Hate on the books

The state should be interested in freedom of speech on the Web even more than citizens

The state should be interested in freedom of speech on the Web even more than citizens. Not even because censorship is prohibited in the Constitution, but because this is the only chance to understand: who can become the new Anders Breivik, who is ready to shoot people. Rashid Nurgaliyev's idea about the need to study mores by monitoring social networks and blogs is objectionable only because it pops up in a pre-election context. In fact, behind the statement of the Minister of the Interior, one can discern a peculiar reaction to the massacre arranged on the island of Utoya. As you know, Breivik never hid his views. He did not just have plastic surgery to create a truly Aryan physiognomy, he radiated hatred. And if someone paid attention to his words and views, then at least Breivik could not get a license for weapons.
Until recently, the Internet has attracted the attention of freedom-stranglers more than attentive researchers, although the Web itself, of course, is the richest material for operational work. Whatever the haters of the authorities write, for now it should be recognized that outside the Caucasus, the opposition is acting by the methods of Gandhi, while racial and national hatred gives rise to an incredible number of murders in large cities, especially in Moscow - we will most likely determine their exact number. we won't be able to, because records of such crimes can be sloppy, and they are regularly classified as domestic. „

Many problems could have been avoided if the Internet had been monitored for many years.

“Many problems could have been avoided if the Internet had been monitored for many years and all persons expressing extreme views that are really extremist, aimed at inciting racial and national hatred (or indicating that hatred is already alive in the heart of this person ), would be calculated and registered with the competent authorities. These lists themselves would certainly help the internal affairs bodies in creating profiles of the most active members of nationalist groups, which would make it easier to identify the organizers and permanent "heroes" of the riots, separating them from random fellow travelers and "recruits". But most importantly, thousands or tens of thousands of people prone to violence could be deprived of the opportunity to obtain licenses to carry weapons. How many murders this would have prevented in Russia, we do not know, but in Norway it would certainly have saved the lives of dozens of delegates to the rally, who became living targets for the lunatic.
Here one could take a ride on the topic of where the police looked when they were police, but evil tongues have been giving a very simple explanation for such an “oversight” for the second decade. Let's put it this way: before the revolution, the "Black Hundred" was financed by the Okhrana, and, they say, not much has changed in our Fatherland in a hundred years. In those days, the political system of the empire was also built on the basis of nationalist lightning rods, Cossacks and the “wild division”, and it came to the point that the fate of politicians was decided in the offices of the secret administration, the leaders of which were sometimes important to keep agents - so much so that it was possible to donate governor or other superior for the common good.
A hundred years ago, this construction fell apart when things really smelled of being fried, and nationalism left the agenda for a long time. But that was then - and now I would very much like that Tikhonov and Khasis, who published in the Reaction newspaper, would not have the opportunity to shoot lawyer Stas Markelov and Novaya Gazeta journalist Nastya Baburova, so that lunatics would not have at least official licenses to acquire and possession of weapons, and I personally appeal to Mr. Minister with a request to facilitate such a development of events.

ReplyReply allForwardDelete