6 ms·

"So they do deny freedom of speech and freedom of expression to people that the government doesn't like " Of course they do, every state on earth limits freedo

"So they do deny freedom of speech and freedom of expression to people that the government doesn't like " Of course they do, every state on earth limits freedom of speech. In germany regarding certain topics even more so. But nazis are still allowed to express their ideology. This is a difference to a time, when also this was forbidden. (for example in the NS area)

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
[flagged]
- hutzlibu 5y ago
  "It is very simple really. " Is it? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30289162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30289162 You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you? Or about the things I think other people should do to you? (are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.) But I actually do think, the limits should be as small as possible and for all I care, the nazis should be free to have their swastikas Tattoo to their front head.
  - YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
    > You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you? No. The only concession I would consider is a call to violence if there is an real and immediate threat. Not internet death threats. The second I may concede would be defamation under a very strict standard e.g. You were claiming someone broke a law. > Or about the things I think other people should do to you? People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me. > (are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.) If you are talking about the Communists. The communists killed and imprisoned a huge number of people. Also some of the famines were entirely predictable and in some cases were deliberate.
    - hutzlibu 5y ago
      "People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me." So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? I don't think so. This is the line I mean, which is not at all clear. "The communists killed and imprisoned a huge number of people." You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. But you do not have to tell me about pol pot, gulags and co. I am certainly no fan of them either. And like I said, I am not in favor of banning swastikas. Not so much, because some poor nazis are then not free to express their ideology, but because the symbol is way older and was not invented by the nazis, just missused. So I agree, that by the same logic, you would have to ban the hammer and the christian cross with it. Still, the death chambers and the holocaust was very unique in its quantity and quality, so I cannot really stand nazis whining about oppression. I live in a hotspot of them.I know they do it a lot. I also know, they are the first, to supress anything they do not like, if they are in a position of power.
      - YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
        > So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? Yes > And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? If people are likely to assault someone because someone else told them over social media. They would have probably done it anyway. > You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_... It is literally like the second or third result on DDG.
        ailef 5y ago
        That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source. From the page itself: > Any attempt to estimate a total number of killings under communist regimes depends greatly on definitions, and the idea to group together different countries such as Afghanistan and Hungary has no adequate explanation. There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with taking the widest, most encompassing definition. One should wonder then, what number would we get if we apply the same definition to pro-Western/capitalist countries?

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago

[flagged]

hutzlibu 5y ago
"It is very simple really. " Is it? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30289162 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30289162 You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you? Or about the things I think other people should do to you? (are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.) But I actually do think, the limits should be as small as possible and for all I care, the nazis should be free to have their swastikas Tattoo to their front head.
- YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
  > You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you? No. The only concession I would consider is a call to violence if there is an real and immediate threat. Not internet death threats. The second I may concede would be defamation under a very strict standard e.g. You were claiming someone broke a law. > Or about the things I think other people should do to you? People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me. > (are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.) If you are talking about the Communists. The communists killed and imprisoned a huge number of people. Also some of the famines were entirely predictable and in some cases were deliberate.
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    "People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me." So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? I don't think so. This is the line I mean, which is not at all clear. "The communists killed and imprisoned a huge number of people." You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. But you do not have to tell me about pol pot, gulags and co. I am certainly no fan of them either. And like I said, I am not in favor of banning swastikas. Not so much, because some poor nazis are then not free to express their ideology, but because the symbol is way older and was not invented by the nazis, just missused. So I agree, that by the same logic, you would have to ban the hammer and the christian cross with it. Still, the death chambers and the holocaust was very unique in its quantity and quality, so I cannot really stand nazis whining about oppression. I live in a hotspot of them.I know they do it a lot. I also know, they are the first, to supress anything they do not like, if they are in a position of power.
    - YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
      > So can "they" openly say, that they think, you deserve to be robbed and assaulted? Yes > And for the sake of it, let "them" be a famous antifa influencer, so you can expect that other people do as their influencer told them is the right thing? If people are likely to assault someone because someone else told them over social media. They would have probably done it anyway. > You claimed they killed more than the nazis. Which is a claim, I heard before quite often, but usually without proper sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_... It is literally like the second or third result on DDG.
      - ailef 5y ago
        That page is what I would definitely not characterize as a proper source. From the page itself: > Any attempt to estimate a total number of killings under communist regimes depends greatly on definitions, and the idea to group together different countries such as Afghanistan and Hungary has no adequate explanation. There doesn't seem to be a real consensus on what actually should be counted or not. But I'm ok with taking the widest, most encompassing definition. One should wonder then, what number would we get if we apply the same definition to pro-Western/capitalist countries?