4 ms·

> To their credit they've also relaxed a bit over the years. For example, they > lifted the ban on Mein Kampf and it flew off the shelves (https://www.bbc.

> To their credit they've also relaxed a bit over the years. For example, they > lifted the ban on Mein Kampf and it flew off the shelves (https://www.bbc.com > /news/world-europe-38495456) not because the country was full of secret Nazis > this whole time just waiting for it, but because the German people strongly > desire freedom. Factually wrong take. Mein Kampf was never "banned", in fact, there is no such thing as book bans under German law, as there is no censorship - article 5 of the Basic Law explicitly says so. The state can make it illegal to sell and advertise media to minors if it is considered dangerous, and Mein Kampf is and always was on that list. The reason Mein Kampf could not be distributed until a few years ago is because after Hitler's death, the copyright on Mein Kampf fell to the state of Bavaria (for convoluted reasons), and Bavaria just never reprinted it, nor gave license to reprint it. Therefore, any copying of the book was piracy and was prosecuted under piracy laws. Because German copyright ends 70 years after the death of the author, this no longer applies, and the book can be printed and distributed again. Note that public distribution of the book for nazi propaganda purposes is still banned under German hate speech laws ("Volksverhetzung") - not because it is this particular book, but because all nazi propaganda in public is blanket banned. This is why the now-released official Bavarian-government-approved copy of Mein Kampf contains additional commentary by historians to situate Hitler's remarks in historic context.

autoexec 3y ago
> The reason Mein Kampf could not be distributed until a few years ago is because after Hitler's death, the copyright on Mein Kampf fell to the state of Bavaria ( Bavaria used copyright to enforce an "unofficial" ban on the book. It's ridiculous to try to paint the situation as one where Bavaria just never got around to reprinting it.
- indigo945 3y ago
  This was of course intentional, but you incorrectly claimed that > To their credit they've also relaxed a bit over the years. For example, > they lifted the ban on Mein Kampf This just never happened. No ban was ever lifted. This does not show some change in the German mindset towards being more tolerant of Nazi speech, as you insinuate. The copyright expired - that is all.
  - autoexec 3y ago
    If you'd like another example where German citizens are being subjected to less censorship, the restrictions on Nazi images in video games have been somewhat lightened. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45142651 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45142651
    - indigo945 3y ago
      As mentioned above, the USK cannot "censor" games, it is responsible for deciding which games (or other pieces of media) are considered "harmful for the youth" (and by the way, it is a public-private partnership, not a government body). Games considered "harmful for the youth" (i.e. games that are, colloquially, "auf dem Index") may by law not be distributed or advertised to minors. They may still be imported, sold, and otherwise distributed, as long as care is taken that they are only distributed to people of age. Because it's essentially impossible to ensure that any particular advertisement will only be seen by adults, this however means that games not approved by the USK may practically not be publicly advertised at all. Because game publishing companies have a strong incentive to be allowed to advertise their games, they will often self-censor to ensure USK approval. This is done for commercial, not legal reasons; if the companies didn't want to advertise their games, they wouldn't have to abide by USK guidelines. It is also illegal to advertise tobacco in Germany, and it is also illegal to sell tobacco to minors. Unless you believe that this constitutes a "tobacco ban" in Germany, it is hard to argue that video games are "banned" under this law. That said, the 2018 change in USK policy that allows video games showing anti-constitutional symbolism to still be approved as long as the message is clearly anti-nazi is still perfectly reasonable, and probably a good development, as it aligns USK policy in this regard with policy that it previously took on other media.
      - Jiro 3y ago
        > This is done for commercial, not legal reasons; if the companies didn't want to advertise their games, they wouldn't have to abide by USK guidelines. That's a ban by any reasonable standard. That's like saying that a requirement that churches be built on the moon wasn't banning churches, or a requirement that Jews who own businesses pay a 95% tax isn't a ban on Jews owning businesses. In some technical sense it's not a complete ban, but if the government says that if you do X, you face so many restrictions that you'd go broke, that's defacto a ban. It's an excuse made by people who like to pretend that they're not getting their hands dirty by literally banning something, while banning it in practice.
nvm0n2 3y ago
Sure they ban books (or punish authors for writing them, which amounts to the same thing). https://www.racket.news/p/madness-american-satirist-cj-hopkins https://www.racket.news/p/madness-american-satirist-cj-hopki... Just when you may have thought things couldn’t get any crazier: American playwright and humorist C.J. Hopkins, profiled in this space on numerous occasions, has been sent a “punishment order” by a German judge, offering him a Sophie’s Choice of 60 days in jail or 3,600 euros. His crime? Essentially, insulting the German health minister in a tweet, and using a scarcely-visible image of a Swastika on a mask in a book critical of the global pandemic response, The Rise of the New Normal Reich. He was first accused of this “crime” in June, shortly after Roger Waters was placed under investigation for wearing his clearly satirical “Pink” costume in a stage performance in Berlin. As I wrote when C.J. was charged weeks later, authorities claim that through the use of the mask image, C.J. was “disseminating propaganda, the contents of which are intended to further the aims of a former National Socialist organization.”

autoexec 3y ago

> The reason Mein Kampf could not be distributed until a few years ago is because after Hitler's death, the copyright on Mein Kampf fell to the state of Bavaria ( Bavaria used copyright to enforce an "unofficial" ban on the book. It's ridiculous to try to paint the situation as one where Bavaria just never got around to reprinting it.

indigo945 3y ago
This was of course intentional, but you incorrectly claimed that > To their credit they've also relaxed a bit over the years. For example, > they lifted the ban on Mein Kampf This just never happened. No ban was ever lifted. This does not show some change in the German mindset towards being more tolerant of Nazi speech, as you insinuate. The copyright expired - that is all.
- autoexec 3y ago
  If you'd like another example where German citizens are being subjected to less censorship, the restrictions on Nazi images in video games have been somewhat lightened. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45142651 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-45142651
  - indigo945 3y ago
    As mentioned above, the USK cannot "censor" games, it is responsible for deciding which games (or other pieces of media) are considered "harmful for the youth" (and by the way, it is a public-private partnership, not a government body). Games considered "harmful for the youth" (i.e. games that are, colloquially, "auf dem Index") may by law not be distributed or advertised to minors. They may still be imported, sold, and otherwise distributed, as long as care is taken that they are only distributed to people of age. Because it's essentially impossible to ensure that any particular advertisement will only be seen by adults, this however means that games not approved by the USK may practically not be publicly advertised at all. Because game publishing companies have a strong incentive to be allowed to advertise their games, they will often self-censor to ensure USK approval. This is done for commercial, not legal reasons; if the companies didn't want to advertise their games, they wouldn't have to abide by USK guidelines. It is also illegal to advertise tobacco in Germany, and it is also illegal to sell tobacco to minors. Unless you believe that this constitutes a "tobacco ban" in Germany, it is hard to argue that video games are "banned" under this law. That said, the 2018 change in USK policy that allows video games showing anti-constitutional symbolism to still be approved as long as the message is clearly anti-nazi is still perfectly reasonable, and probably a good development, as it aligns USK policy in this regard with policy that it previously took on other media.
    - Jiro 3y ago
      > This is done for commercial, not legal reasons; if the companies didn't want to advertise their games, they wouldn't have to abide by USK guidelines. That's a ban by any reasonable standard. That's like saying that a requirement that churches be built on the moon wasn't banning churches, or a requirement that Jews who own businesses pay a 95% tax isn't a ban on Jews owning businesses. In some technical sense it's not a complete ban, but if the government says that if you do X, you face so many restrictions that you'd go broke, that's defacto a ban. It's an excuse made by people who like to pretend that they're not getting their hands dirty by literally banning something, while banning it in practice.

nvm0n2 3y ago

Sure they ban books (or punish authors for writing them, which amounts to the same thing). https://www.racket.news/p/madness-american-satirist-cj-hopkins https://www.racket.news/p/madness-american-satirist-cj-hopki... Just when you may have thought things couldn’t get any crazier: American playwright and humorist C.J. Hopkins, profiled in this space on numerous occasions, has been sent a “punishment order” by a German judge, offering him a Sophie’s Choice of 60 days in jail or 3,600 euros. His crime? Essentially, insulting the German health minister in a tweet, and using a scarcely-visible image of a Swastika on a mask in a book critical of the global pandemic response, The Rise of the New Normal Reich. He was first accused of this “crime” in June, shortly after Roger Waters was placed under investigation for wearing his clearly satirical “Pink” costume in a stage performance in Berlin. As I wrote when C.J. was charged weeks later, authorities claim that through the use of the mask image, C.J. was “disseminating propaganda, the contents of which are intended to further the aims of a former National Socialist organization.”