Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
What role, if any, did pressure to deal with neo-Nazis in the making of this law? Equivocationist laws against extremists has been a right-wing response to such pressure in both Germany and Hungary.

By the way, will you write a diary on Lithuanian politics some day? What you wrote above raised my interest, and I don't think it could be a job more depressing that what I have to deal with when covering my wider region, from the Czech Republic to Romania.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Fri Jun 20th, 2008 at 11:39:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think that many Lithuanian politicians are particularly uncomfortable with anti-fascist issues per se. But the political culture is such that historical details (say, regarding Jews in WWII) are not widely known or discussed, neo-Nazi threat is not taken urgently on personal level. Higher officials routinely say the right things, and active opposition is demonstrated by some commentators. Probably in aggregate, more discomfort is in the silent "pressure" to allow sympathizers disproportional influence.

The equal treatment of extremists is still in the conditioning phase in Lithuania, to my opinion. More so than, say, in Estonia (which symmetrically banned swastika and hammer/sickle some time ago). The question is, how many parliamentarians fully knew (or cared) what equivocationist model they are following.

If I have time this month, I'll try to prepare a diary. But my view is not very standard; I'll have to check recognizably accepted hierarchies of facts.

by das monde on Sat Jun 21st, 2008 at 09:39:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series