It's curious how in the modern world the political campaigns of many politicians have changed quite a lot.
The parliamentarian elections are currently ongoing in Finland, and of course streets are littered with ads for candidates. Such ads usually consist of a poster with the face of the candidate and a short slogan or mission statement. While many of these are rather traditional and stereotypical (even boring) ones, I have noticed a shift in tone with many of them.
For example, one of them just says "rasismi rikoslakiin", which translates roughly to "(add) racism to criminal law" (ie. "criminalize racism"). That's it. Those two words, and nothing else. (Not very surprisingly it's a candidate for the Green Party.)
If I were to meet this candidate, I would seriously ask him what exactly he means by that. In other words, what exactly would become illegal that's currently legal?
My guess is that he wants to go the same route as the United Kingdom, ie. criminalize "racist" speech online. After all, everything else is already illegal. Discrimination based on race? Harassment of people because of their race? Incitement to violence or discrimination against people based on race? All illegal already. So what else is there left? The only thing I can think of is speech.
In other words, I suspect that what he wants is to limit the freedom of speech of Finnish citizens even more than it already is. That is, he wants to make Finland less free and more totalitarian.
This is the trend I have been noticing. Political campaigns of many parliamentary candidates have shifted from promises of protecting people's rights, freedoms, privileges, well-being and fair treatment, into a) limiting and restricting people's rights and freedoms, and b) increasing the amount of resources thrown at non-citizens at the expense of the tax-paying citizens.
When you think about it, it makes no sense. Why would someone run a political campaign where the main goal is to limit people's rights and freedoms and increase the level of totalitarianism, the level of governmental control and power over the citizens? "Vote for me, and I will limit and restrict your freedoms, and criminalize even more of your constitutionally protected rights."
Yet, it works. People will vote for these candidates. They are essentially duped into it, because they think that these draconian restrictions will only affect the "bad guys". They do not think that these draconian laws will ever affect them. They do not understand nor appreciate why constitutional protections and rights exist, and why they are so important, and why they shouldn't be limited and restricted. They do not understand that the more they advocate for limiting people's rights and freedoms, sooner or later it will come back to haunt them, eventually.
The parliamentarian elections are currently ongoing in Finland, and of course streets are littered with ads for candidates. Such ads usually consist of a poster with the face of the candidate and a short slogan or mission statement. While many of these are rather traditional and stereotypical (even boring) ones, I have noticed a shift in tone with many of them.
For example, one of them just says "rasismi rikoslakiin", which translates roughly to "(add) racism to criminal law" (ie. "criminalize racism"). That's it. Those two words, and nothing else. (Not very surprisingly it's a candidate for the Green Party.)
If I were to meet this candidate, I would seriously ask him what exactly he means by that. In other words, what exactly would become illegal that's currently legal?
My guess is that he wants to go the same route as the United Kingdom, ie. criminalize "racist" speech online. After all, everything else is already illegal. Discrimination based on race? Harassment of people because of their race? Incitement to violence or discrimination against people based on race? All illegal already. So what else is there left? The only thing I can think of is speech.
In other words, I suspect that what he wants is to limit the freedom of speech of Finnish citizens even more than it already is. That is, he wants to make Finland less free and more totalitarian.
This is the trend I have been noticing. Political campaigns of many parliamentary candidates have shifted from promises of protecting people's rights, freedoms, privileges, well-being and fair treatment, into a) limiting and restricting people's rights and freedoms, and b) increasing the amount of resources thrown at non-citizens at the expense of the tax-paying citizens.
When you think about it, it makes no sense. Why would someone run a political campaign where the main goal is to limit people's rights and freedoms and increase the level of totalitarianism, the level of governmental control and power over the citizens? "Vote for me, and I will limit and restrict your freedoms, and criminalize even more of your constitutionally protected rights."
Yet, it works. People will vote for these candidates. They are essentially duped into it, because they think that these draconian restrictions will only affect the "bad guys". They do not think that these draconian laws will ever affect them. They do not understand nor appreciate why constitutional protections and rights exist, and why they are so important, and why they shouldn't be limited and restricted. They do not understand that the more they advocate for limiting people's rights and freedoms, sooner or later it will come back to haunt them, eventually.
Comments
Post a Comment