Both should be banned, or neither should be banned
peter-m80 · 4h ago
Because an ideology to empower workers is the same as a fascist and racist regime... Yeah
somedude895 · 2h ago
Both are totalitarian ideologies which always have and continue to require the persecution of dissidents.
ETH_start · 8m ago
It's authoritarianism in the name of egalitarian ideals.
xigoi · 3h ago
Please read something about the history of communism in Czechia.
baal80spam · 3h ago
Or anywhere, for that matter.
spwa4 · 2h ago
Communism just turns an entire country into a single company that is the police as well and therefore that company doesn't even have a choice: it must use violence against its workers, just for public order. And, by definition, a lot of people can do better for themselves under communism and must be prevented from doing so ... That's the source of one criticism of communism: that communism effectively replaces money with violence. And what always goes wrong is that some psychopath realizes that a single central decision point that enforces it's decisions through violence ... yummy. People in Eastern Germany lived this, involuntarily: difference between fascism and communism ... there is no practical difference. Central undemocratic all-encompassing decision making enforced through violence is oppression, and of course, you cannot have democratic socialism. In theory it's obvious, and in practice, Israel tried that and they voted to end socialism as soon as it was realistic, even though a LOT of institutions in Israel are still communist, they are far less capitalist than China is.
rixed · 41m ago
> The revised legislation introduces prison sentences of up to five years for anyone who “establishes, supports or promotes Nazi, communist, or other movements which demonstrably aim to suppress human rights and freedoms or incite racial, ethnic, national, religious or class-based hatred.”
Why is it necessary to name some vague adversary? Why is it not enough to punish the promotion of authoritarianism and all forms of hatred?
antonymoose · 32m ago
Is that what the “or other movements” clause does?
In any case, I don’t see the harm in naming and shaming the historical worst of the worst?
rgavuliak · 28m ago
Because Czechia has lived through communism so its propaganda is aimed at a concrete period in history, same with nazism.
Also - law needs to be concrete enough to be enforceable.
lostmsu · 4h ago
The way I read it is this law criminalizes discussing prohibition of ownership of production tools.
baal80spam · 3h ago
Communists killed more people than the Nazis did so it makes sense.
krapp · 30m ago
I mean, if we're going by body count alone then religion easily outpaces communism and Nazism.
southernplaces7 · 4h ago
Oh the irony of this.... I detest communism and the sheer idiocy of so many of its tenets, as well as the particularly dogmatic (and fortunately archaic) rigidity of those who vomit them out. But no, you don't weaken an insidious ideology by banning its ideas.
krapp · 22m ago
How do you weaken an insidious ideology?
Letting insidious ideologies flourish and debating them in the marketplace of ideas doesn't work.
So how do you do it?
ngcazz · 5h ago
First they came for the communists.
alephnerd · 5h ago
First the ŠtB came for Masaryk...
(And Fascists+Nazis are banned as well in Czechia today, so the precedent exists)
ashoeafoot · 4h ago
First the fascists and the communists came to do common conquest, so first they came for the weaker nations ..
There was a whole akward year where all the comintern was ordered to praise and love hitler. True love to the idea is when you share poland over a dinner date.
jesterson · 4h ago
You must have forgotten whp have eventually conquered Hitler. Hint: it is not "allied forces", which are keen to claim so more and more in recent years.
somedude895 · 2h ago
The Soviets would have gone under without lend-lease from capitalist US. They've paid much more in blood for which they deserve all the respect in the world, but defeating the Nazis was a joint effort. It's really strange how some revisionists in the West want so desperately to minimise their own part in defeating evil.
lostmsu · 4h ago
> common conquest
As opposed to the British Empire and, essentially, everyone else who could?
Why is it necessary to name some vague adversary? Why is it not enough to punish the promotion of authoritarianism and all forms of hatred?
In any case, I don’t see the harm in naming and shaming the historical worst of the worst?
Also - law needs to be concrete enough to be enforceable.
Letting insidious ideologies flourish and debating them in the marketplace of ideas doesn't work.
So how do you do it?
(And Fascists+Nazis are banned as well in Czechia today, so the precedent exists)
There was a whole akward year where all the comintern was ordered to praise and love hitler. True love to the idea is when you share poland over a dinner date.
As opposed to the British Empire and, essentially, everyone else who could?