4 ms·

No, that was certainly not the reason, on the contrary. Speech was severely restricted at the time and Germany also had hate speech laws. That probably had a s

No, that was certainly not the reason, on the contrary. Speech was severely restricted at the time and Germany also had hate speech laws. That probably had a severe negative effect because people became more radical as they were disallowed to vent their grievances. Those that demanded restraint often did it because of their own vanity. Open hate speech with government propaganda which discriminated against Jews came later. At that point the Nazis already felt justified in their actions. I cannot say anything to Rwanda because I don't know the conflict. I tend to disbelieve those that said it was because of hateful speech.

scotty79 5y ago
> Speech was severely restricted at the time and Germany also had hate speech laws. Nope. It had way too weak protections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Germany#Weimar_Republic_(1918%E2%80%931933) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Germany#Weimar_R...
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  > The Weimar Republic maintained a number of criminal provisions for hate crimes and anti-Semitic expression. > The aim of censorship under the Nazi regime was simple: to reinforce Nazi power and to suppress opposing viewpoints and information I believe Goebbels said something that the mistake was giving them free speech in the first place. He didn't like free speech at all, but he was also a propaganda expert and knew that some people would again try to censor speech which would work in his favor.
  - scotty79 5y ago
    When Nazi regime came to power it was already too late. And protections against ant-Semitic expression were too weak as evidenced by Nazi regime coming to power by being elected in democratic process. Another source: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propaganda-and-censorship https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propa... "When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Through decrees and laws, the Nazis abolished these civil rights and destroyed German democracy. " But I concede that there are exactly opposite views. After all it's history so anyone is free to make stuff up about it that fits his narrative.
    - zozbot234 5y ago
      > "When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press." Note that these rights were not at all guaranteed pre-1919. Censorship of speech and of the press was practically institutionalized in the German Empire. It makes no sense to argue that the rabid anti-Semitism of late-19th c. and early-20th c. Germany was a result of too much freedom; on the contrary, it was directly carried over from previous authoritarian government, The Weimar constitution ultimately came too late to really improve on that state of things.
      - scotty79 5y ago
        What was too little too late was not the freedom of speech, but laws against anti-Semitic expressions. They were too limited and mellow. Goebbels was sentenced for anti-Semitic expressions which didn't stop him at all.
        zozbot234 5y ago
        The fact that those laws were even on the books is in itself notable given that, again, anti-Semitism had largely been endorsed by previous governments. And it wasn't just Germany either. Remember the Dreyfus Affair? That was in France pre-WWI. Dreyfus was framed by the authorities for a crime he did not commit, and initially got a life sentence before widespread public opposition led to a reopening of the case and ultimately to his exoneration. This whole ruckus shows that the very idea that anti-Semitism was something that should be opposed could be considered radical and anti-authoritarian at the time even in "civilized, developed" La Belle Époque France, never mind Germany! The mindset was wildly different from what we'd expect today.
        bavell 5y ago
        You're ignoring entirely the devastating economic impact of the treaty of Versailles and claiming it was all about free speech. Totally off the Mark ;)
        5y ago

scotty79 5y ago

> Speech was severely restricted at the time and Germany also had hate speech laws. Nope. It had way too weak protections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Germany#Weimar_Republic_(1918%E2%80%931933) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Germany#Weimar_R...

raxxorrax 5y ago
> The Weimar Republic maintained a number of criminal provisions for hate crimes and anti-Semitic expression. > The aim of censorship under the Nazi regime was simple: to reinforce Nazi power and to suppress opposing viewpoints and information I believe Goebbels said something that the mistake was giving them free speech in the first place. He didn't like free speech at all, but he was also a propaganda expert and knew that some people would again try to censor speech which would work in his favor.
- scotty79 5y ago
  When Nazi regime came to power it was already too late. And protections against ant-Semitic expression were too weak as evidenced by Nazi regime coming to power by being elected in democratic process. Another source: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propaganda-and-censorship https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propa... "When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Through decrees and laws, the Nazis abolished these civil rights and destroyed German democracy. " But I concede that there are exactly opposite views. After all it's history so anyone is free to make stuff up about it that fits his narrative.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > "When the Nazis came to power in 1933, the German constitution guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of the press." Note that these rights were not at all guaranteed pre-1919. Censorship of speech and of the press was practically institutionalized in the German Empire. It makes no sense to argue that the rabid anti-Semitism of late-19th c. and early-20th c. Germany was a result of too much freedom; on the contrary, it was directly carried over from previous authoritarian government, The Weimar constitution ultimately came too late to really improve on that state of things.
    - scotty79 5y ago
      What was too little too late was not the freedom of speech, but laws against anti-Semitic expressions. They were too limited and mellow. Goebbels was sentenced for anti-Semitic expressions which didn't stop him at all.
      - zozbot234 5y ago
        The fact that those laws were even on the books is in itself notable given that, again, anti-Semitism had largely been endorsed by previous governments. And it wasn't just Germany either. Remember the Dreyfus Affair? That was in France pre-WWI. Dreyfus was framed by the authorities for a crime he did not commit, and initially got a life sentence before widespread public opposition led to a reopening of the case and ultimately to his exoneration. This whole ruckus shows that the very idea that anti-Semitism was something that should be opposed could be considered radical and anti-authoritarian at the time even in "civilized, developed" La Belle Époque France, never mind Germany! The mindset was wildly different from what we'd expect today.
      - bavell 5y ago
        You're ignoring entirely the devastating economic impact of the treaty of Versailles and claiming it was all about free speech. Totally off the Mark ;)
        5y ago