DPRK condolences and laws on the interpretation of history

The blogger from iDnes.cz, František Matějka, filed a criminal complaint against the chairman of the KSČM, Vojtěch Filip, due to his condolences to the death of Kim Jong-il.

Lessons from crisis development
Lessons from crisis development

His a criminal complaint builds on the 1993 law on the illegality of the communist regime.

Let's think about it now. We have a law here that tells us what we should think of the past. No matter what it really was, there is a law and that is the way it is.

I personally think that the regime between 1948 and 1989 was monstrous. But do I have the right to impose this opinion on someone?

What if a law was passed that said that "The period of the 90s was a period of successful and famous transformation into a market economy“- how would you like this interpretation interpreted by law? How about your parents, how your friends?

What the previous regime did, what I also consider (among other things) monstrous to do, was the distortion of history and the manipulation of facts - enforcing a single correct view of historical events. But what does the pre-Velvet Revolution regime law illegally do?

Perhaps we will now sue anyone who declares that "it wasn't that bad" and that "everyone was better"? We will close anyone who has a different view to the events that took place here? By what right are we trying to impose on someone an opinion on history?

The analysis of the past is the work of historians, not politicians and laws. What about Act of Events of 1938? 1968? How about the law on White mountain? What about replace history textbooks with a collection of laws about the right view of history?

What made the past regime monstrous (among other things) was to impose the only right view of the past. People with a different opinion were sent to uranium mines, prisons or executions.

But what does the 1993 law on the illegality of the previous regime do? What will he do Act on the Merits of Václav Havel? What does any lawwhich imposes on us the only correct view of history? He is doing what the previous regime did. The form is the same, only the content is different.

Similar laws must be repealed without compensation. No one has the right to impose on anyone the only right view of the past. If people think that the previous regime was monstrous, the law is not needed at all. If they don't think so, the law shouldn't exist at all, because then it is violation of freedom of speech and thought.

There are similar laws an example of totalitarian thinking in those who create and promote them.

0 comments

  1. Hello, this is an old article, but still - there are certain limits to which freedom must end. This is not about dictatorship, but about morality. Will you let a sadistic pedophile on your child? You could also say that he has a right to his deviation. Even in a free society, there simply has to be a certain limit. And if people can't follow morality (defending communists and murderers is wrong), then there must be law. Unfortunately.

  2. @Petr Sad: As far as I know, Seoul is located in the Republic of Korea, ie in South Korea. The DPRK, or North Korea, is mentioned in the article only in connection with human rights organizations in that country. The Republic of Korea is not the DPRK, you confuse concepts with impressions. 😉

  3. to Horák: "… a dull flock does not want freedom, but equality." It is perfectly fine that it wants equality. But it should also want freedom, because there is no one without the other and both without the third - the greatest! Namely Brotherhood…

  4. so good, but writing ONLY blogs is like remcat with beer, is there any possibility in the Czech Republic (I live in America) to support Matejka in this? Otherwise, if Filip comes out without a mess, it will be hurry.

  5. not that you are wrong, I myself am a supporter of free opinion, but where is the freedom if I want to doubt the Holocaust, not that I am such an idiot or a fanatic, but we are also right to the mistake. Or, and not only in the Czech Republic, but elsewhere in the EU, when a white person gets up and cares about a tanned one, as happened in England, he goes to sit. That double elbow is what's bothering me, and another one too, so at least give Matejk, whom I think, to let Filip at least see the media.

  6. If people today are persecuted and imprisoned for mere expression of sympathy - and that is, I see no reason why Vojtěch Filip should avoid the same meter. If it finally hits someone, they change the law and no one is punished for expressing sympathy, then my time has not been wasted.

  7. FM wrote that announcement actually to defend the plus-minus of the same opinion you have. He also likes (complete) freedom, and therefore he does not like it, when according to the same law only some are punished, while others still produce with their vercajek and opinions with impunity.

  8. Mr. Kučík: the communist populist Filip wants to be visible at all costs - dozens of heads of state and thousands of statesmen around the world die every year; Do you think that you will find Philip's condolences even in these cases?

  9. The nationalist populist Matějka wants to make himself visible at all times (and he is good for any frog-minded topic) and Lukáš still (unintentionally) helps him with that… :))
    I have it all in a storm in a glass of water, which every reasonable judge must sweep from the table (I do not argue with the text on Devian at all)…

  10. Yes - I share your position, I understand it and I agree with it. I note, however, that the blunt majority of the flesh is unable to share freedom; a dull herd does not want freedom, but equality. So I think that you and I belong to a significantly minority population - after all, this has always been the case and will be for a long time to come 🙁

  11. OK - so do you agree with the support and promotion of National Socialism (alas Nazism in Hitler's Germany) and fascism (alas fascist Italy and Spain)? Please give a well-founded answer.

Comments are off.