Comment on Wikimedia Foundation calls on US Supreme Court to strike laws that threaten Wikipedia

Deceptichum@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• kautau@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  “We want small government!”

  “But also big government in cases where our hate speech might be at stake!”

  source
• NateNate60@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Texas and Florida are pretty well-known as the shitholes of America. Run by populist idiots who cater to the uninformed and gullible voter. I’m sure there are places like that in every country.

  source

  • SomethingBurger@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Places like that in other countries usually don’t have as much power as US States do. Other countries are better designed and don’t have practically independent sub-countries inside them with their own laws.

    source

    • Furball@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Federalism can also be a very good thing to allow autonomy for certain groups within a country, though. I wouldn’t say Unitarianism is a better design by default.

      source

      • SomethingBurger@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Why would certain groups have autonomy on some things but not others? They don’t get to pick and choose. Either declare independence or submit to the central government.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • bitcrafter@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      If you are going to compare the United States to other political entities, I think that the better thing to compare it to is the European Union rather than other countries, because like the EU the US was formed from the union of sovereign member states and that is why it is designed the way that it is (for better or worse).

      Given that, I have an honest question asked out of ignorance: Does the EU have more power over its member states than the United States does? (I am not super-familiar with it, so the answer may very well be yes.)

      source

      • SomethingBurger@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        It has less. The EU is mostly an economic union. It can regulate trade and consumer rights, but not much else. Countries must adhere to the European Declaration of Human Rights and some other conditions to join the Union (like being a democracy or having a stable economy), but the EU cannot enforce these rules after the fact; see Hungary which became a near-dictatorship after joining, or France which is regularly sentenced for human rights violations and simply pays the fine instead of changing anything.

        EU laws cannot supercede a country’s constitution. If they clash, the country must - by EU rules - change its constitution, but not doing so carries almost no consequence.

        source
      • Instigate@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        I think it’s even better to compare the US with other federated nations - Canada, Australia, Russia, Brazil, India, Argentina etc. as they’re all constitutional nations of federated states with separations of power between the federation and the individual states.

        source
• Drusas@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Feels like we're in a death spiral.

  source

  • Drunemeton@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    “Please keep your hands inside the ride at all times.”

    source
• nutsack@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The wording of this law makes no sense to me

  source

  • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You’re catching on!

    source
• Rolder@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  How would it work if, say, a website run out of California or even another country violated this law

  source

  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Pretty much the same way that Europe’s GDPR works: they fine the business operations within the covered jurisdiction. If you don’t do business in their jurisdiction, you are perfectly free to tell them to shove their regulation up their ass.

    Wikimedia collects donations from Texans. If these laws survive a legal challenge, Wikimedia would either have to stop collecting donations from Texas or comply with Texas law.

    source
• captainlezbian@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  They want to normalize calls for executing undesirables

  source
• thbb@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Does this means we can invade truth social or reddit/conservative and they won’t be allowed to ban their contradictory?

  source
• qaz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  But what does this even mean? Would banning someone because they are of the opinion the holocaust didn’t happen illegal?

  source