5 ms·

Merkel's government is terrified of the worldwide right wing nationalist movement and wants to limit free speech and right to assemble as much as possible in an

Merkel's government is terrified of the worldwide right wing nationalist movement and wants to limit free speech and right to assemble as much as possible in an attempt to silence likely AfD supporters. Germany like much of Europe already has thoughtcrime laws, this is but a more effective way to enforce them.

DasIch 10y ago
Germany has no thoughtcrime laws. No laws that would have an affect on free speech or assembly have been passed recently or are under discussion formally or informally. Indeed precisely because opposition exists, this would be an incredibly stupid move likely to cause backlash.
- whythrowaway 10y ago
  Ursula Haverbeck.
  - DasIch 10y ago
    Ursula Haverbeck is a nazi who denies the Holocaust and publicly lies about it. She was found guilty of incitement to hatred. That is not a violation of freedom of speech. Lies are not covered by freedom of speech in Germany, they're not covered by freedom of speech in other countries either, even the US. In fact in most countries certain types of lies are illegal and fall under laws against fraud, libel or any number of things. Germany simply also covers incitement of hatred. Additionally the first article of the German constitution and one of its fundamental principles is that human dignity shall be inviolable and that the state has a duty to respect and protect it. In my opinion ensuring the dignity of the vicitims of the holocaust is protected requires making sure that the state fights those that would deny the holocaust.
    - whythrowaway 10y ago
      She presented numerous historical documents as evidence that the holocaust as we know it did not happen, and that the United States viewed the German people as a threat far prior to WWII and planned to exterminate them, for example via the "Hooton Plan" to use mass immigration of non-Europeans to breed native Germans out of existence. Does this sound familiar? For saying this, an elderly woman in her late 80s has been repeatedly imprisoned. Sounds like thoughtcrime to me.
      - DasIch 10y ago
        Oh, yes this does sound familiar, it sounds like you're a holocaust denier and a nazi as well, I should have guessed.
        whythrowaway 10y ago
        Good thing you had those labels handy, you might have had to think.
      - prodmerc 10y ago
        Right, the US planned to exterminate Germans via immigrants. And by the US, you mean one loony guy named Hooton. And by planned, you mean he mentioned it as a possible idea.
      - cyphar 10y ago
        I just read one of her blog posts[1], not knowing who she is. Unless you want to claim that Google translate deliberately mistranslates her words, she's incredibly fucking racist. I'm not a fan of Islam (and criticise it myself), but saying that all Arabic and Turkish children should be sent back to their home countries to protect German children is undeniably hate speech. [1]: http://ursula-haverbeck.info/richter-staatsanwalt-und-polizist/ http://ursula-haverbeck.info/richter-staatsanwalt-und-polizi...
    - cLeEOGPw 10y ago
      > Lies are not covered by freedom of speech in Germany Who is the decider of truth? The state. It is the only source of "truth" and "liars" are excluded from human rights. Sounds pretty much textbook definition of thought crime laws.
      - grzm 10y ago
        Do you consider libel or slander thoughtcrime?
- mschuster91 10y ago
  > No laws that would have an affect on free speech or assembly have been passed recently or are under discussion formally or informally. Masking on a demonstration has recently been turned from an Ordnungswidrigkeit ("contravention" according to Wikipedia) to a felony in multiple states. The aim behind this is to be able to prove via video who is responsible in case violence erupts - yet the biggest perpetrators and provocateurs, the police, don't have individual name/number tags, and more often than not they wear masks. Oh, and it's illegal to bring any kind of arms to demonstrations, most often it's even forbidden to bring glass beer bottles (and violating this can be prosecuted as a felony). Sometimes I feel that our governments have intentionally disarmed us - mostly after a couple nasty amok runs at schools, but I believe this is rather an excuse. The real issue at hand is that in case the AfD with their fascist world view ever comes to power (hell, they already got 25% in Saxony), the population won't have anything to fight them with.
  - DasIch 10y ago
    The police in Germany falls under the authority of the states and not the federal government. Some of them, like Berlin, do require individual number tags. Additionally you have a constitutional right to fight a government that violates the constitution by any means once legal avenues are exhausted.
    - mschuster91 10y ago
      And once you file a complaint against the cops for violence, you end up targeted. Either for harrassment (as happened to me) or for frivolous counter-suits ("Widerstand",happened to a couple of friends). Filing complaints against police is pretty much pointless, as evidenced by the numbers (of 2138 cases, only 33 ended up in court, see https://correctiv.org/blog/2016/02/12/polizeigewalt-zahlen-faelle/ https://correctiv.org/blog/2016/02/12/polizeigewalt-zahlen-f...) or by the sheer time scale. The poor old man who had his eyes shot out by a water cannon at S21 had to wait SIX YEARS for an offer of compensation (http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/umstrittene-polizeiaktion-stuttgart-wasserwerfer-opfer-soll-euro-schmerzensgeld-bekommen-1.3260155 http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/umstrittene-polizeiaktion...). And even if a state like Berlin requires numbered cops, if there are supporting units from other states these do NOT have to carry numbers. Witnessed this first hand when beaten up in Berlin by cops from Dresden.
- venomsnake 10y ago
  Actually it has. What is "hate speech" otherwise. And Nazi symbols are also illegal.
  - DasIch 10y ago
    Hate speech is not illegal. Incitement of hatred is. This requires disturbing the public peace by inciting hatred, calling for violence or attacking human dignity (a human right in Germany). There is also no law against nazi symbols specifically. Symbols of unconstitutional organizations are illegal, this is one of the aspects of being a militant democracy. The goal here is to prevent a failure of the democracy in the way it did with Hitler. Nazi symbols are illegal because of that but they're not the only ones. Communist, socialist and jihadist organizations are affected by this as well.
- piotrjurkiewicz 10y ago
  > Germany has no thoughtcrime laws. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/19/head-of-german-anti-islam-group-pegida-trial-hate-lutz-bachmann https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/19/head-of-german... https://boingboing.net/2016/04/23/german-political-leader-arrest.html https://boingboing.net/2016/04/23/german-political-leader-ar... https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-springs-to-action-over-hate-speech-against-migrants/2016/01/06/6031218e-b315-11e5-8abc-d09392edc612_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-springs-... https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7371/facebook-freedom-of-speech https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7371/facebook-freedom-of-...
  - dom0 10y ago
    I think this is confusing to outsiders, because English media reports these as hate speech, whereas hate speech actually refers to something else in Germany. In Germany these incidents are Volksverhetzung (~demagoguery). The bar for "achieving" it is set quite high: > Wer in einer Weise, die geeignet ist, den öffentlichen Frieden zu stören, Who does one of the following in a way apt to disturb/destroy public peace/harmony > (1) gegen eine nationale, rassische, religiöse oder durch ihre ethnische Herkunft bestimmte Gruppe, gegen Teile der Bevölkerung oder gegen einen Einzelnen wegen seiner Zugehörigkeit zu einer vorbezeichneten Gruppe oder zu einem Teil der Bevölkerung zum Hass aufstachelt, zu Gewalt- oder Willkürmaßnahmen auffordert oder agitate against national/racial/religious or ethnic group, or against parts of the public or against private persons due to their belonging to a recognized group / part of the public, in order to incite hate or violence. > (2) die Menschenwürde anderer dadurch angreift, dass er eine vorbezeichnete Gruppe, Teile der Bevölkerung oder einen Einzelnen wegen seiner Zugehörigkeit zu einer vorbezeichneten Gruppe oder zu einem Teil der Bevölkerung beschimpft, böswillig verächtlich macht oder verleumdet, attacking the human dignity of <the same blob of text as above> or defames or libels. In other words, to be sentenced for Volksverhetzung the court actually has to prove that you intentionally wanted to incite violence/hate against a defined group of people / person, while intentionally also fulfilling the first condition. A bit like murder in Germany it is a crime of disposition (killing w/o disposition is Totschlag - or one of the more specific "XY with deadly outcome" crimes - not Mord), unlike murder it is not punishable in absence of disposition.

DasIch 10y ago

Germany has no thoughtcrime laws. No laws that would have an affect on free speech or assembly have been passed recently or are under discussion formally or informally. Indeed precisely because opposition exists, this would be an incredibly stupid move likely to cause backlash.

whythrowaway 10y ago
Ursula Haverbeck.
- DasIch 10y ago
  Ursula Haverbeck is a nazi who denies the Holocaust and publicly lies about it. She was found guilty of incitement to hatred. That is not a violation of freedom of speech. Lies are not covered by freedom of speech in Germany, they're not covered by freedom of speech in other countries either, even the US. In fact in most countries certain types of lies are illegal and fall under laws against fraud, libel or any number of things. Germany simply also covers incitement of hatred. Additionally the first article of the German constitution and one of its fundamental principles is that human dignity shall be inviolable and that the state has a duty to respect and protect it. In my opinion ensuring the dignity of the vicitims of the holocaust is protected requires making sure that the state fights those that would deny the holocaust.
  - whythrowaway 10y ago
    She presented numerous historical documents as evidence that the holocaust as we know it did not happen, and that the United States viewed the German people as a threat far prior to WWII and planned to exterminate them, for example via the "Hooton Plan" to use mass immigration of non-Europeans to breed native Germans out of existence. Does this sound familiar? For saying this, an elderly woman in her late 80s has been repeatedly imprisoned. Sounds like thoughtcrime to me.
    - DasIch 10y ago
      Oh, yes this does sound familiar, it sounds like you're a holocaust denier and a nazi as well, I should have guessed.
      - whythrowaway 10y ago
        Good thing you had those labels handy, you might have had to think.
    - prodmerc 10y ago
      Right, the US planned to exterminate Germans via immigrants. And by the US, you mean one loony guy named Hooton. And by planned, you mean he mentioned it as a possible idea.
    - cyphar 10y ago
      I just read one of her blog posts[1], not knowing who she is. Unless you want to claim that Google translate deliberately mistranslates her words, she's incredibly fucking racist. I'm not a fan of Islam (and criticise it myself), but saying that all Arabic and Turkish children should be sent back to their home countries to protect German children is undeniably hate speech. [1]: http://ursula-haverbeck.info/richter-staatsanwalt-und-polizist/ http://ursula-haverbeck.info/richter-staatsanwalt-und-polizi...
  - cLeEOGPw 10y ago
    > Lies are not covered by freedom of speech in Germany Who is the decider of truth? The state. It is the only source of "truth" and "liars" are excluded from human rights. Sounds pretty much textbook definition of thought crime laws.
    - grzm 10y ago
      Do you consider libel or slander thoughtcrime?
mschuster91 10y ago
> No laws that would have an affect on free speech or assembly have been passed recently or are under discussion formally or informally. Masking on a demonstration has recently been turned from an Ordnungswidrigkeit ("contravention" according to Wikipedia) to a felony in multiple states. The aim behind this is to be able to prove via video who is responsible in case violence erupts - yet the biggest perpetrators and provocateurs, the police, don't have individual name/number tags, and more often than not they wear masks. Oh, and it's illegal to bring any kind of arms to demonstrations, most often it's even forbidden to bring glass beer bottles (and violating this can be prosecuted as a felony). Sometimes I feel that our governments have intentionally disarmed us - mostly after a couple nasty amok runs at schools, but I believe this is rather an excuse. The real issue at hand is that in case the AfD with their fascist world view ever comes to power (hell, they already got 25% in Saxony), the population won't have anything to fight them with.
- DasIch 10y ago
  The police in Germany falls under the authority of the states and not the federal government. Some of them, like Berlin, do require individual number tags. Additionally you have a constitutional right to fight a government that violates the constitution by any means once legal avenues are exhausted.
  - mschuster91 10y ago
    And once you file a complaint against the cops for violence, you end up targeted. Either for harrassment (as happened to me) or for frivolous counter-suits ("Widerstand",happened to a couple of friends). Filing complaints against police is pretty much pointless, as evidenced by the numbers (of 2138 cases, only 33 ended up in court, see https://correctiv.org/blog/2016/02/12/polizeigewalt-zahlen-faelle/ https://correctiv.org/blog/2016/02/12/polizeigewalt-zahlen-f...) or by the sheer time scale. The poor old man who had his eyes shot out by a water cannon at S21 had to wait SIX YEARS for an offer of compensation (http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/umstrittene-polizeiaktion-stuttgart-wasserwerfer-opfer-soll-euro-schmerzensgeld-bekommen-1.3260155 http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/umstrittene-polizeiaktion...). And even if a state like Berlin requires numbered cops, if there are supporting units from other states these do NOT have to carry numbers. Witnessed this first hand when beaten up in Berlin by cops from Dresden.
venomsnake 10y ago
Actually it has. What is "hate speech" otherwise. And Nazi symbols are also illegal.
- DasIch 10y ago
  Hate speech is not illegal. Incitement of hatred is. This requires disturbing the public peace by inciting hatred, calling for violence or attacking human dignity (a human right in Germany). There is also no law against nazi symbols specifically. Symbols of unconstitutional organizations are illegal, this is one of the aspects of being a militant democracy. The goal here is to prevent a failure of the democracy in the way it did with Hitler. Nazi symbols are illegal because of that but they're not the only ones. Communist, socialist and jihadist organizations are affected by this as well.
piotrjurkiewicz 10y ago
> Germany has no thoughtcrime laws. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/19/head-of-german-anti-islam-group-pegida-trial-hate-lutz-bachmann https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/19/head-of-german... https://boingboing.net/2016/04/23/german-political-leader-arrest.html https://boingboing.net/2016/04/23/german-political-leader-ar... https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-springs-to-action-over-hate-speech-against-migrants/2016/01/06/6031218e-b315-11e5-8abc-d09392edc612_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/germany-springs-... https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7371/facebook-freedom-of-speech https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7371/facebook-freedom-of-...
- dom0 10y ago
  I think this is confusing to outsiders, because English media reports these as hate speech, whereas hate speech actually refers to something else in Germany. In Germany these incidents are Volksverhetzung (~demagoguery). The bar for "achieving" it is set quite high: > Wer in einer Weise, die geeignet ist, den öffentlichen Frieden zu stören, Who does one of the following in a way apt to disturb/destroy public peace/harmony > (1) gegen eine nationale, rassische, religiöse oder durch ihre ethnische Herkunft bestimmte Gruppe, gegen Teile der Bevölkerung oder gegen einen Einzelnen wegen seiner Zugehörigkeit zu einer vorbezeichneten Gruppe oder zu einem Teil der Bevölkerung zum Hass aufstachelt, zu Gewalt- oder Willkürmaßnahmen auffordert oder agitate against national/racial/religious or ethnic group, or against parts of the public or against private persons due to their belonging to a recognized group / part of the public, in order to incite hate or violence. > (2) die Menschenwürde anderer dadurch angreift, dass er eine vorbezeichnete Gruppe, Teile der Bevölkerung oder einen Einzelnen wegen seiner Zugehörigkeit zu einer vorbezeichneten Gruppe oder zu einem Teil der Bevölkerung beschimpft, böswillig verächtlich macht oder verleumdet, attacking the human dignity of <the same blob of text as above> or defames or libels. In other words, to be sentenced for Volksverhetzung the court actually has to prove that you intentionally wanted to incite violence/hate against a defined group of people / person, while intentionally also fulfilling the first condition. A bit like murder in Germany it is a crime of disposition (killing w/o disposition is Totschlag - or one of the more specific "XY with deadly outcome" crimes - not Mord), unlike murder it is not punishable in absence of disposition.