{"id":180413,"date":"2017-02-28T19:44:16","date_gmt":"2017-03-01T00:44:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/european-parliament-votes-to-censor-politically-incorrect-speech-the-new-american\/"},"modified":"2017-02-28T19:44:16","modified_gmt":"2017-03-01T00:44:16","slug":"european-parliament-votes-to-censor-politically-incorrect-speech-the-new-american","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/politically-incorrect\/european-parliament-votes-to-censor-politically-incorrect-speech-the-new-american\/","title":{"rendered":"European Parliament Votes to Censor Politically Incorrect Speech &#8211; The New American"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Worried by the rise of nationalist parties that threaten the    very existence of the European Union (EU), the European    Parliament (EP) has quietly amended its internal rules to    enable the silencing of racist speech within its hallowed    halls.  <\/p>\n<p>    The     rule change, which passed in December, allows the president    of the EP to interrupt the live broadcasting of a    parliamentary debate in the case of defamatory, racist or    xenophobic language or behavior by a member. Furthermore, it    gives the president the power to delete said incident from    the audiovisual record of the proceedings, consigning it to    the memory hole unless a journalist happens to be present to    report on it. Offenders may be fined up to $9,500.  <\/p>\n<p>    Conveniently, the rule doesnt define what constitutes    defamatory, racist or xenophobic language or behavior,    leaving it to the presidents discretion, although the EP    Bureau, which consists of the president and 14 vice presidents,    must review the decision within four weeks.  <\/p>\n<p>    This undermines the reliability of the Parliaments archives    at a moment where the suspicion of fake news and manipulation    threatens the credibility of the media and the politicians,    Tom Weingaertner, president of the Brussels-based International    Press Association (IPA), told the     Associated Press.  <\/p>\n<p>    Weingaertner said the IPA was never consulted on the rule,    which came to light only when the Spanish newspaper La    Vanguardia reported on it.  <\/p>\n<p>    The AP gives some hints into what kinds of language and    behavior might be censored under the new rule. Noting that the    EP is often the stage for political and sometimes nationalist    theater, the AP writes, Beyond routine shouting matches,    members occasionally wear T-shirts splashed with slogans or    unfurl banners. Flags adorn some lawmakers desks.  <\/p>\n<p>    As if putting the flag of the country one represents on ones    desk werent scurrilous enough, the AP says that in recent    years, lawmakers have gone too far.  <\/p>\n<p>    There have been a growing number of cases of politicians    saying things that are beyond the pale of normal parliamentary    discussion and debate, British EP member Richard Corbett, a    socialist who shepherded the rule change through parliament,    told the AP. What if this became not isolated incidents, but    specific, where people could say: Hey, this is a fantastic    platform. Its broad, its live-streamed. It can be recorded    and repeated. Lets use it for something more vociferous, more    spectacular.  <\/p>\n<p>    Of course, if a member of the EP made a speech denying the    Holocaust or stumping for the reintroduction of chattel    slavery, there would be no need for the president to cut him    off. His foolish words would be sufficient to brand him an    outcast, and the public response to his remarks would be    deafening.  <\/p>\n<p>    No, what the EP really wants to silence is dissenting political    speech, especially if it might lead to the EUs dissolution.    Reports the AP:  <\/p>\n<p>    After Britains decision to leave the European Union, the    rising popularity of anti-immigrant candidates like Geert    Wilders in the Netherlands or far-right Marine Le Pen in France    is worrying Europes political mainstream. Le Pen, who is    running for the French presidency this spring, has promised to    follow Britains lead.  <\/p>\n<p>    At the European Parliament, where elections are due in 2019,    many say the need for action against hate speech, and strong    sanctions for offenders, is long overdue.  <\/p>\n<p>    Parliamentarians who hold dissenting views, such as Gerolf    Annemans of Belgiums Flemish independence party Vlaams Belang,    know exactly where this is headed. During debate in December,    Annemans said the rule can be abused by those who have    hysterical reactions to things that they qualify as racist,    xenophobic, when people are just expressing politically    incorrect views.  <\/p>\n<p>    Annemans warning is eminently reasonable. Prominent Europeans    have been tried and convicted of hate speech for expressing    opinions on Islam or immigrants that do not comport with those    of the powers that be. Wilders, for instance, was recently        found guilty of inciting discrimination for telling    supporters he would arrange to have fewer Moroccan immigrants    in the country. Franceprosecuted    journalist Eric Zemmour and actress Brigitte Bardot for making    remarks critical of Islam. Its not much of a stretch to think    that the EP would gladly stifle similar opinions during its    proceedings.  <\/p>\n<p>    The AP describes the EPs current system for cutting off    politically incorrect debate and notes that a time-delayed    broadcast is also a possibility. But with the multiplicity of    languages spoken in the EP and the varying opinions on what    constitutes hate speech, misunderstandings and even abuses    could crop up, observes the news service.  <\/p>\n<p>    This sort of thing has even supporters of the rule a bit    concerned. Helmut Scholz of Germanys left-wing Die Linke party    told the AP that EP members, being popularly elected, must be    permitted to express their opinions on Europe in parliament,    saying, You cant limit or deny this right. He also warned    that allowing debate to be cut off and remarks to be deleted    from the record could lead to fake news based on selective    extracts of debates. He said he still thinks there needs to be    some way to stop distribution of genuinely evil ideas,    although the AP admits that such things as Nazi rallying cries    and racist obscenities are relatively rare.  <\/p>\n<p>    Parliaments are supposed to be forums for open debate. The    pro-EU forces at the EP, however, are apparently afraid of    public discussion of certain topics, preferring instead to    muzzle those with alternative viewpoints. But if the EU and its    member states open-borders policies are so obviously superior    to the alternatives, what do the European elites have to fear?  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Link:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thenewamerican.com\/world-news\/europe\/item\/25491-european-parliament-votes-to-censor-politically-incorrect-speech\" title=\"European Parliament Votes to Censor Politically Incorrect Speech - The New American\">European Parliament Votes to Censor Politically Incorrect Speech - The New American<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Worried by the rise of nationalist parties that threaten the very existence of the European Union (EU), the European Parliament (EP) has quietly amended its internal rules to enable the silencing of racist speech within its hallowed halls. The rule change, which passed in December, allows the president of the EP to interrupt the live broadcasting of a parliamentary debate in the case of defamatory, racist or xenophobic language or behavior by a member <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/politically-incorrect\/european-parliament-votes-to-censor-politically-incorrect-speech-the-new-american\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-180413","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politically-incorrect"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180413"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=180413"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/180413\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=180413"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=180413"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=180413"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}