3 ms·
> more often than not Do you have any evidence for that claim or is it a gut feeling? > in the UK it's what Starmer doesn't want to hear. In a literal sense
by teiferer 10mo ago
> more often than not
Do you have any evidence for that claim or is it a gut feeling?
> in the UK it's what Starmer doesn't want to hear.
In a literal sense that can't be true, since upon change of government, the hate speech definition does not suddenly change. In contrast, Putin and Khamenei are very literally able to personally define the definition.
In a figurative sense, that's likely true. As a democratically elected representative of the people, what he wants censored reflects what the people want censored, so is in alignment with a democratic society. If the people change their mind or realize it's not actually what they wanted, they elect somebody else next time. Good luck trying that with Putin or Khamenei.
In either case, your comparison does not hold up.
- throwfaraway135 10mo agohttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/04/grooming-gangs-scandal-cover-up-oldham-telford-rotherham/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/01/04/grooming-gangs-s...
- teiferer 10mo agoSo, use that information at the next election. If enough people care then it changes outcomes. Again, try that with Putin or Khamenei. (If such an article even gets published instead of ending the career or life of the journalist.)
- JuniperMesos 10mo ago> In a literal sense that can't be true, since upon change of government, the hate speech definition does not suddenly change. In contrast, Putin and Khamenei are very literally able to personally define the definition. Well it might if people systematically vote for politicians who promise to change the hate speech definition.