>He was not prosecuted for making a simple joke. He was prosecuted for bookending a video with the joke wherein the bulk of the video itself is him repeating 'g

>He was not prosecuted for making a simple joke. He was prosecuted for bookending a video with the joke wherein the bulk of the video itself is him repeating 'gas the jews' and 'sieg heil' over and over dozens of times interspersed with Hitlers speeches. The introduction of the video made it amply, inequivocally clear that what followed was meant to be taken as a joke. He starts with something like "my girlfriend thinks her dog is adorable, so I'm going to turn it into the least adorable thing in the world, which is a nazi". There is no way this can possibly be construed as hate speech in any shape and form (unless you think that uttering the phrase "sieg heil", in whatever context, humorous, historical, etc, is "harmful" in itself). This is the same as the people who object to the word "nigger" as racist, going so far as to censor Mark Twain-type books where it appears in a plainly anti-racist context, because that's how that type of people work: never any nuance, never any context. The man and his joke poses no real credible threat. In fact the amount of serious, actual damage done by this whole affair, the thousands of people radicalised against the "politically correct" upon seeing these preposterous cases, the fuel given to reactionaries by these indefensible rulings... This actually did real damage. >nazi pug The dog isn't a nazi. The dog was... raising its paw.