Nothing. Just like how Poland and Hungary are EU members and they are walking their own way not giving a f about anything, rewriting the constitutions and laws as they wish
They are because being kicked out of the EU requires unanimous vote and hungary and poland just veto eachother into the EU. Nobody expected two states to become fascist at the same time when the EU was created.
>Nobody expected two states to become fascist at the same time when the EU was created
Since Germany and Italy was such a long time ago ;)
Personally I have found that on HN there is more of a dictatorship of phrasing than a dictatorship of ideas. Here's the short list of ideas you can't say on HN no matter how you phrase them, I think you would agree that this is not excessive: - "Individuals of one race are better or worse than individuals of another." - "One gender is clearly better or worse than another." - Anything about Republicans or Democrats Th…
- Anything positive about China - Relating ad blocking to piracy - Benefits of open offices
These may be controversial but you won’t be canceled.
Turkey has been a democracy for almost a century now. However, it all comes down to this, what happens when people of a democratic country elect a president that has totalitarian tendencies?
On the paper, Turkiye is a democracy. In reality, since 1950's it was not. It is a dictatorship or oligarchy at best, funded by the big money of the world, mostly from the US. Rigged elections, placing puppet governments (like Tayyip) is an ongoing theme. At the time of election, people are given the impression of who they are electing as it is in a democracy, while the result is already known by the powers that be.
Other than few military takeovers of the country since 1960, this country have never had fair and clear elections. Hence, Tayyip's puppet government has ben brought to action by the same powers that be, to decimate the Turkish armed forces, so, no more of those nasty military take-over actions can be repeated.
Turkiye has turned into a Banana republic for what it is worth.
>Ultimately we have a dictatorship of ideas What an amazing way to phrase "others don't like what I am saying and don't want to associate with me". The government controlling social media platforms is vastly different from a collection of companies controlling social media platforms that they built. There's an argument that can be made about companies needing to treat their platforms as public squares depending on if…
> The government controlling social media platforms is vastly different from a collection of companies controlling social media platforms that they built If the difference is measured by the effect produced then in many cases it is zero, that is, there is no any difference. For example,we frequently see collective censorship which effectively means the absence of freedom of speech. In fact, there exist also other int…
Freedom of speech is specifically freedom from the government interfering with your speech. Freedom of speech does not mean you can compel others into carrying your message forward.
Take your argument to its logical conclusion. Say I want everyone you come in contact with to hear my personal thoughts on government. Are you ok with being compelled to pass along a card with my diatribe on it to all of the people you interact with on a daily basis?
I wonder what some mid- to long-term consequences of Turkey slipping into dictatorship will be for NATO as a whole. It's clear Turkey is drifting away from the values held by the alliance members. I'm so glad they haven't been accepted into the EU. That would be a disaster.
France just left a NATO exercise after aggressions from Turkish navy
Turkey has been a democracy for almost a century now. However, it all comes down to this, what happens when people of a democratic country elect a president that has totalitarian tendencies?
On the paper, Turkiye is a democracy. In reality, since 1950's it was not. It is a dictatorship or oligarchy at best, funded by the big money of the world, mostly from the US. Rigged elections, placing puppet governments (like Tayyip) is an ongoing theme. At the time of election, people are given the impression of who they are electing as it is in a democracy, while the result is already known by the powers that be.…
The United States is not much better in terms of this. We have a free press in name only. If you are saying something that certain people don’t like, you are canceled. Your tweets will be taken down since you violated weakly worded community standards. You will be flagged on HN. Etc. Ultimately we have a dictatorship of ideas. The best answer so far is to go make a freedom platform with blackjack and hookers. Essenti…
I think there have been ideas in every society that have been taboo and not allowed to be shared. For example, in Germany nobody is allowed to speak positively about the Nazis. This is ultimately a subjective line that is drawn by the people in power and by social forces. These platforms are just enforcing their own subjective line on bigoted viewpoints. It only seems to be negative against conservatives in most cases so personally I think it’s fine, since those bigoted viewpoints tend to come mostly from conservatives.
„... pressing ahead with government plans after he said his family was insulted online“ That’s how you frame your readers. The author doesn’t know whether there’s causal relation between the possible insult and the plans to control the social platforms. But this is how media tricks the readers in thinking so.
> The author doesn’t know whether there’s causal relation between the possible insult and the plans to control the social platforms. I don't know--seems pretty clear to me. “Do you see why we oppose social media like YouTube, Twitter, Netflix, etc...?” Erdogan asked in reference to the alleged insults of his family members. “It is imperative that these channels are brought under control.” Again in reference to the in…
In your quotations there's nothing about any insult to his family. That means a causal relation isn't yet proven.
In a dictatorship, cracking down on social media is a no brainer. But I think social media undermines democracies as well. Social media vastly amplifies loud minorities. Democracy assumes that the majority of people are reasonable, so majority rule will also be reasonable. Loud minorities undermine majority rule. Loud minorities have always existed, but social media is now amplifying them to the point of obscuring wh…
> This is why we can have an election outcome that no one in the media predicted.
I presume you're referring to the 2016 presidential election in the US, and if so that's patently false. FiveThirtyEight estimated a ~28% probability[0] that Trump would win, and other major media outlets had similar outlooks prior to the election. Many willfully interpreted "28% chance" as "with any luck it won't happen," but you can't say that the media didn't think it was possible.
„... pressing ahead with government plans after he said his family was insulted online“ That’s how you frame your readers. The author doesn’t know whether there’s causal relation between the possible insult and the plans to control the social platforms. But this is how media tricks the readers in thinking so.
He literally referenced the insults as a justification for his actions. So no, this is not media deceptiveness. Quotes from a different article: > "“Do you see why we oppose social media like YouTube, Twitter, Netflix, et cetera.?” Erdogan asked in reference to the alleged insults of his family members. “It is imperative that these channels are brought under control.” > Erdogan said: “Turkey is not a banana republic.…
Still, no evidence of causal relation between insulting his family and the decision to control social platforms.