'Nazi Grandma' Handed New Prison Sentence by German Court
210 replies, posted
[QUOTE=wystan;51428852]People have every right to question all history no matter the subject, even if the evidence is overwhelming, it doesn't matter, shouldn't be illegal. People used to think they made soap and lampshades out of Jews, that turned out to be untrue, so I can understand why people would question it further.[/QUOTE]
They question it in the same way anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers question things. That is, despite all the evidence that exists showing how wrong they are.
[QUOTE=dark_vivec;51431943]They question it in the same way anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers question things. That is, despite all the evidence that exists showing how wrong they are.[/QUOTE]
Specifically concerning the holocaust deniers, what harm are they doing? The answer is none. They only hurt themselves with their ignorance and no amount of government regulation and censorship will change that.
[QUOTE=Sims_doc;51428923]I am curious, given her age does she know something that we don't? and why is she saying such things.[/QUOTE]
No she's just a whackjob who's also old
However terrible holocaust denial is, you shouldn't get put in prison for basically having a different view, even if it's a stupid one. While they're at it why not put global warming deniers in chains aswell?
-snip-
is this like America's version of weed crimes?
Lock 'em up, throw away the key, etc.
[QUOTE=RB33;51431203]We are not being spoon fed information. I think it's saying much that you people are afraid of this. Because i'm not, we have trust in the government here.[/QUOTE]
Only fools trust the government and politicians blindly. I don't want a curated world view presented to me, I want THE world view. And if misinformation is hidden within that world view I trust myself and only myself to wade through the sea of information and discern valid -- and invalid -- details.
I'll use a sentence that holocaust deniers use a lot, not because I don't believe in the holocaust in particular, but because the matter of the sentence is irrefutable.
Truth does not fear investigation.
Banning expression of thoughts and ideals is dangerous, maybe in this particular case the effect is small, but it's a slippery slope if you get accustomed to the fact that you can just ban things to get rid of things "you don't want to hear". People drew parallels to 1984 earlier, and I think it is a relevant comparison.
You mentioned that banning holocaust denial is nice, because then you don't have to hear Nazis spreading their opinions on the matter during their rallies, which I assume you want to see just as little as you want to hear their opinion. So why not ban Nazi rallies? Or maybe even go for a more general ban on hateful rallies. In this case you'd have the arbitrary definition of hateful declaring what would be allowed and what wouldn't. Would occupy wall street have been illegal under these rules? Possibly, you could argue that the protest was hateful towards the 1%(which also happens to be a minority group), and thus illegal.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51431501]Ok, it's great that you think that but it does nothing at all to disprove what I said. If you go into my post and replace "misinformation" with "hate", my point is still valid.
See, denying what I'm telling you is a lot like holocaust denial; it doesn't matter if it convinces you or if you believe in it, it's still true.
You have no comprehension on how the Third Reich rose to power or how propaganda and misinformation works.[/QUOTE]
So if I missinform someone else, tell them a lie, they now spread that lie without knowing the truth, how is that not misinformation spreading?
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;51431512]You literally said that you'd rather be spoonfed information by the government than spoonfed Nazi ideals
Which raises the point again that you clearly find the people of Europe incapable of forming their own opinions on matters and dissenting views -must- be subverted[/QUOTE]
So I don't like nazis spreading their views, so i must want the government spoon feeding me opinions? There is nothing in between there? It's only one or the other?
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51431533]It doesn't matter if you do or don't trust your government, they're still censoring your thoughts and thats fucked up.[/QUOTE]
They are not censoring your thought, they punish you for your denying that millions of victims in a horrible crime against humanity died and you trying to belittle it, if you spread that belief in public.
[QUOTE]See, here you go again with your complete lack of understanding of how the Third Reich worked and how it came into power.
1933 didn't come around and the Nazis just popped into existence from the ether. It was [i][b]gradual[/i][/b]. It started with things like censorship, thought policing, and the banning of controversial media. It played on ignorance and distrust that already existed, and the people of Germany thought it was a good thing, just like you think this censorship is a good thing. Starting an evil government like Fascist Germany did not happen overnight, even from 1933 onwards it still took 6 years to build its standing army into the greatest fighting force on earth, and it took that long to condition it's people to be ready for the brutalities of war.
You really just don't have a damned clue what you're talking about man.[/QUOTE]
That you even think that criminalizing holocaust denial is comparable to the rise of Nazi Germany is mindboggling. Only a paranoid person would truly be afraid of that happening, we are not on the path to Nazi Germany over here. We have had these laws for decades and we're still not Nazi Germany, so i don't know why you think it will be a problem.
And I have never wanted to discuss the rise of power of the nazis or Hitler, really. So i don't why, we are talking about it. Except your theory that somehow, we might become like Nazi Germany because of this.
What halocaust denial is doing is spreading hate, if hate doesn't spread. Then how can there be so many people hating jews/*insert other group*? Because the hate has spread, from one person to another.
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51432037]Specifically concerning the holocaust deniers, what harm are they doing? The answer is none. They only hurt themselves with their ignorance and no amount of government regulation and censorship will change that.[/QUOTE]
They spread lies that the jews most likely would have made it up to gain sympathy or palestine or to cover for their global conspiracy. If they believe it's made up, someone must gain from it, right? And the jews as victims gets the blame for doing it. Not leading to a favourable view of jews. Ending up harming the opinion of jews, all because of lies. Lessened opinion then, leads to disgust and even violence against them. Lies, misinformation and hate do harm. I don't see how you can deny that. The holocaust is the prime example.
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=lanhacker1488;51432975]Only fools trust the government and politicians blindly. I don't want a curated world view presented to me, I want THE world view. And if misinformation is hidden within that world view I trust myself and only myself to wade through the sea of information and discern valid -- and invalid -- details.
I'll use a sentence that holocaust deniers use a lot, not because I don't believe in the holocaust in particular, but because the matter of the sentence is irrefutable.
Truth does not fear investigation.
Banning expression of thoughts and ideals is dangerous, maybe in this particular case the effect is small, but it's a slippery slope if you get accustomed to the fact that you can just ban things to get rid of things "you don't want to hear". People drew parallels to 1984 earlier, and I think it is a relevant comparison.
You mentioned that banning holocaust denial is nice, because then you don't have to hear Nazis spreading their opinions on the matter during their rallies, which I assume you want to see just as little as you want to hear their opinion. So why not ban Nazi rallies? Or maybe even go for a more general ban on hateful rallies. In this case you'd have the arbitrary definition of hateful declaring what would be allowed and what wouldn't. Would occupy wall street have been illegal under these rules? Possibly, you could argue that the protest was hateful towards the 1%(which also happens to be a minority group), and thus illegal.[/QUOTE]
Investigation has proved it true and one does a terrible thing denying that it happened. One does a terrible disservice to humanity to not admit the terrible parts of it has made, to remember it and move forward to never repeat such a thing again.
6 million of an ethnic group hasn't died in extermination attempt in 99% of all other things, so it's indeed a special case without fair comparison to something else. That's why it can be illegal and not a lot more things.
Your arguing for that a protest ban in your point, i'm not for that sort of thing. If they keep being peaceful, not using swaztikas and not spreading transparent hate, they can keep doing their marching and the rest can ignore them. We might see them but don't have to hear the stupidest things, they have to say.
That's a lot of text.
Her opinion is bullshit, but being imprisoned for having this opinion is even more bullshit.
-snip-
[QUOTE=bunguer;51433536][b]"They are not censoring your thought, they punish you for your denying that millions of victims in a horrible crime against humanity died and you trying to belittle it, if you spread that belief in public."[/b]
I sincerely hope you never obtain a position of great power, that statement is downright scary.
The fact that you want people arrested for telling "lies" shows as much. These people don't think these ideas as lies and due to the nature of history and how it is written, there's no infallible way of knowing for sure. There's a lot of evidence that points history in a certain way, mind you, but there's a whole field of [b]historical revisionism[/b] for instance, are you going to arrest them all for going against the grain and often portraying the "good guys" as "bad ones" in a multitude of historical events?[/QUOTE]
I don't need to obtain power, since it's already a law. Blame the current or former politicans for that.
The places were these crimes happened still exist today, it has been documented, both by the Nazis themselves and by others. No reasonable person would deny it based on the evidence that exists. It's simply disrepecting millions of dead, fueling hate and belittling a crime against humanity. Not really much different than vandalizing a graveyard. You're harming the memory of these people and possibly excusing what happened. There's no way for me that's excusable. Even in a country of free speech.
Very few cases of history involves ethnic cleansings of millions, this is unique and an exception. So i would not want to arrest people otherwise for having disagreements with them.
I think that the failure in communication here is that most of the posters here are arguing that censorship in general is bad, without really making it clear to you (RB33) how they apply to censoring Holocaust denial specifically. I'll try doing that:
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]So I don't like nazis spreading their views[/QUOTE]
The problem with criminalizing speech isn't that we prevent those with harmful viewpoints from spreading them, it's that we ban the expression of thought. I doubt anyone here LIKES Nazis from spreading their views, but completely banning expression of an idea is the wrong way to go about it. Criminalizing the expression of an idea may outlaws hate speech, but it also prevents rational debate.
[B]Suppose[/B] the holocaust didn't happen, and a historian uncovers evidence demonstrating this hypothetical truth. Is it right for us to legally silence him, even though in this scenario he is correct? You might argue that in reality he isn't correct, but how can we possibly know that if we don't assess his argument and attempt to disprove it?
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
They are not censoring your thought, they punish you for your denying that millions of victims in a horrible crime against humanity died and you trying to belittle it, if you spread that belief in public.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]Lies, misinformation and hate do harm. I don't see how you can deny that. The holocaust is the prime example.[/QUOTE]
Restating my above point, how can we determine what is truth and what is fiction if we're unable to debate each others viewpoints?
Some other stuff I want to discuss:
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
That you even think that criminalizing holocaust denial is comparable to the rise of Nazi Germany is mindboggling. Only a paranoid person would truly be afraid of that happening, we are not on the path to Nazi Germany over here. We have had these laws for decades and we're still not Nazi Germany, so i don't know why you think it will be problem.
[/QUOTE]
Nazi Germany wasn't Nazi Germany until Hitler got elected chancellor. The future is difficult to predict, and allowing for the criminalization of thought gives more tools of potential unchallengeable oppression to those in power. You're welcome to believe that what you believe is true or right to express will never be made illegal, but by the time your opinions start getting censored it will probably be too late. It's not paranoia to say that we'd like to prevent such a situation from happening and therefore oppose censorship.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]What halocaust denial is doing is spreading hate, if hate doesn't spread. Then how can there be so many people hating jews/*insert other group*? Because the hate has spread, from one person to another.[/QUOTE]
This argument relies on you clarifying what you mean by "hate", explaining why "hate" is bad, also justifying that Holocaust denial generates hate. These aren't trivial points, as I define hate as simple negative feelings, which aren't inherently bad. I also don't buy that Holocaust denial inherently generates negative feelings towards Jews. Burden of proof is on you. Simply saying something and relying that most people wouldn't disagree with you doesn't make it true (consider Nazi beliefs in Germany during WWII to illustrate this argument).
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
Investigation has proved it true[/QUOTE]
What if it's proven untrue?
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]If they keep being peaceful, not using swaztikas and not spreading transparent hate, they can keep doing their marching and the rest can ignore them. We might see them but don't have to hear the stupidest things, they have to say.[/QUOTE]
You SHOULD expose yourself to their arguments though, especially if you disagree with them. That's the only way that you can justify your beliefs.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]That's a lot of text.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, thanks for taking the time to explain more about what you think, especially in the face of virtually all posters disagreeing with what you're saying.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]So if I missinform someone else, tell them a lie, they now spread that lie without knowing the truth, how is that not misinformation spreading?[/quote]
Missing my point, [i]again[/i]
Misinformation barely works in 2016.
Let me give you another example for the umpteenth time. I tell you that all niggers should die because they're inferior and have lower IQ's than the white master race. You foolishly believe this without asking any sort of follow up questions, but you decide to google it on your smart phone because you're clearly suspicious of the validity of my statement. You find out 15 seconds late that what I said is not true, and you do not spread that bullshit.
"The holocaust is a lie"
"9/11 was faked/rigged"
"Niggers/Jews/Arabs are inferior"
"All Muslims are terrorist"
All these untrue statements are clearly false, and you and everybody else know it. Anyone who doesn't know it can figure out it's not true via 5 seconds of research.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
So I don't like nazis spreading their views, so i must want the government spoon feeding me opinions? There is nothing in between there? It's only one or the other?[/quote]
I don't like Nazis spreading their views either. And you know what my country has done about it? Proven them wrong, ridiculed them, and protested their movement until they were forced into obscurity to the point where they barely exist. What has your country done about it? Policed people's thoughts and censored their words and clearly all that has done is victimize the ideology. It clearly isn't working for you since you yourself have said that you have Nazi rallies marching down your streets.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
They are not censoring your thought, they punish you for your denying that millions of victims in a horrible crime against humanity died and you trying to belittle it, if you spread that belief in public.[/quote]
You can dress it up as having that opinion is a gross or tragic thing, but the bottom line is that your government is censoring your though and criminalizing you for it. Bottom line.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
That you even think that criminalizing holocaust denial is comparable to the rise of Nazi Germany is mindboggling. Only a paranoid person would truly be afraid of that happening, we are not on the path to Nazi Germany over here. We have had these laws for decades and we're still not Nazi Germany, so i don't know why you think it will be a problem.[/quote]
I'm not comparing 2016 Sweden to 1939 Germany, I'm dissecting them since you keep going full circle Godwin on everyone. My point is that censorship is the groundwork for a tyrannical government. Clearly your government has no malicious intent in doing so, but it can be easily abused in the future. Censorship in any capacity is never good.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
And I have never wanted to discuss the rise of power of the nazis or Hitler, really. So i don't why, we are talking about it. Except your theory that somehow, we might become like Nazi Germany because of this.[/quote]
We're talking about it because [i]you[/i] fulfilled Godwin's law.
[QUOTE=RB33;51429641]If hate doesn't spread, how did we get Hitler? We have to be careful around these things, that's why we have these laws.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
What halocaust denial is doing is spreading hate, if hate doesn't spread. Then how can there be so many people hating jews/*insert other group*? Because the hate has spread, from one person to another.[/quote]
Hate is formed out of fear and fear is formed out of a lack of knowledge. The Nazi movement in Europe, and other places, has kicked off in response to an influx of Muslims entering your countries and a lack of knowledge about them. The only thing a lot of people know about Muslims is terrorism and the brutality they see from them in the news. If an effort was made to educate people on their culture and the differences between the Wahabist terrorist and the more peaceful sects, then you wouldn't have issues with Nazis marching down your streets, as you have stated.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
They spread lies that the jews most likely would have made it up to gain sympathy or palestine or to cover for their global conspiracy. If they believe it's made up, someone must gain from it, right? And the jews as victims gets the blame for doing it. Not leading to a favourable view of jews. Ending up harming the opinion of jews, all because of lies. Lessened opinion then, leads to disgust and even violence against them. Lies, misinformation and hate do harm. I don't see how you can deny that. The holocaust is the prime example.[/quote]
The US doesn't censor speech or police opinions, and we don't have rampant violence against Gays, Jews, Muslims, whoever. So clearly your logic does not work it any way shape or form. Having an opinion hurts nobody, unless you count somebody's feelings :(.
I don't mean to be a dick, but you really don't know what you're talking about. You should really just cut your losses and run before that hole gets so deep that you can't climb out.
[QUOTE=Nyxxie;51433628]The problem with criminalizing speech isn't that we prevent those with harmful viewpoints from spreading them, it's that we ban the expression of thought. I doubt anyone here LIKES Nazis from spreading their views, but completely banning expression of an idea is the wrong way to go about it. Criminalizing the expression of an idea may outlaws hate speech, but it also prevents rational debate.[/QUOTE]
Viewpoints won't disappear but they will spread less if not expressed in public. What we criminalize are disrespectful proven lies that denies horrible crimes against humanity. There is no rational debate to be had, because there is nothing rational about holocaust denial. It's like having a rational debate about the earth's shape. Is it round or is it flat and so on.
[QUOTE][B]Suppose[/B] the holocaust didn't happen, and a historian uncovers evidence demonstrating this hypothetical truth. Is it right for us to legally silence him, even though in this scenario he is correct? You might argue that in reality he isn't correct, but how can we possibly know that if we don't assess his argument and attempt to disprove it?[/QUOTE]
It's not right. Theories of things where there exist no evidence (either for or against) should be allowed. That's how we discuss and assess history. There is no need to disprove holocaust denial, since it has already been disproved and the evidence is widely available. Again, it's like trying to prove that the earth is round.
[QUOTE]Restating my above point, how can we determine what is truth and what is fiction if we're unable to debate each others viewpoints?[/QUOTE]
It is allowed but here, there is nothing to debate about, what happened has already been determined.
[QUOTE]Nazi Germany wasn't Nazi Germany until Hitler got elected chancellor. The future is difficult to predict, and allowing for the criminalization of thought gives more tools of potential unchallengeable oppression to those in power. You're welcome to believe that what you believe is true or right to express will never be made illegal, but by the time your opinions start getting censored it will probably be too late. It's not paranoia to say that we'd like to prevent such a situation from happening and therefore oppose censorship.[/QUOTE]
These laws have existed for decades and has proved it's possible to have them without becoming an authoritarian state. This has been proved, that countries will become authoritarian because of it has not though. So it's up to you people to prove otherwise.
[QUOTE]This argument relies on you clarifying what you mean by "hate", explaining why "hate" is bad, also justifying that Holocaust denial generates hate. These aren't trivial points, as I define hate as simple negative feelings, which aren't inherently bad. I also don't buy that Holocaust denial inherently generates negative feelings towards Jews. Burden of proof is on you. Simply saying something and relying that most people wouldn't disagree with you doesn't make it true (consider Nazi beliefs in Germany during WWII to illustrate this argument).[/QUOTE]
Hate is the feeling of extreme dislike or distaste. We wouldn't have a functioning society if people hated each other, nothing would get done. Feeling hate towards a group of people can make people do terrible things to them. That's why it's bad. Spreading that the holocaust is some conspiracy where the jews would gain from it will fuel dislike and even hate towards them. Ending up with violence and discrimination. History is filled with examples of this from the ancient era to today.
[QUOTE]What if it's proven untrue?[/QUOTE]
Then it would be decriminalized but i don't think it would be proven untrue.
[QUOTE]You SHOULD expose yourself to their arguments though, especially if you disagree with them. That's the only way that you can justify your beliefs.[/QUOTE]
They argue with the evidence against them and there being a giant conspiracy covering it up. Not the believable stuff, really. It's not worth listening to. If i'm to listen to that, i should also listen to other conspiracy theories, anti-vaxxers and that the earth might be flat.
[QUOTE]Indeed, thanks for taking the time to explain more about what you think, especially in the face of virtually all posters disagreeing with what you're saying.[/QUOTE]
Well, otherwise this would be a safe space for unregulated free speech advocates with hardly no opposition. Debates on principles are healthy to have once in a while.
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51433809]Missing my point, [i]again[/i]
Misinformation barely works in 2016.
Let me give you another example for the umpteenth time. I tell you that all niggers should die because they're inferior and have lower IQ's than the white master race. You foolishly believe this without asking any sort of follow up questions, but you decide to google it on your smart phone because you're clearly suspicious of the validity of my statement. You find out 15 seconds late that what I said is not true, and you do not spread that bullshit.[/QUOTE]
You give people too much credit, there will always be stupid people. Or else, there would be no KKK or neo-nazis right now.
[QUOTE]I don't like Nazis spreading their views either. And you know what my country has done about it? Proven them wrong, ridiculed them, and protested their movement until they were forced into obscurity to the point where they barely exist. What has your country done about it? Policed people's thoughts and censored their words and clearly all that has done is victimize the ideology. It clearly isn't working for you since you yourself have said that you have Nazi rallies marching down your streets.[/QUOTE]
I believe they would have more supporters, if they could more openly spread their message. Some people are receptive to extremist messages.
[QUOTE]You can dress it up as having that opinion is a gross or tragic thing, but the bottom line is that your government is censoring your though and criminalizing you for it. Bottom line.[/QUOTE]
You can think, you just can't spread it. If you and your friends discuss your holocaust denial in your basement all day. It wouldn't be a legal problem, just if you instead are holding a rally outside while doing it.
[QUOTE]I'm not comparing 2016 Sweden to 1939 Germany, I'm dissecting them since you keep going full circle Godwin on everyone. My point is that censorship is the groundwork for a tyrannical government. Clearly your government has no malicious intent in doing so, but it can be easily abused in the future. Censorship in any capacity is never good.[/QUOTE]
It hasn't happened yet, proving it's possible to not go tyrannical while having very limited censorship.
[QUOTE]We're talking about it because [i]you[/i] fulfilled Godwin's law.[/QUOTE]
It's a discussion about the holocaust and you bring up comparisons with the rise of Hitler and all that. It's pretty hard not to.
[QUOTE]Hate is formed out of fear and fear is formed out of a lack of knowledge. The Nazi movement in Europe, and other places, has kicked off in response to an influx of Muslims entering your countries and a lack of knowledge about them. The only thing a lot of people know about Muslims is terrorism and the brutality they see from them in the news. If an effort was made to educate people on their culture and the differences between the Wahabist terrorist and the more peaceful sects, then you wouldn't have issues with Nazis marching down your streets, as you have stated.[/QUOTE]
Not always, why would you fear those who are weaker than you? You simply dislike them on a huge level. Partly, that is because of lack of knowledge. But hate is not always because of fear. The neo-nazis have always been there, just grown more powerful because of immigration. That kind of education only helps the average immigration critic, if even that. Neo-nazis only want excuses for the own failures and their situation.
[QUOTE]The US doesn't censor speech or police opinions, and we don't have rampant violence against Gays, Jews, Muslims, whoever. So clearly your logic does not work it any way shape or form. Having an opinion hurts nobody, unless you count somebody's feelings :(.
I don't mean to be a dick, but you really don't know what you're talking about. You should really just cut your losses and run before that hole gets so deep that you can't climb out.[/QUOTE]
Acting on your opinion with discriminating others or using violence towards them harms though. You're advocating for unrestricted hate speech and that's a far larger hole than i'm having in that case.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]Viewpoints won't disappear but they will spread less if not expressed in public. What we criminalize are disrespectful proven lies that denies horrible crimes against humanity. There is no rational debate to be had, because there is nothing rational about holocaust denial. It's like having a rational debate about the earth's shape. Is it round or is it flat and so on.[/QUOTE]
If you believe someone's opinion to be incorrect, trying to get it banned isn't going to fix the root of the problem (ignorance). Trying to suppress a viewpoint is akin to telling those with that viewpoint that you cannot assail the validity of their views, therefore you choose to attack them directly. I'd argue that censoring the viewpoints held by extreme groups is likely to entrench them further in their beliefs.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]
It's not right. Theories of things where there exist no evidence (either for or against) should be allowed. That's how we discuss and assess history. There is no need to disprove holocaust denial, since it has already been disproved and the evidence is widely available. Again, it's like trying to prove that the earth is round.[/QUOTE]
Just because you believe there is no need to disprove something doesn't mean that the subject is now closed for inquiry. If someone published a peer reviewed and tested paper that gave a compelling argument for the Earth being flat (extremely unlikely, but just suppose), you'd be a fool to not at least consider that your views of the Earth could be wrong and you should investigate further.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]
These laws have existed for decades and has proved it's possible to have them without becoming an authoritarian state. This has been proved, that countries will become authoritarian because of it has not though. So it's up to you people to prove otherwise.[/QUOTE]
You might trust and respect your current government, but those who come into power after your current government might not be as trustworthy. There's a reason your country (assuming Sweden based on flag) has a constitution, which makes specific mention to freedom of press and expression. It's your duty as a citizen to ensure the freedoms your enjoy aren't taken from you, your fellow citizens, and those who follow you. I view opposing laws like this, even against groups I dislike, partly for that purpose.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]
Spreading that the holocaust is some conspiracy where the jews would gain from it will fuel dislike and even hate towards them. Ending up with violence and discrimination. History is filled with examples of this from the ancient era to today..[/QUOTE]
Care to name a few of those examples where Holocaust denial was a significant factor?
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]
They argue with the evidence against them and there being a giant conspiracy covering it up. Not the believable stuff, really. It's not worth listening to. If i'm to listen to that, i should also listen to other conspiracy theories, anti-vaxxers and that the earth might be flat.[/QUOTE]
I mean, hey, why not listen if you haven't already? Then at least you can be more informed of their arguments, even if you think you already know them.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]You can think, you just can't spread it. If you and your friends discuss your holocaust denial in your basement all day. It wouldn't be a legal problem, just if you instead are holding a rally outside while doing it.[/QUOTE]
It wouldn't be a legal problem because no one would know, not because it wouldn't be illegal. In theory making Holocaust denial illegal could still get someone locked up if the police didn't like them or if they were a target of surveillance.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]It hasn't happened yet, proving it's possible to not go tyrannical while having very limited censorship.[/QUOTE]
So far, the censorship being imposed doesn't affect you, and actually affects those you disagree with. That doesn't mean your country isn't doing something wrong. Take, for example, the current trouble in the UK in regards to porn censorship. Those restrictions were passed because those in power decided that the imagery being censored was wrong, and decided to impose their beliefs on the populace. Clearly people disagree on what is acceptable for discussion, so why not leave it a social decision rather than a legal decision.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]
I believe they would have more supporters, if they could more openly spread their message. Some people are receptive to extremist messages.[/quote]
Trying to get you to understand an insanely simple concept is like trying to get a lead balloon to float.
I literally told you in the post you're quoting that the US has free speech and everyone has the right to spread the word about their society/community/group/whatever as they see fit. They [i]can[/i] openly spread their information, and they [B]DO[/b]. But like I just said, the people of the US have refused to listen to their nonsense and the social consequences of their stupidity have driven them out of normal society and their groups barely exist anymore.
[QUOTE=RB33;51433823]
It's a discussion about the holocaust and you bring up comparisons with the rise of Hitler and all that. It's pretty hard not to.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RB33;51429641]If hate doesn't spread, how did we get Hitler? We have to be careful around these things, that's why we have these laws.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RB33;51433243]
And I have never wanted to discuss the rise of power of the nazis or Hitler, really. So i don't why, we are talking about it. Except your theory that somehow, we might become like Nazi Germany because of this.[/quote]
*Breaks Godwins law*
"Why do you want to talk about Hitler so much?"
*Is proven to have brought Hitler up first*
"Well in my stupid defense, it's hard not to bring up Hitler."
I give up, I'm done. Throwing in the towel. This is pointless to keep this going because talking to you is like talking to a 6 year old. This ideology is far too complex for you to understand.
[QUOTE=Nyxxie;51434073]If you believe someone's opinion to be incorrect, trying to get it banned isn't going to fix the root of the problem (ignorance). Trying to suppress a viewpoint is akin to telling those with that viewpoint that you cannot assail the validity of their views, therefore you choose to attack them directly. I'd argue that censoring the viewpoints held by extreme groups is likely to entrench them further in their beliefs.[/QUOTE]
Well, that's the price we pay then. I rather have fewer than more of them.
[QUOTE]Just because you believe there is no need to disprove something doesn't mean that the subject is now closed for inquiry. If someone published a peer reviewed and tested paper that gave a compelling argument for the Earth being flat (extremely unlikely, but just suppose), you'd be a fool to not at least consider that your views of the Earth could be wrong and you should investigate further.[/QUOTE]
They are going to be seen as weird and possibly crazy if they after several hundred years (or as in the holocaust case, 70 years) of evidence for it, turn against it and make an argument against it.
[QUOTE]You might trust and respect your current government, but those who come into power after your current government might not be as trustworthy. There's a reason your country (assuming Sweden based on flag) has a constitution, which makes specific mention to freedom of press and expression. It's your duty as a citizen to ensure the freedoms your enjoy aren't taken from you, your fellow citizens, and those who follow you. I view opposing laws like this, even against groups I dislike, partly for that purpose.[/QUOTE]
This is paranoia, you shouldn't let fear scare you from acting because anything you do might lead to a totalitarian state in the future.
[QUOTE]Care to name a few of those examples where Holocaust denial was a significant factor[/QUOTE]
Holocaust denial contribute to greater issue of antisemitism and there's plenty of those cases. Holocaust denial rarely goes alone.
[QUOTE]I mean, hey, why not listen if you haven't already? Then at least you can be more informed of their arguments, even if you think you already know them.[/QUOTE]
They are sounding crazy and goes against a wall of evidence. No one has time to listen to conspiracy theorists going about all day.
[QUOTE]It wouldn't be a legal problem because no one would know, not because it wouldn't be illegal. In theory making Holocaust denial illegal could still get someone locked up if the police didn't like them or if they were a target of surveillance.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, no one would, therefore not legal. The police listening on them in private and then convicting them for it is a serious overreach and shouldn't be allowed.
[QUOTE]So far, the censorship being imposed doesn't affect you, and actually affects those you disagree with. That doesn't mean your country isn't doing something wrong. Take, for example, the current trouble in the UK in regards to porn censorship. Those restrictions were passed because those in power decided that the imagery being censored was wrong, and decided to impose their beliefs on the populace. Clearly people disagree on what is acceptable for discussion, so why not leave it a social decision rather than a legal decision.[/QUOTE]
Because it's worthy of a crime to deny the holocaust. You have crossed the line with great margin at that point. Whatever porn you have watched have not killed millions, there lies the difference.
[editline]27th November 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51434108]Trying to get you to understand an insanely simple concept is like trying to get a lead balloon to float.
I literally told you in the post you're quoting that the US has free speech and everyone has the right to spread the word about their society/community/group/whatever as they see fit. They [i]can[/i] openly spread their information, and they [B]DO[/b]. But like I just said, the people of the US have refused to listen to their nonsense and the social consequences of their stupidity have driven them out of normal society and their groups barely exist anymore.[/QUOTE]
I still don't agree with that path. I think we can work this out in our own way. They should be held criminally responsible, not only socially responsible.
[QUOTE]*Breaks Godwins law*
"Why do you want to talk about Hitler so much?"
*Is proven to have brought Hitler up first*
"Well in my stupid defense, it's hard not to bring up Hitler."
I give up, I'm done. Throwing in the towel. This is pointless to keep this going because talking to you is like talking to a 6 year old. This ideology is far too complex for you to understand.[/QUOTE]
Stop acting like Hitler is some holy rule you can't break. In a thread about the holocaust, someone says that hate doesn't spread. Asking how Hitler got to power is a legitimate question to ask to show how hate really do spread. He used the hate to gain power and fueled it further to crackdown on the jews.
Tell me how that isn't relevant. It wasn't meant to shift the discussion, it was just a comparison. Highly relevant as the topic actually includes nazism.
I serious hope the "ideology is too complex" part isn't referring to holocaust denial, because it's the stupidest ideology there could ever be. Denying overwhelming evidence, trying to clean the image of nazis or just further fuel the hate of jews.
If you weren't referring to that, tell me the principle of what ideology is too complex for me. Because i haven't agreed with you overall so far, this is just a matter of what principles we prioritize. Not who could be a 6 year old or not.
[QUOTE]. They can openly spread their information, and they DO. But like I just said, the people of the US have refused to listen to their nonsense and the social consequences of their stupidity have driven them out of normal society and their groups barely exist anymore.[/QUOTE]
Well technically, trump just got elected so we know that openly harmful, racist and backwards ideas spreading leads to popular support if gone unchecked.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;51434258]Well technically, trump just got elected so we know that openly harmful, racist and backwards ideas spreading leads to popular support if gone unchecked.[/QUOTE]
You could argue that Trump was elected because he wasn't Hillary Clinton, but I'm not about to jump down that path.
[QUOTE=nerdster409;51428857]Not every country has freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't make it more justifiable.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]Well, that's the price we pay then. I rather have fewer than more of them.[/QUOTE]
You still have yet to prove that allowing for public expression of holocaust denial leads to more Nazis than through other means.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]
This is paranoia, you shouldn't let fear scare you from acting because anything you do might lead to a totalitarian state in the future.[/QUOTE]
It's not paranoia to want to limit your government's power, it's a completely well-founded concern. I once again direct you to read your constitution and notice how much of it restricts what the government can and can't do. You owe it to yourself and the many generations of people that will be citizens after you to care about your rights, rather than trust and hope.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]Holocaust denial contribute to greater issue of antisemitism and there's plenty of those cases. Holocaust denial rarely goes alone.[/QUOTE]
I asked for evidence, though. You don't have to be an antisemite to deny the holocaust.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]Exactly, no one would, therefore not legal. The police listening on them in private and then convicting them for it is a serious overreach and shouldn't be allowed.[/QUOTE]
What's the difference between a group of people discussing these ideas in private vs in public then, if we're going to make exceptions for that. Criminalizing an idea doesn't just apply to public rallies (and if it does, it's just a feel-good law; can't see it, doesn't exist).
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]Because it's worthy of a crime to deny the holocaust.[/QUOTE]
It directly harms literally no one, the only negative of it is your unsubstantiated claim that simply denying the Holocaust increases the acceptance of Nazi ideals.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]You have crossed the line with great margin at that point.[/QUOTE]
When specifically is this line drawn? You've already said 9/11 doesn't count because ONLY ~4000 people died. Completely arbitrary? Who defines this line? Who does it benefit, and before you say "it will decrease Nazis" please justify this with evidence.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]Whatever porn you have watched have not killed millions, there lies the difference.[/QUOTE]
At the end of the day it's just people censoring what they view as offensive. Offensive and "harmful" opinions are subjective, and people shouldn't have to be thrown in prison or fined because other people dislike what they talk about. More importantly, it's not the place of the government to interfere with the exchange of ideas. As serious and offensive as you personally believe Holocaust denial to be, most people look at it as idiocy and move on. Others shouldn't have to suffer because of your opinion.
[QUOTE=RB33;51434222]I still don't agree with that path. I think we can work this out in our own way. They should be held criminally responsible, not only socially responsible.[/QUOTE]
Once again, WHO is being harmed by holocaust denial, how are they being harmed (justify this factually, beyond simple claims) and why is it worth throwing someone in jail for (or fining really).
:toot::toot:Rot in jail old hag!
[QUOTE=gk99;51434298]Doesn't make it more justifiable.[/QUOTE]
America doesn't have complete freedom of speech.
You can't yell FIRE in a theatre for one, that's illegal.
And yet bringing a snowball into a senate meeting as proof that global warming is a hoax is only a step away from that.
[QUOTE=Nyxxie;51434388]You still have yet to prove that allowing for public expression of holocaust denial leads to more Nazis than through other means.[/QUOTE]
If Hitler was forbidden to hold his rallies, would more or less hear his messsage and be convinced by what he said?
[QUOTE]It's not paranoia to want to limit your government's power, it's a completely well-founded concern. I once again direct you to read your constitution and notice how much of it restricts what the government can and can't do. You owe it to yourself and the many generations of people that will be citizens after you to care about your rights, rather than trust and hope.[/QUOTE]
There is no reason to worry about it for the moment, the government has done a fine job so far. If they suddenly go tyrannical on us, we protest about it then. Not when there's no reason to fear it will happen.
[QUOTE]I asked for evidence, though. You don't have to be an antisemite to deny the holocaust[/QUOTE]
Well, i found this. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism#Current_situation[/url]
Should be at the top of the section linked.
[QUOTE]What's the difference between a group of people discussing these ideas in private vs in public then, if we're going to make exceptions for that. Criminalizing an idea doesn't just apply to public rallies (and if it does, it's just a feel-good law; can't see it, doesn't exist).[/QUOTE]
I have to wonder if people in this thread will ever get my point. It isn't about removing it from existence, it's about stopping it from spreading. Which you do by not allowing it in public.
[QUOTE]It directly harms literally no one, the only negative of it is your unsubstantiated claim that simply denying the Holocaust increases the acceptance of Nazi ideals.[/QUOTE]
Lots of crimes harms no one but they are still crimes. What is a crime is often determined by morality, even if there is no real victim.
[QUOTE]When specifically is this line drawn? You've already said 9/11 doesn't count because ONLY ~4000 people died. Completely arbitrary? Who defines this line? Who does it benefit, and before you say "it will decrease Nazis" please justify this with evidence.[/QUOTE]
Let's 100.000 people and as an ethnic cleansing attempt. Which 9/11 was neither. I don't need evidence to put an subjective line, if that's what you were asking.
[QUOTE]At the end of the day it's just people censoring what they view as offensive. Offensive and "harmful" opinions are subjective, and people shouldn't have to be thrown in prison or fined because other people dislike what they talk about. More importantly, it's not the place of the government to interfere with the exchange of ideas. As serious and offensive as you personally believe Holocaust denial to be, most people look at it as idiocy and move on. Others shouldn't have to suffer because of your opinion.[/QUOTE]
Jews shouldn't have to suffer because of holocaust denial either.
[QUOTE]Once again, WHO is being harmed by holocaust denial, how are they being harmed (justify this factually, beyond simple claims) and why is it worth throwing someone in jail for (or fining really).[/QUOTE]
Jewish people, who are blamed for this made up conspiracy. It's a part of the greater antisemitism problem. They will be discriminated against and harmed. Why it is worth it? Because of a combination of you did something terrible, you are spreading a terrible message, denying a crime against humanity.
There are laws against saying whatever stupid things against people, you can't say everything. Then you are held responsible for that.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation[/url]
A insult can also constitute as a crime in Sweden. (If it's bad and often enough)
[QUOTE=EcksDee;51434258]Well technically, trump just got elected so we know that openly harmful, racist and backwards ideas spreading leads to popular support if gone unchecked.[/QUOTE]
More like people didnt care about his messages of hate and just jumped in with him because he offered more on the plate than Hilary ever did
[QUOTE=Matrix374;51434485]More like people didnt care about his messages of hate and just jumped in with him because he offered more on the plate than Hilary ever did[/QUOTE]
Except he objectively didn't and why would you even say that?
His tax plan would bankrupt America and slash its GDP by a third.
His foreign policy and ideas on how to deal with terrorism are actively detrimental to America's standing and the health and safety of Americans abroad.
Hisideas on how to deal with crime and illegal immigrants both wouldn't solve the problem and would just be a sink on the economy.
His healthcare plan will leave millions MORE uninsured than are now.
His education plan will destroy America's already dwindling average scores in international tests.
Hillary would have been a fucking great president, just a lying asshole at the same time, but she wouldn't have destroyed the nation like Trump probably will.
-snip-
[QUOTE=bunguer;51434735]Go educate yourself on why Hillary lost, maybe watch that Jonathan Pie video or something, but perhaps another thread is more appropriate, there are enough threads about the elections as it is.
On topic, thankfully most people see this as the absurd it is, those who don't also don't seem to provide explanations on why this particular topic is special, with so many other controversies out there. IMO, fearing these lies is only giving strength to the defenders.[/QUOTE]
Hillary lost because Democrats didn't turn out, and because 60 million Americans didn't bother to learn the impacts of Trump's policies.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;51434738]Hillary lost because Democrats didn't turn out, and because 60 million Americans didn't bother to learn the impacts of Trump's policies.[/QUOTE]
Maybe they would have if the media would be explaining those policies instead of crying how terrible of a person Trump is.
Giving the government the power to define [b]"objective" truths[/b] and to [b]jail you for going against those truths[/b] is giving them [i]absolute[/i] power. You've given them the ability to create whatever narrative they please, and to jail anyone that tries to argue against that narrative. [b]This can, and likely will, be abused.[/b] Imagine if your government decreed that abortion was wrong, and that was simply the truth, and "murder deniers" were to be jailed.
Not so fucking innocent, is it?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
