...so they decided to get rid of the freedom.
I was listening to the BBC World Service's The World Today program last night. One of the pieces was on the aftermath of the royal/military coup in Nepal. The country's king sacked the government and seized power for himself, blaming the defunct government for failing to deal with a Maoist rebellion. This particular piece was about the sweeping restrictions on press freedom.
The information ministry (I'm immediately suspicious of press freedom in any country that feels the need to have an information ministry) said it was restricting journalism that "directly or indirectly instigates or supports terrorist and destructive activities and terrorism."
A wonderfully vague phrase that some so-called patriots in this country would impose in a heartbeat if they had the chance.
The radio piece had an interview with an activist for some Asian press fredom watchdog group. He pointed out that one of the justifications the now absolute monarch and his minions used for restricting press reporting of the rebellion and its conduct was, and I'm not making this up, that it might hurt the morale of the troops.
Which begs the question: is militarism the enemy of freedom around the world?
Or just in South Asia?
1 comment:
test
Post a Comment