Offending being Venetian is legal ?

One of the positive effects that led to the law of recognition of the Venetian rights “minor nationality” is to no longer see oneself discriminated against in the media, and the right that in general there is no incitement to hatred or contempt towards being Venetian, even an indirect or as tolerated attitude.

For example today would be legally responsible for ethnic hatred Toscani's famous phrase that had held up the Venetians (all as a people and without distinction) to be drunkards and ancestral descendants of alcoholics, and the judiciary has also acquitted itself proving to be led by a state racism. The Supreme Court had confirmed acquittal because the expression of the Tuscans did not offend anyone in particular, reiterating that, as already in 2011, that the Venetians do not exist as a specificity. the thing is false, because Toscani was instead explicitly referring not only to a certain identity, but even to a certain geographical area. What would happen if someone said that Sicilians are atavistic mafiosi and it is the destiny of Sicilians to be mafiosi simply because they were born in Sicily?

With the law on the national rights of the Venetians everything changed, denying the existence of the Venetian identity as the Court of Cassation did is prohibited by international law, and now denying their right to national minority and identity would be the equivalent of denying the existence of the Jews.

The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, which now applies to the Venetian, in fact it provides a series of protection mechanisms on this theme that serious prohibit such facts occurred.

Signing it the state has signed it undertook “…to guarantee every person belonging to a national minority the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law. A tal fine, any discrimination based on belonging to a national minority is prohibited.” (art 4 Point 1)

This right had not yet been recognized to the Venetians when Toscani was acquitted, but today it is there, and must exercise it whenever such facts happen. It is necessary to report the fact asking for the application and compliance with the law in court.

Toscani Try to repeat what he said. He won't do it because he is not a racist, he is just an advertiser like many others who for commercial purposes does not exist to instigate hatred and discrimination of particular categories as long as this is permitted by the flaws in the law, and in fact he also did so in other situations not hesitating to show naked bodies, or for example by also offending religious sentiment as is allowed to be done today.

Tuscans will therefore no longer offend the Venetians, because today there is a law and it is forbidden, and he will no longer do so, not out of fear or understanding of the error but out of practical convenience.

Caution, we are in a delicate sphere, that of “freedom of expression”, space and the limits of this, and it is necessary to deepen the discussion.

I don't say that you can't criticize or offend an idiot just because he's Venetian, but you can't declare someone an idiot just because they are Venetian. In my opinion, it is not admissible and must be prohibited to attack the feelings of an entire nation or a religion for advertising or commercial purposes or even simply for audience and visibility purposes.. The Supreme Court did this implicitly, It acknowledged that the Venetians can be declared Drunkards atavaci. So why is it not legal to say that the judiciary is made up of psychopaths?

If we allow advertisers, sellers of pots, careerists have the freedom to attack and offend the identity and religious feelings of others, impunity, let's let advertising replace culture and ethics first, Then philosophy and politics, and in practice we delegate them to become the decision makers of our society and our representatives, and that would make them the laws.

In fact this has already happened with the advent of private television, when we left to advertising and much space after 15 years (not centuries) there we are found to Government, with a society that has become as false and hypocritical as an advertisement. Whether coincidence or a consequence obvious? But we know that Italy is a country that does not deal with these issues and the “Culture”, or better, decides not to deal with it because it suits those who don't want a society of legality and respect for the rules, Rather, he doesn't want rules because he is already the strongest who always wins, that is, the dark potentates. It speaks only of culture when that match many of the museum tickets sold. Point.

If we let the advertiser in the media decide who can be denigrated and offended as a category (not as an individual), we decide to commit suicide made the whole of European culture rational respect for individual and collective rights, indeed their delineation and defense, and we give strength and voice to religious extremism which instead has a total veto over this ( a sua volta antiumano) but it responds in excess and in an oppressive manner to the human right to a certain dignity and self-esteem otherwise denied.

Returning now to the discrimination prohibited by law I wrote, the state has committed to intervene if necessary so that the Venetian identity can no longer be offended, and this obligation is always given by art. 4 of the Convention which in the second paragraph says that the Parties (that is, the states) “.. undertake to adopt, It is of the case, appropriate measures to promote in all areas of economic life, social, political and cultural full and effective equality between people belonging to a national minority and those belonging to the majority. In this respect, they will take due account of the specific conditions of persons belonging to national minorities.“.

Since it is forbidden to offend other minorities, including homosexuals, in Rooms, people of color, but also women and other “minorities” , offending the Venetians as a national identity must also be prohibited. And we should not let such communication techniques ambiguous space that offend a third party or through tawny helpful. And in fact, everyone is prohibited from offending, for example, blacks, it is not clear why it is granted if it offends the Venetians, a national minority, Now.

This is one of the revolutions brought about by the law that recognizes the Venetians as minor nationalities, and I wrote “minor nationality” instead of “national minority” because it seems to me a more correct expression of the meaning and necessary respect that is due to the Venetian nation.

Now let's see if the identity associations are ready to take up these “weapons” the right (the only ones who have the sense of being imbracciate today), or if the Venetians should begin to wake up on their own representation. In fact, as said, a film “I'm jew and I can make fun of the Jews, you're not and you can not do.” , and I am Venetian and can say that politically you have to wake up in the face of evidence.

forgot: if you are Venetian(The) and you haven't declared it yet, failure downloading the form and sending the statement, it's the only legal way you have. But luckily you have it.

All rights reserved