Social media: The liberal state should additionally problem guidelines | EUROtoday

“The meaning of politics is freedom,” wrote the thinker Hannah Arendt: the liberty to develop, the liberty to experiment with life, the free alternate of opinions between – legally – equals amongst equals. At least in a democracy.

Too usually the state interferes within the pursuits of the person, desires to trim them, educate them and steer them alongside paths that it believes are proper. But that isn’t the job of the state. Where authorities affect may be lowered with the intention to protect and enhance the liberty of the person, it ought to be executed. Who can severely dispute this?

However, the disciples of vulgar liberalism are at present turning into more and more louder. They preach the excessiveness of individualism. Unfortunately, they haven’t understood or forgotten: The West and Western democracies have produced two primary solutions: freedom because the absence of ties – AND freedom because the voluntary acceptance of authority.

The democratic state or a democratic affiliation of states has the proper to problem guidelines that shield the person or the weaker and even minorities. A United States Supreme Court justice as soon as defined this restricted freedom as follows: “The freedom of movement of my fist must be limited by the proximity of your chin.”

In phrases of right now, this implies: The EU has the proper to take motion in opposition to hatred and incitement on social media, however this should be about prison offenses and never about political snooping. This has nothing to do with censorship, however quite with preserving Western values.