• phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Does France have free speech protections? Seems like this would be unconstitutional in the US, but not sure what laws exist there.

    • erranto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They have freedom of the press, but no freedom of speech they way it is guaranteed through the US constitution. in fact they have laws against hate speech and antisemitism.

      • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Interesting, it would seem one can support a Palestinian state and oppose retaliation against innocent Palestinian civilians for the actions of an extremist group without being engaged in hate speech or antisemitism, however much the west really struggles with this concept.

        • erranto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They know which side they stand on and they want all their citizens to align to it.

          • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If that’s their justification then did they forget what democracy is about? It’s quite literally the opposite of having the government determine the people’s stance.

            • roguetrick@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              They’re democratic, just not particularly pluralistic. Everybody’s gotta be culturally French, very tyranny of the majority types.

        • Knedliky@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because it’s a stick to beat Muslim citizens with. It’s what all conservative French governments have been doing for the last 15 years, more or less openly depending on Le Pen’s (father or daughter) polling numbers. Darmanin is about as anti-Muslim pro-police-state as they come.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Freedom of speech” as it’s known in the US is slightly misnamed. It’s more accurately “freedom from government regulation of speech”, and the EU doesn’t really have the same protections.

    • ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They shelled our peaceful protest in southern California with tear gas mortars. Peaceful protest isn’t even de facto legal in the US.

      • Stuka@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lol there is nothing about this comment that isn’t over the top dramaticism.

    • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most European countries do have free speech protections, but with much more limitations than in the US. (IIRC the US would also not allow e.g. speech calling for a lynch mob, as long as it’s specific enough.)

      Various forms of hate speech, including support for terrorist organizations, are covered by those. Terrorist usually isn’t just what the government dislikes; it usually requires (or is subject to review by) a court decision.

      There are obvious arguments against such rules, but there are very few social benefits to letting people support literal child murdering terrorists, call for the lynching of certain groups of people, claim that the Holocaust never happened and should be repeated (sic), or just march up and down the street in Nazi uniforms showing off their right arms much to the dismay of any survivors, their descendants, and the people who would be next on the list.

      The main risk is the government abusing its power to ban all anti-government protests. Europe has decided that this risk is small enough with all checks and balances in place to be worth the social benefit. The US has decided otherwise.

      • mwguy@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        IIRC the US would also not allow e.g. speech calling for a lynch mob, as long as it’s specific enough.

        Participation in a lynvh mob is illegal, but calling for one I don’t believe has been tested in court and would likely not pass judicial review (IANAL).

        • Wodge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Trump has been calling for violence regarding his many court cases, and has since been put under a gag order. Calls for violence do not seem to be protected under the 1st amendment.

          • mwguy@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can’t loose your rights in the US without due process. Trump is under a gag order after a valid due process made it so.