Remember that not only is there no free speech in Europe, there are also no free elections.
Romanian elections were deemed null by the bureaucrat caste just weeks ago. Now there is a threat by the bureaucrats to do annul elections in Germany.
cc nostr:npub17xvf49kht23cddxgw92rvfktkd3vqvjgkgsdexh9847wl0927tqsrhc9as nostr:note1t8klc2l4xcjzmj7cl96tkh4r4gj6xm333s6pnkn980350cwyjvaqpj5khd
Some things can only be remedied by revolt.
The illusion of democracy is powerful. Secret services rule the world, outside of democracy.
I have just watched a bigger part of the documentary. You actually do your best to dramatize. But what is the legitimacy to call someone a dick, accuse a person of false quotes or threaten someone with death. These are the specific posts, that are targeted in germany.
How many face to face conversations have you had today at work, where someone threatened to kill you, accused you in front of all working mates to have said something you did not say or something like it.
I would not let someone talk like this about me. Not in real live nor in the internet. Germany does all well. Since a place where threats are acceptable can not be a free place.
How many conversations were not had, because normal Germans feared reprisal at 4am by the wrongthink and speech police?
Were there things that were not questioned, due to fear of reprisal?
For example: the green new scam, shutting down of coal & nuclear power plants, forever war against Russia?
Censorship is a slippery slope. Europe has been sliding for a while.
This is maby a topic you can bring up as a cultural thing. For sure germans need to be more open instead of creating a «Brandmauer» to conversations which are uncomfortable. But this culture is independent of this law.
There is no wrong speech police. Neighter has the police any part in deciding whom to target.
Germany has the devision of power. Therefor they need a court order to confiscate something. Therefore a lawyer already defined the wording of a person as attack against a person with no context of critique against any factual matter (since freedom of speech is protected by the constitution).
When the accused does not accept the decision of the first lawyer, there is still opportunity to defend the case in a court.
Is your critique agqinst this procedure? Or do you have specific cases where people have been finally convicted for expressing their oppinion?
They all laugh together when talking about how shocked people are when they take phones (property). Governments take your stuff and laugh about it afterwards. Criminal.
