I recently came across an article on Echo24 where the author wonders how in Russia they prosecute teachers who say something other than what the government propaganda claims.
...and as it turned out, it can be quite tricky for educators in Russian schools to try to oppose the official narrative in any way. In April, for example, schoolchildren in the Russian city of Penza reported their teacher to the police, who criticized Russian military activities in Ukraine. According to information from the independent portal Meduza, the authorities then initiated a prosecution against the 55-year-old English teacher based on a law that prohibits the dissemination of information discrediting the Russian military.
(The whole text can be read here.)
I remembered an article - well, there were more of them - where exactly the same thing happened in our country about a month ago. For example here.
"A teacher should honor the facts, not utter propaganda contrary to the obvious facts. Yes, everyone has the right to an opinion, but not to a lie," Gazdík wrote for Seznam Zprávy.
His department dealt with similar cases already at the beginning of Russian aggression. That's when he sent out instructions to schools on how to talk to children about the conflict. But not everyone follows it. "That's why I appreciate the approach of the school principal, who immediately put the teacher on the line and terminated her employment relationship," added Gazdík.
If we changed the names of the teachers and the countries, I'd almost say it's the same article.
So I'm just asking - maybe I don't understand it completely - but how do you recognize "democracy" as opposed to "evil totalitarianism", when in both it is obviously forbidden to think and especially to say something other than what the government officially stamps?
Support my work
The difference may be in the hardness of the agent used. The question is, in which legal branch does the Russian law, which prohibits the dissemination of information discrediting the Russian army, fall into; I assume that we will be in the category of criminal law (maybe; it is not clear to me from the article; let alone that she was convicted), or administrative punishment (I have no idea about Russian laws and journalists are not really helping me with this). In the case of the Czech teacher, it is a labor law penalty; the question of how the relevant headmistress of the school or the municipality, as the founder, defined the breach of duty by the employee "in a particularly gross manner" (see § 55 para. 1 letter b) ZP), if it was necessary, when Gazdík concluded that it was correct and publicly supported it (I assume it was an immediate termination of employment by the employer). Someone somewhere wrote that if similar events were an incentive for a free dialogue between several parties, it would be educational, but the times are not very favorable to dialogues. And so anyone who does not currently fit into the official narrative is easily branded a traitor in one country and a disinformer in another country. Truth is hard to find where, in the name of the only Good, reason has been reduced to ashes in the furnace of feelings. But there is really no need to be under any illusions about Russia.
Once again for "mirka" (Cemper? xD)
..We know that everything 'they' told us for two years was a lie. So why should we believe anything they tell us now and will tell us in the future? Our governments are as crooked and unreliable as Google and Wikipedia…
Well, I learned a great wisdom in my mature age, that two doing the same thing is not the same thing. In the circle of my acquaintances, we got to these hot topics and I mentioned my opinion on "turning off" disinformation websites and I argued that both here and in Russia they use exactly the same procedures, i.e. that someone from the security forces calls a private company (editor ,….) and will recommend what they should or should not do. The reaction quite shocked me, it's not the same thing, the fundamental difference is that here is a democracy and in Russia a dictatorship.... And the entire debate was carried out in a similar spirit. Restricting freedom there is a bad thing for consolidating dictatorship, and here it is a good thing for protecting democracy...
Yes, that's exactly how it is, unfortunately, and a lot of people blindly applaud it. According to them, the difference is that "our" truth is the right one after all... 😉
Cemper? …
1) In the text it is written that she was tried - I don't know what information you have about life imprisonment...
2) What do I know, I think the Czech teacher was fired from her job...
3) Do you, the party, or who determines what is currently true?
4) If you like my books, you probably didn't understand them at all, because then you could never write that I adore Russia in any way, or even crawl up his ass - on the contrary, it is still true that Putin is a criminal. But the world is not black and white, even if you might wish it to be, and if I don't have a Ukrainian flag on my profile, it doesn't mean I'm a Russian agent...