EU Views Net Censorship As a "Trade Barrier"

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "The European Parliament just passed a proposal to treat internet censorship as a trade barrier, in particular the 'Great Firewall of China.' If passed by the European Council, the issue would be raised in trade negotiations and could lead to economic sanctions and trade restrictions for those countries unwilling to remove oppressive Net censorship." We have discussed some of the ways in which the EU, and its member countries, engage in their own brand of censorship.

Comments

Positive movement

[KublaiKhan]

Even if it is somewhat hypocritical in some cases, it's a nice step forward--because, after all, this will mean that the member states will have to eventually reduce or eliminate censorship in order to comply with the EU regulations.

Re:Social justice will create better markets

[KublaiKhan]

A nice hope, but unfortunately many people prefer echo chambers to debating tables.

This is why there are many vibrant communities for the support of racism, discrimination, xenophobia, and suspicion of conspiracies by Other People.

Re:The EU May Be Censoring...

[nycguy]

So the Chinese government is not PROTECTING its people from the DANGERS of porn? And EU officials are not OPPRESSING those who have views they find DETESTABLE? Of course, MAYBE you were just being SARCASTIC. Either way, why are we typing like THIS?

Re:nazi ban

[ZDRuX]

So basically you're against censorship, unless it's something you don't like - then it's to censor it.

Re:The EU May Be Censoring...

[LithiumX]

Yes... that's the way to promote freedom. Cut oppressive governments further off from the outside world, so that they are even less inclined or able to change.

I still believe if we had extended full trade relations towards Cuba as soon as they revolted, their communism would have quickly changed into something more balanced.

Oppression can only exist in a vacuum. Opening your doors to such nations doesn't encourage them, it makes them interdependant, and exposes them to better systems. Just look at China - they are by no means perfect, but exposure to the free market has changed them drastically.

Re:nazi ban

[cozziewozzie]

Could you give me some examples of "destroying historical artifacts"?

Using Nazi symbols is explicitly allowed in Germany, if it is used for historical reasons, in documentaries, movies depicting that time, or any scholarly purpose. The museums are full of historical artifacts from that time. What "destruction" are you talking about?

What is not allowed is glorifying the Nazi regime and holocaust denial, as well as reselling Nazi symbols. Mein Kampf is not banned, or illegal, it just can't be printed. There are plenty of copies floating around. But it's illegal to take a copy to school, and then try to convince kids that it's full of great ideas and that they should try them on their colleague with immigration background. Which happens right now, in Germany.

I agree that banning things is not the way. But some people act as if Germany is doing it out of some childish spite, not real historical and political reasons. Millions of people were executed in concentration camps by the Nazi regime and there are many people still around who are trying to repeat that today. Comparing TODAY's Nazi gangs with Romans and Carthage shows complete lack of perspective.

Re:The EU May Be Censoring...

[superwiz]

Censorship is good in one case only; To protect children. I personally think in that case it is protection. Think-of-the-children is a common tag line on slashdot for a reason. It is used to justify all kinds of trade offs of liberty for security. Parents must protect their children. The government should not and MUST NOT assume the position of a parent. Standards of "normal" vary and the government has no business protecting children from vulgar language any more than it has protecting them from "wrong" religions.