4 ms·

1) It is a binding referendum (this is what some catalan politics say). It is not about what they think, but about what are they going to do. The binding part i

1) It is a binding referendum (this is what some catalan politics say). It is not about what they think, but about what are they going to do. The binding part is what makes this completely illegal. 2) Some people don't take is seriously because it is against the law (there is a law which they can use to do a referendum like this but it needs support from central government and an open dialog that is not happening) 3) Catalans agree with the law. The Catalan court was who said this referendum was illegal. In any democracy you must govern by the law. The people chose the government and they make the laws. What is wrong with this? If you want a different government you vote something different, but Catalans are not doing this either. This process is not supported by some independist.

logicallee 9y ago
>In any democracy you must govern by the law. The people chose the government and they make the laws. What is wrong with this? you raise a good question and the answer is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority . That's why in America even if the majority support a law limiting speech, the supreme court will still strike down such a law - the State can't cause the removal of things like this app in America, lawfully; even if it has people's support. what is interesting is that I wouldn't have to explain this to someone else in America - it's part of what everyone already knows.
- jorgemf 9y ago
  That is why you have a constitution. This referendum is against it and that is why is against the law. You cannot claim your city as independent of the country doing a referendum among your friends. This is what is happening now in Spain (more or less)
  - logicallee 9y ago
    So, I actually didn't mention anything about the referendum at all. I was just using your example to point out that your attitude about the removal of an app means that "first-amendment" (free speech) issues aren't big in Europe. It has nothing to do with what the app (or referendum) says or doesn't say. It could be about anything. I was pointing out that you don't consider the forced removal of the app by the state to itself be a huge issue. It shows how strongly people feel about "free speech" in Europe: not at all. It's not part of the discussion or a relevant matter for you, as long as it's done lawfully.
    - jorgemf 9y ago
      Because how this is being done is a completely mistake. They don't respect each other and do things against the law they supported before. But don't compare it with free speech, this is not what is happening now. I want an open dialog, not this bullshit. If you do something illegal you face the consequences, as this is completely illegal they faced them. Otherwise is that they open a public debate and discuss, talk with the people, negotiate the terms, etc. They could do things right like in Ireland, but they are not doing it. And the central government instead of open a dialog is closed completely to any type of dialog. Someone tries to open a dialog and they point at them and blame them. And they got more votes because of their attitude. So fight is served because politics don't want to talk and are making the people hate the other people. To sum up, the problem is how are they doing the things and that most population support both of them (each one their party) increasing the anger and the hate.
- yorwba 9y ago
  > the State can't cause the removal of things like this app in America, lawfully; even if it has people's support. It can however cause the removal of apps that are ruled illegal by a court; the only difference is the kind of app that would be illegal. The US already has all kinds of restrictions on free speech, or somewhat speech-like actions like distributing an app. That is backed by the US constitution, just as this instance was (apparently) backed by the Spanish constitution. What is interesting to me is a) that you think everyone in the US is intimately familiar with the implications of the first amendment and concepts like the tyranny of the majority. That doesn't seem to be the case, given the striking number of people who think they can say whatever they want without any legal repercussions. And b) that you believe your argument to be so persuasive that someone who disagrees with you couldn't possibly have been aware of it.

logicallee 9y ago

>In any democracy you must govern by the law. The people chose the government and they make the laws. What is wrong with this? you raise a good question and the answer is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority . That's why in America even if the majority support a law limiting speech, the supreme court will still strike down such a law - the State can't cause the removal of things like this app in America, lawfully; even if it has people's support. what is interesting is that I wouldn't have to explain this to someone else in America - it's part of what everyone already knows.

jorgemf 9y ago
That is why you have a constitution. This referendum is against it and that is why is against the law. You cannot claim your city as independent of the country doing a referendum among your friends. This is what is happening now in Spain (more or less)
- logicallee 9y ago
  So, I actually didn't mention anything about the referendum at all. I was just using your example to point out that your attitude about the removal of an app means that "first-amendment" (free speech) issues aren't big in Europe. It has nothing to do with what the app (or referendum) says or doesn't say. It could be about anything. I was pointing out that you don't consider the forced removal of the app by the state to itself be a huge issue. It shows how strongly people feel about "free speech" in Europe: not at all. It's not part of the discussion or a relevant matter for you, as long as it's done lawfully.
  - jorgemf 9y ago
    Because how this is being done is a completely mistake. They don't respect each other and do things against the law they supported before. But don't compare it with free speech, this is not what is happening now. I want an open dialog, not this bullshit. If you do something illegal you face the consequences, as this is completely illegal they faced them. Otherwise is that they open a public debate and discuss, talk with the people, negotiate the terms, etc. They could do things right like in Ireland, but they are not doing it. And the central government instead of open a dialog is closed completely to any type of dialog. Someone tries to open a dialog and they point at them and blame them. And they got more votes because of their attitude. So fight is served because politics don't want to talk and are making the people hate the other people. To sum up, the problem is how are they doing the things and that most population support both of them (each one their party) increasing the anger and the hate.
yorwba 9y ago
> the State can't cause the removal of things like this app in America, lawfully; even if it has people's support. It can however cause the removal of apps that are ruled illegal by a court; the only difference is the kind of app that would be illegal. The US already has all kinds of restrictions on free speech, or somewhat speech-like actions like distributing an app. That is backed by the US constitution, just as this instance was (apparently) backed by the Spanish constitution. What is interesting to me is a) that you think everyone in the US is intimately familiar with the implications of the first amendment and concepts like the tyranny of the majority. That doesn't seem to be the case, given the striking number of people who think they can say whatever they want without any legal repercussions. And b) that you believe your argument to be so persuasive that someone who disagrees with you couldn't possibly have been aware of it.