| mrstickball said: Ah, but there is a huge difference there. In your example, the man has the right to express himself. If he expresses himself in the wrong area at the wrong time, there are consequences for that. However, he is still free to express himself. Likewise, the man that was attacked would be able to face his attackers in court, and ensure they went to jail for their crimes. I'm going to agree with PostMod here. Russia banning the game shows that they are still protectionist when it comes to freedoms. That is that they don't want their country to be shown in a negative light. Of course, that is just the tip of their iceburg, as they don't quite have a great track record with human rights, or freedoms - even after the fall of the USSR. On the other end, I can understand if Russians don't like what is portrayed in the game. They should be able to choose to not buy the game, or protest it. But to have the government come in and ban it is not great for freedom. What happens if Russia bans any game that portrays the west in a positive light, next?
|
More plausible is that this is an instance of impotent rage. They're pissed, really want to do something no matter how pointless, and this is the best they came up with.
