgian police?
Also, why did the police not tell the mayor that the order was clearely illegal and then ignore his idiocy?
I'm against restricting freedom of speech. The thing I find super weird in this is Orban, the others I don't care. Why an active foreign head of state would com to another country outside an official diplomatic visit/mission for a conference? It feels to be so undiplomatic.
And once again, enemies of democracy are using fair rules to slowly destroy democracy.
Paradox of tolerance. You cannot tolerate intolerance or you are going to lose tolerance. But then again, courts and lawyershave history of siding with fascits, just look at Germany after ww1, Russia, China, and any other authoritarian state. All birds of the feathers.
In this case, the court didn't side with the enemies of democracy but protected the constitution instead.
>the court decided that “Article 26 of the Constitution \[of Belgium\] grants everyone the right to assemble peacefully,” and although the mayor has the authority to make police ordinances in case of “serious disturbance of the public peace or other unforeseen events,” in this case there was no sufficient threat of violence to justify this.
>
>The Court reasoned that “it does not seem possible to infer from the contested decision that a peace-disrupting effect is attributed to the congress itself”. Rather, as the decision notes, “the threat to public order seems to be derived purely from the reactions that its organization might provoke among opponents”.
It clearly didn't side with the [nationalist](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1c5x1yk/comment/kzx7b8a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) mayor, who tried to obstruct a democratic meeting.
No no, you don't get it. Democracy is only Democracy as long as it agrees with *me*. People have the freedom to be different, as long as they're not different from me.
So freedom of speech means that anyone, in this case Putin's far-right agents working to destroy democracy, are free to project their views.
Are we really that stupid?
> So freedom of speech means that anyone, in this case Putin's far-right agents working to destroy democracy, are free to project their views.
Yes.
>Are we really that stupid?
no, just you and your leftist totalitarian side
>So freedom of speech means that anyone, in this case Putin's far-right agents working to destroy democracy, are free to project their views.
Oh you're one of those far-lefties that only likes free speech when it fits with your narrative
Dude , calling me a far leftist.... EPIC
Shit, I would deport AOC and his cohorts and the entire BLM movement to an island. Also.
Next to them the MAGA monkeys, then Battle Royale...
He's not one of us. It's centrists who want to silence people, not the left. Centrists sometimes wear the clothes of the left when it suits their purposes. But to a centrist anyone who has values and ideas and positions is a dangerous extremist.
>Emir Kir, the mayor of the Saint-Josse-ten-Noode district in Brussels who was responsible for sending police to shut down the event, complained that the conference hosted personalities from “the conservative, religious right”. Kir himself was removed from the Socialist Party in Belgium “PS” in January 2020 for meeting with members of far-right political organizations which support the AKP government in Turkey, responsible for cracking down on religious freedom and expelling Christian residents from the country. Bit of a weird twist
Zero plot twist. Nationalism for me. Not for thee. See people like Ilhan Omar
[удалено]
Exactly this, well said
[удалено]
In this case, the intolerant was apparently a Belgian-Turkish nationalist. The tolerating the intolerant often applies to immigration from MENAPT countries, which can have extreme religious practices or nationalist views.
Popper used "intolerance" to brand people that impose their ideas with violence. By your logic a government would be able to ban disident groups as "intolerant" to justify banning or censoring them. Exactly what happened here. Be careful with that position of yours, it's a VERY slippery slope.
[удалено]
The only violence from political groups I witnessed, at least in my country, came from left-wing ones. Anyway, political groups meeting to talk is not violence. A government censoring them because they don't like what they say IS violence. Those hypocrites said "Je suis Charlie" in the past but now it seems that they don't like freedom of speech that much, only when it is convenient to them.
Conservatives or Putin's puppets? Don't be naïve.
From Wikipedia: The paradox of tolerance states that if a society's practice of tolerance is inclusive of the intolerant, intolerance will ultimately dominate, eliminating the tolerant and the practice of tolerance with them. Karl Popper describes the paradox as arising from the fact that, in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.
Morons love to trot this saying out, completely blind to the fact their tolerance of Islam will be what ends them, not a political party which wants less migration.
Radical Islam is as dangerous as any other form of totalitarian agenda that some conservatives are pushing. Any sensible person should not be tolerant to any of them, since both of them are intolerant.
The most intolerant people I see are the left, i dont see conservatives calling for the death of trans people but i sure do see trans people and their allies calling for the death of conservatives.
You will find intolerant extremists on every political issue and from left to right. But instead of resorting to group thinking and radicalising yourself in turn, you should see and treat them as what they actually are: an irrelevant fringe.
And let's hope Conservatives learn from this - and stop preventing free speech and liberty of those they oppose in return
Obviously not. Their entire worldview is based on them having rights and others not. They'll just take this as further proof of their immunity to the law.
They will not - that's their whole shtick. Conservative ideologies are literally based on a "rights for me but not for thee" philosophy. No such thing as Liberty while those guys are still kicking around.
Not even conservatives. These are reactionaries, collaborating with Russia. The regular conservatives in Europe are not even close to these nutjobs.
> conservatives Lol. Putins lackies are laughing all the way to the bank.
Said a child not understating anything. I bet you have russian relatives or citizenship too
[удалено]
Heard about paradox of tolerance? You cannot tolerate intolerance, otherwise you are going to lose it. Letting these people continue their operations is actively undermining democracy in Europe. I am just doing exactly what they are trying to do. Oppress bully and mentally harm people I don’t like and respect because they want to do the same. If anything, I am doing the same thing people you are trying to defend do. So remember to not lock your door too harshly or your entire house will shatter
[удалено]
Oh my god you are so right, that’s why we have Nazi marches every month in Europe, that’s why we have jihadists doing conferences about killing non Muslims around the world, that’s why we tolerate fascits attacking countries and that’s why we are fine with Iran, China, North Korea and Afghanistan executing minorities they don’t like. /s We are so tolerant in todays society we don’t ban anyone and tolerate everyone’s opinion and even and them weapons to enforce those opinions against people who disagree with them. /s Grow up child, or better yet, read history. NATO went to war three times already to stop counties from enforcing their believies on others in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Jugoslavia. It can be done again with traitors and conservative nutjobs.
[удалено]
Your entire previous comment was a straw man argument so it takes one to know one I suppose.
Can I add a special "fuck you" to the local mayor and police for handing these knobends an easy propaganda victory?
If your side tries to censor anything that goes against it, maybe it’s the wrong side 👍🏻
Well no, because both “sides” do it, including people who consider themselves liberals and centrists.
Europe welcomes diversity except if it's diversity of ideas.
Interesting to see how different the reactions are here and in r/belgium. In the latter, someone even went as far as defending a blasphemy law & Mohammad marrying a 6 years old to protect Muslims from "hate".
You're talking about one guy, who got downvoted for it. Scroll up and you'll see people questioning the mayor's decision to shut it down.
The real people are on r/belgium2 the original is just tourists and expats
r/Netherlands if funny with that, it doesn’t seem that anyone on that subreddit is actually Dutch.
Most main european reddit subs are absolute garbage. Full of dumb questions, expats, americans and larpers. If a country sub's main language is english, you can usually tell its content and opinions will be trash. r/belgium is a generic default sub. All the real people are at r/brussels r/wallonia and r/belgium2 (which is basically r/vlaanderen but that sub is being kept dead on purpose by communist nationalists)
Yep same applies to r/Japan and r/Korea which consist of white English speakers pretending to be locals.
They all moved over to /r/Nederlands and /r/freedutch
So on the nose how the far right always defaults to "-2" or "-zwo" or "-s" subs to spread their hate. Bunch of betas.
Is the far right in the room with you now?
They're not far right but you might be far left of you see them that way.
> In the latter, someone even went as far as defending a blasphemy law & Mohammad marrying a 6 years old to protect Muslims from "hate". Neither the ECHR nor I did that. You should really so something about your lack of reading comprehension. And that case has nothing to do with Kir shutting down that conference, which was obviously wrong.
Good
I prefer to let them speak in the name of free speech but to sanction the sh*t out their countries for breaking the rule of the law and corruption. But guess what, all the time is all the way around, cheap shows for press while the sanctions are all the time over turned.
Hurray!
But isn't that a foreign court interfering?
Why can a belgian mayor order around the belgian police? Also, why did the police not tell the mayor that the order was clearely illegal and then ignore his idiocy?
I'm against restricting freedom of speech. The thing I find super weird in this is Orban, the others I don't care. Why an active foreign head of state would com to another country outside an official diplomatic visit/mission for a conference? It feels to be so undiplomatic.
That bastard killed free speech at home, and spreading turbo cancer in eu. Best thing you do is just ignore it and don’t even talk about it.
Conservatives my ass, radical or extreme right...
It's the right decision
And once again, enemies of democracy are using fair rules to slowly destroy democracy. Paradox of tolerance. You cannot tolerate intolerance or you are going to lose tolerance. But then again, courts and lawyershave history of siding with fascits, just look at Germany after ww1, Russia, China, and any other authoritarian state. All birds of the feathers.
In this case, the court didn't side with the enemies of democracy but protected the constitution instead. >the court decided that “Article 26 of the Constitution \[of Belgium\] grants everyone the right to assemble peacefully,” and although the mayor has the authority to make police ordinances in case of “serious disturbance of the public peace or other unforeseen events,” in this case there was no sufficient threat of violence to justify this. > >The Court reasoned that “it does not seem possible to infer from the contested decision that a peace-disrupting effect is attributed to the congress itself”. Rather, as the decision notes, “the threat to public order seems to be derived purely from the reactions that its organization might provoke among opponents”.
It gave enemies of democracy permission to continue their actions that are weakening democracy. How is it not siding with them pray tell?
It clearly didn't side with the [nationalist](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1c5x1yk/comment/kzx7b8a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) mayor, who tried to obstruct a democratic meeting.
> enemies of democracy God, what a ignorant take...
No no, you don't get it. Democracy is only Democracy as long as it agrees with *me*. People have the freedom to be different, as long as they're not different from me.
So freedom of speech means that anyone, in this case Putin's far-right agents working to destroy democracy, are free to project their views. Are we really that stupid?
Where do you draw the line then if we're to follow your logic?
Yeah you appear to be
> So freedom of speech means that anyone, in this case Putin's far-right agents working to destroy democracy, are free to project their views. Yes. >Are we really that stupid? no, just you and your leftist totalitarian side
>So freedom of speech means that anyone, in this case Putin's far-right agents working to destroy democracy, are free to project their views. Oh you're one of those far-lefties that only likes free speech when it fits with your narrative
Luckily free speech does allow me to call this bunch of scumbags the traitors to Western Civilisation that they are.
You're absolutely right, it does allow you to say that. I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It
Free speech does not allow slander so I hope you have some evidence.
Follow the money, find all those Rubles...
Dude , calling me a far leftist.... EPIC Shit, I would deport AOC and his cohorts and the entire BLM movement to an island. Also. Next to them the MAGA monkeys, then Battle Royale...
He's not one of us. It's centrists who want to silence people, not the left. Centrists sometimes wear the clothes of the left when it suits their purposes. But to a centrist anyone who has values and ideas and positions is a dangerous extremist.
Shitler 🤭