Is censorship sometimes necessary?

[James M]

I have read that in Germany it is against the law to sell the famous book written by Herr Hitler. I have read that in France it is against the law to express certain opinions about the treatment of Armenians in Turkey during World War I. I have read that in South Korea people may not click on websites from North Korea.

In your opinion, is censorship sometimes a necessary measure in order to ensure peace and tranquility in society?

[B3l1]

If people want they can always buy certain book or visit certain website.. My belief is that they are censoring things to preserve the national integrity and history.

[Jamie (K)]

I don't have any opinion about whether the Germans should ban sales of Mein Kampf. Hitler brought the ruin of their country, and if they think it's going to stoke that kind of thing again, I guess it's their option. Germany is a rather free country, so in my opinion they can be given that slack.

Censorship never ensures peace and tranquility in society. The North Koreans don't maintain their "peace and tranquility" through censorship, but through guns and concentration camps. Censorship is just part of the overall oppression package. (They've recently arrested people for expressing insufficient grief at the death of their "Dear Leader".)

The only time censorship is necessary, in my opinion, is when there is a war or some similar problem and the identity of spies and the movement of troops has to be kept secret in order to save their lives.

[Minhajquazi]

No country is open since early life of human history, behind treachery. Because, treachery is one kind of human nature! It starts from Adam and Eve,they did it with the God.

By this time, treachery is not stopped-it has been going on. Yes, you can control it by your acumen and wisdom,one form is censorship. The more illiterate society is, the more censorship will be.

Hitler's upper chamber was vacuum, and so did many conservative politicians everywhere. This is a simple math,-Why do some people have more conservative than their other classmates in school?

Because, these conservatives have seen a lot of troubles than their competitors. Reverse, these dynamic persons have seen a lot of troubles, but they handled them successfully, where other couldn't have successful-result is either dynamic or conservative.

Again, those people have migrated in new society, generally, they become more dynamic seeing new society, people, values, and new Geography. that is why the USA, Canada or Australia are developed, or better education can open your eyes,and makes you more dynamic than your preceding s.

Ultimately, better education could reduce the censorship much faster than anything,like not to quarrel, tease anybody or accept the new concept without hesitation, which is called -adaptability, by Marketing term.
_________________
Quazi,(46) a writer, thinker & humanist
since 28 years.

[Lmn_Dreem]

In my opinion, country is like a huge family. King and citizens are like father and kids. No one may let kids without censorship. Meanwhile, the more we'll be strict, the more kids will disobey. On the other hand, it's not approperiate to force our kids to consider our arguments with their uncles. I see that censoring should be inherent with wisdom because it's a very sensetive concept. It may help us to build a successful community but if it raise more it will work against us.

[Jamie (K)]

Small countries feel like big families, but if you live in a huge country, you don't feel that way. In my country we consider the people in the government -- including the president -- to be our servants, so they have no business telling us which ideas to express and which ones not to.

[Lmn_Dreem]

It depends on the general system in the country. In our country we consider the people in the goverment like our parents. They work hard to keep us in the top. Even censorship here keep our community from intellectual invasion which destroyed many countries.

[Jamie (K)]

What countries have been destroyed by "intellectual invasion"? I can think of great civilizations that fell because they refused to accept foreign ideas. China in the 19th century is a good example of that.

[Lmn_Dreem]

Many countries lose its religion, identity and secuurity due to intellectual invasion. You can see that all over the world

[Jamie (K)]

In some countries the religion is the basic problem with society, and they would benefit from large-scale religious conversions. For example, countries that are under Shari'a law have very serious problems with brutality and oppression of women and religious minorities, slavery and other abominations, and they would benefit greatly if the majority of their people converted to a more just religion that is peaceful and respects all people equally.

[Torsten]

Almost any censorship is tilting at windmills, it doesn't get you anywhere. I don't know of any country where constant censorship has resulted in anything sustainable. With the arrival of the Internet maintaining censorship became even more difficult. Governments which use censorship as a means of maintaining control are doomed to fail. Sooner or later they will get replaced by a democratic system that allows for freedom of speech. You can't control the thoughts of an entire nation.

TOEIC listening, photographs: Chefs in a kitchen

[Lmn_Dreem]

No my dear, you have fake thoughts about Shariá. First, woman is the best member in islamic family. As a wife her husband shoul give her dowry which she determines, he have to pay for her life like when she was before wedding, he should respect her all the time and he is responsible for her transport, health, education, shopping, etc. Woman in Islam is like a queen. Islam is the most peaceful and slavery is forbidden in Islamic faith.

[Jamie (K)]

No, my dear, you don't understand equality of sexes. Under Sharia, a woman's testimony is considered equivalent to only half of that of a man. She is considered property of her husband until she marries, and then property of her husband. She can be given the death penalty if she commits adultery, but there appears to be no death penalty for men who commit adultery (he can call it "temporary marriage" (نكاح المتعة)). Sharia law allows the husband to beat his wife (I have seen various imams explaining the justifications for this and restrictions on the size of the stick, for example), but there is apparently no provision for the wife to beat her husband. These are just a few of many examples of unequal treatment of women under Sharia law.

Slavery is allowed under Islam under certain specified circumstances, as long as the person taken into slavery is not a Muslim. This is a good example of discrimination against non-Muslims. Another form of unjust discrimination is the jizya that non-Muslims must pay just for the mere privilege of not being Muslim.

Islam is not the most peaceful religion, because Mohammed ordered it to be spread by violence, and it is still spread by violence today.

All this is very well documented, so don't play your little taqiyya game with me.

[Lmn_Dreem]

Censorship is not incompatible with democracy. Prophet Mohammad the greatest in Islam, uncovered his back and said he allow who has a right to take it with his hand. I don't know if it's clear that is like when I say if you feel I abuse you then take your right, beat me, that is your right. But democratic and everything in our life should be in the middle without overkill or negligence.

[Jamie (K)]

The false prophet Mohammed did not believe in democracy, so I don't know what role he has to play in a discussion of that subject. He was basically a gangster, and gangsters don't operate democratically.

Anyway, Mohammed could bare his back without fear of a beating, because he was an absolute dictator and could order the murder of anyone who tried.

Don't forget that he ordered the murder of a woman who wrote funny poems about him, so he obviously had no respect for human rights.