6 ms·

Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value.

fd233t343 9y ago
Exactly like you - Germans - had decided circa 37 that letting Jews and Jew-defenders not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value, right?
steveeq1 9y ago
Would you hold that same opinion if the thing said were, say, violent american black rap lyrics?
- Grollicus 9y ago
  I don't understand your meaning, sorry. Do you mean would I want to see 'violent american black rap lyrics' banned? Depends on what is said I guess? If theres a song about 'kill all the jews' we've had enough of that shit here 70 years ago. Generally german courts are very narrow about what is Volksverhetzung. If you run afoul of it you are very far away from any sensible discussion. The law is basically "don't (1)incite violence (2)against Minorities in a way that is (3)able to disturb the public peace". These three things are impossible to do without generally being a dangerous ass. We don't want people like that.
  - steveeq1 9y ago
    > I don't understand your meaning, sorry. Meaning if there's american rap song about killing people, do germans ban it? These violent lyrics seem to fall under the law as you described. Also, are violent american rap songs banned (in practice) in germany? Do germans have this same negative attitude to american "thugs"?
    - Grollicus 9y ago
      Songs about killing people are generally not banned because of Volksverhetzung. That law is specific about the 3 things I listed in me comment above. (3) is a very strong requirement because it means the song must be theoretically able to disturb the peace in germany, eg. incite riots or something equally drastic. Theres not much that can do that. Songs about killing minorities might be banned, but then it's still about context. Artists generally have a lot of room and when they write stuff like that theres usually satire in play. Which would propably be okay. I don't know about any artists that got hit with Volksverhetzung. On the other hand, I'd expect Songs about killing to get hit by youth protection laws which means they can't be played on the radio, can't be advertised and can't be sold to minors.
      - steveeq1 9y ago
        > is a very strong requirement because it means the song must be theoretically able to disturb the peace in germany, eg. incite riots or something equally drastic. Many american rap songs do just exactly this, and it's not satirical. Sometimes rap songs do mentioning killing jews specifically although it is relatively rare. Most of the time it talks about killing other black people, which falls under the second part of the law you describe. Do Germans make a big deal about this? I'm not german, I'm just trying to understand the viewpoint. Also, do germans find american thugs in low regard? One can argue they can be just as dangerous.
        anigbrowl 9y ago
        'Many American rap songs' incite riots? this is news to me.
        raguuu 9y ago
        Ghetto culture?
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        > Many american rap songs do just exactly this Which American rap songs, specifically, have incited riots or similarly drastically disturbed the peace, in Germany or elsewhere?
  - abiox 9y ago
    > we've had enough of that shit here 70 years ago. you had a military dictatorship. it couldn't be opposed or contested by anyone, because you and/or your family would just be killed. german citizens couldn't stop the killing any more than russians could stop millions from being killed. that was the fundamental problem. dictators do as they please. criminalizing the speech of random bob under a democratic government isn't doing much of anything, and these laws mean nothing to a dictator. what actually matters is having a democratic government that is beholden to the citizenry. if anything this speech criminalization is a theater of sorts that makes you less safe.
    - Grollicus 9y ago
      What you are writing here is a dangerous thing because it relativizes the holocaust. Military Dictatorships don't suddenly appear out of nothing. My grandparents' generation chose to actively look away because they thought it won't get "that bad". They might have told themselfes they didn't know better - you know, afterwards - but you can't remove 6 million people out of a country of maybe 60 million and no one notices shit. Well, it did get bad, and then some. We know that now, we can now look back and see how it began. It began with social insecurity and propaganda (populism). We can't fight social insecurity but we can fight propaganda and that is why we have § 130 Volksverhetzung.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > They might have told themselfes they didn't know better - you know, afterwards - but you can't remove 6 million people out of a country of maybe 60 million and no one notices shit. Removal from the general population was an overt policy (and overtly not all that different than what the Western allies did with suspect populations identified by ethnicity.) The actual conditions to which Jews and others were removed, even prior to the implementation of extermination, was not overt. No one was trying to conceal the removal of disfavored segments from the general population.
        Grollicus 9y ago
        > The actual conditions to which Jews and others were removed, even prior to the implementation of extermination, was not overt. That is not correct. Most Jews in Germany were sent to work camps and used as slave labour for local factories. Check out this response: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3mnglz/did_the_germans_who_lived_near_concentration/cvh66l4/?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3mnglz/did_t... Generally Germany knew, or at least had an idea that something was wrong. Everyone who tells you differently is selling you an agenda.
LoSboccacc 9y ago
nazism is not a well defined concept, nor is hate, you'll figure it out soon enough
- dang 9y ago
  Please don't post glib, baity comments about divisive topics. That's close to the troll line if not over it, and we ban accounts that do it repeatedly. From the site guidelines at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
mbid 9y ago
Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value. A majority deciding something doesn't make it just, as you as a fellow German should know best.
- insickness 9y ago
  Agreed. His implication was that their vote carried some moral relevance. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner is not moral justification.
seertaak 9y ago
I think the issue -- as some people see it -- is that it is possible to, in effect, suppress a debate about certain contentious issues. There is a rhetorical device by which statements critical of, say, uncontrolled immigration, are linked to extremists and nazis, from which there's only a small hop to hate speech (so ban).
- Grollicus 9y ago
  There is nothing contentious to debate about. Additionally, there is no debate if you call for violence against minorities.
  - seertaak 9y ago
    > There is nothing contentious to debate about. The FDP, CSU, AfD and indeed large parts of the CDU want to have a debate about immigration. The CSU represents around half of Bayern, some 6 million people. The FDP, CDU, and AfD together represent 56% of the votes in the last election. Even prominent voices on the left want a debate: Sigmar Gabriel, who until recently was head of the SPD, wants to have a debate. Sahra Wagenknecht of die Linke also wants to have a debate. Heck, there's even a prominent green politician, Boris Palmer, who wants to have debate. So: what planet are you living on? > Additionally, there is no debate if you call for violence against minorities. On this we agree :)
    - Grollicus 9y ago
      The planet where 'having a debate about immigration' and calling for 'the trains [to auschwitz]' for immigrants are two different things. Additionally, the AfD (who are the ones complaining about censorship all the times) don't actually want to have any debate at all, because they kinda have no content. They just play the fear of the masses and want to display themselfes as victims of the majority or whoever.
      - gspetr 9y ago
        Trains to Auschwitz? Weren't they already in concentration camps? https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/01/31/germany-housing-refugees-in-former-death-camps.html https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/01/31/germany-housin...

fd233t343 9y ago

Exactly like you - Germans - had decided circa 37 that letting Jews and Jew-defenders not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value, right?

steveeq1 9y ago

Would you hold that same opinion if the thing said were, say, violent american black rap lyrics?

Grollicus 9y ago
I don't understand your meaning, sorry. Do you mean would I want to see 'violent american black rap lyrics' banned? Depends on what is said I guess? If theres a song about 'kill all the jews' we've had enough of that shit here 70 years ago. Generally german courts are very narrow about what is Volksverhetzung. If you run afoul of it you are very far away from any sensible discussion. The law is basically "don't (1)incite violence (2)against Minorities in a way that is (3)able to disturb the public peace". These three things are impossible to do without generally being a dangerous ass. We don't want people like that.
- steveeq1 9y ago
  > I don't understand your meaning, sorry. Meaning if there's american rap song about killing people, do germans ban it? These violent lyrics seem to fall under the law as you described. Also, are violent american rap songs banned (in practice) in germany? Do germans have this same negative attitude to american "thugs"?
  - Grollicus 9y ago
    Songs about killing people are generally not banned because of Volksverhetzung. That law is specific about the 3 things I listed in me comment above. (3) is a very strong requirement because it means the song must be theoretically able to disturb the peace in germany, eg. incite riots or something equally drastic. Theres not much that can do that. Songs about killing minorities might be banned, but then it's still about context. Artists generally have a lot of room and when they write stuff like that theres usually satire in play. Which would propably be okay. I don't know about any artists that got hit with Volksverhetzung. On the other hand, I'd expect Songs about killing to get hit by youth protection laws which means they can't be played on the radio, can't be advertised and can't be sold to minors.
    - steveeq1 9y ago
      > is a very strong requirement because it means the song must be theoretically able to disturb the peace in germany, eg. incite riots or something equally drastic. Many american rap songs do just exactly this, and it's not satirical. Sometimes rap songs do mentioning killing jews specifically although it is relatively rare. Most of the time it talks about killing other black people, which falls under the second part of the law you describe. Do Germans make a big deal about this? I'm not german, I'm just trying to understand the viewpoint. Also, do germans find american thugs in low regard? One can argue they can be just as dangerous.
      - anigbrowl 9y ago
        'Many American rap songs' incite riots? this is news to me.
        raguuu 9y ago
        Ghetto culture?
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > Many american rap songs do just exactly this Which American rap songs, specifically, have incited riots or similarly drastically disturbed the peace, in Germany or elsewhere?
- abiox 9y ago
  > we've had enough of that shit here 70 years ago. you had a military dictatorship. it couldn't be opposed or contested by anyone, because you and/or your family would just be killed. german citizens couldn't stop the killing any more than russians could stop millions from being killed. that was the fundamental problem. dictators do as they please. criminalizing the speech of random bob under a democratic government isn't doing much of anything, and these laws mean nothing to a dictator. what actually matters is having a democratic government that is beholden to the citizenry. if anything this speech criminalization is a theater of sorts that makes you less safe.
  - Grollicus 9y ago
    What you are writing here is a dangerous thing because it relativizes the holocaust. Military Dictatorships don't suddenly appear out of nothing. My grandparents' generation chose to actively look away because they thought it won't get "that bad". They might have told themselfes they didn't know better - you know, afterwards - but you can't remove 6 million people out of a country of maybe 60 million and no one notices shit. Well, it did get bad, and then some. We know that now, we can now look back and see how it began. It began with social insecurity and propaganda (populism). We can't fight social insecurity but we can fight propaganda and that is why we have § 130 Volksverhetzung.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > They might have told themselfes they didn't know better - you know, afterwards - but you can't remove 6 million people out of a country of maybe 60 million and no one notices shit. Removal from the general population was an overt policy (and overtly not all that different than what the Western allies did with suspect populations identified by ethnicity.) The actual conditions to which Jews and others were removed, even prior to the implementation of extermination, was not overt. No one was trying to conceal the removal of disfavored segments from the general population.
      - Grollicus 9y ago
        > The actual conditions to which Jews and others were removed, even prior to the implementation of extermination, was not overt. That is not correct. Most Jews in Germany were sent to work camps and used as slave labour for local factories. Check out this response: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3mnglz/did_the_germans_who_lived_near_concentration/cvh66l4/?context=3 https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3mnglz/did_t... Generally Germany knew, or at least had an idea that something was wrong. Everyone who tells you differently is selling you an agenda.

LoSboccacc 9y ago

nazism is not a well defined concept, nor is hate, you'll figure it out soon enough

dang 9y ago
Please don't post glib, baity comments about divisive topics. That's close to the troll line if not over it, and we ban accounts that do it repeatedly. From the site guidelines at https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html: "Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

mbid 9y ago

Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value. A majority deciding something doesn't make it just, as you as a fellow German should know best.

insickness 9y ago
Agreed. His implication was that their vote carried some moral relevance. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner is not moral justification.

seertaak 9y ago

I think the issue -- as some people see it -- is that it is possible to, in effect, suppress a debate about certain contentious issues. There is a rhetorical device by which statements critical of, say, uncontrolled immigration, are linked to extremists and nazis, from which there's only a small hop to hate speech (so ban).

Grollicus 9y ago
There is nothing contentious to debate about. Additionally, there is no debate if you call for violence against minorities.
- seertaak 9y ago
  > There is nothing contentious to debate about. The FDP, CSU, AfD and indeed large parts of the CDU want to have a debate about immigration. The CSU represents around half of Bayern, some 6 million people. The FDP, CDU, and AfD together represent 56% of the votes in the last election. Even prominent voices on the left want a debate: Sigmar Gabriel, who until recently was head of the SPD, wants to have a debate. Sahra Wagenknecht of die Linke also wants to have a debate. Heck, there's even a prominent green politician, Boris Palmer, who wants to have debate. So: what planet are you living on? > Additionally, there is no debate if you call for violence against minorities. On this we agree :)
  - Grollicus 9y ago
    The planet where 'having a debate about immigration' and calling for 'the trains [to auschwitz]' for immigrants are two different things. Additionally, the AfD (who are the ones complaining about censorship all the times) don't actually want to have any debate at all, because they kinda have no content. They just play the fear of the masses and want to display themselfes as victims of the majority or whoever.
    - gspetr 9y ago
      Trains to Auschwitz? Weren't they already in concentration camps? https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/01/31/germany-housing-refugees-in-former-death-camps.html https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2015/01/31/germany-housin...