The Socialist Thread

I think in this case they have been criminally violent , but I do agree that freedom of speech is sacred.

In what case?

No.

The NPD are a criminally violent organization, whose ideology has inspired the deaths of nearly a dozen recently, including that of a police officer. I consider them and their far-Right ideology as domestic terrorism; these people do not hide (or try unconvincingly to hide) their ideology of creating a racially pure society. This is very sensitive here, with Germany's history of Nazism.

I also firmly believe in free speech. Yet when this speech advocates the expulsion and destruction of peoples based on racial and ethnic background, and begin acting on that with murders, you step over a very fine line, and I draw the line in the sand there. Article One of the Basic Law states that "The human dignity is inviolable," and that to respect and protect the dignity of all is the authority of the government. These people have crossed that line.

Did the party order these killings? Otherwise they cannot be held responsible for the actions of a bunch of fringe extremists.

In any case the issue here is that you're advocating the banning of a political organization based on its political beliefs. That's ridiculously undemocratic and authoritarian.

And Germany needs to develop thicker skin.

Nazis existed. They were bad. They were also Germans. Stop trying to hide that fact.

Banning a party that is itself undemocratic and authoritarian is not necessarily undemocratic and authoritarian. If the majority of people here want it to be banned, then who are you say it's not "undemocratic and authoritarian" as you are not respecting the opinions of the public, who are sickened by this party. The party is also violation of the many laws within the Basic Law, foremost Article One.

And YES, the NPD has been linked to these thugs: http://www.thelocal.de/national/20111129-39183.html The police have found distinct connections between the NPD and the splinter group responsible for these murders. This has included the arrest of a former NPD chief in Thuringia, who used to be the spokesman to the party there, and aided the murderers while he was in the party. It's very likely this official was not alone.

Stop trying to hide the fact that Germans were Nazis? Yeah. I can see you've never been here. Or lived here.

Banning a party is inherently undemocratic because it silences a political viewpoint, and it's inherently authoritarian because it tells people that believing in certain things or expressing certain ideas is not okay. There's nothing democratic about forcing Nazis and communists out of the political system.

Democracy is not just a tyranny of the majority. All political beliefs are equally valid and should receive equal protection under the law. No amount of angry peasants justifies a witch-hunt, even if people are actually making pacts with Satan. McCarthyism is sooo last century.

No idea what this 'Basic Law' thing you're talking about is.

Key words.

How does that justify banning the party? That's actually a trick question, because nothing would ever justify banning a political party.

The draconian German censorship laws affect the globe, you know. Content is watered-down or revised to make it acceptable in Germany. All because some people get upset at historical fact.

This is not the United States. This is Germany. You can take Madisonian ideas about the tyranny of the majority out. They are not applicable, especially within the federal parliamentary system based on majority coalitions and consensus social democratic principles.

The Basic Law, otherwise known as the Grundgesetz, is the Constitution of the Federal Republic. It is the Law of the Land. Americans will love to talk about their First Amendment rights of free speech. I can talk instead about my Article One rights of respecting human dignity without intimidation.

Not even murders can justify banning a party, especially when someone part of the upper echelon of that said party provided false documents, finances, and even weapons to help kill Turkish immigrants and police officers? That's a ridiculous argument to support free speech.

Democratic ideals are democratic ideals, no matter the system. Allowing the larger group of people to bully the smaller groups of people because they have more of the vote is something that all democracies need to safeguard against in order to avoid devolving into a tyranny of the majority. As well, it's liberalism 101 to expect that all people are free to express all ideas, especially in the political arena.

If we stick to interpreting the law of the land, either in the US or in Germany, then nothing will be accomplished. The debate here is about ideals of expression and political liberty. What is just is not necessarily legal.

That's not the party's doing. He might be performing criminal action, but that doesn't justify silencing his political party. Crimes are committed by individuals. The party itself can never deserve to be banned due the actions of its members, as those are the actions of its members.

There's no such thing as a ridiculous argument that supports free speech.

Democracy functions as long as there are those that believe in democracy in the first place. When you begin to accept parties who do not believe in the democratic system at all, you risk a very fine line of validating the unimaginable.

Au contraire. Ideals are mixed in the Basic Law as a response to the Weimar Constitution and the Third Reich. This is very explicit in Article Twenty-One. All political parties that exist in Germany must conform to democratic principles, and that any party that seeks to endanger or overthrow the federal republic are considered unconstitutional and subject to review by the supreme court. So yes, the NPD's racist and vile beliefs are in the cross-hairs of being banned.

Given that one of their top members highly likely gave weapons, finances and comfort to these thugs shows the kind of party they are. This is also the same party that also considers David Duke, the infamous former KKK leader an ally (who, by the way, was just arrested here in Germany and is facing deportation), and also sent letters to other politicians of ethnic backgrounds to "go home."

I have no problem with free speech. But when that speech is ethnic hatred and incites violence, your soap box should be pulled out.

Democracy isn't democracy at all if you only allow certain viewpoints or ideas to be suggested. It's not up to us to decide what's acceptable and what's unacceptable for people to believe or what causes are just.

As I said, it's pointless to discuss any law of the land here. What is legal is not always just and what is just is not necessarily legal.

Hiya Joe, got a new list all ready to go?

Seriously, read what you just said. Skinheads and Nazis aren't nearly as scary as the kind of rhetoric that you just used.

Hate speech is stupid.

That's great, but based on everything you've said so far, I doubt that considerably.

Speech that incites immediate unlawful action (as long as the law itself doesn't infringe on speech) should be restricted, sure, but there should be no distinctions made on the basis of whether or not it constitutes 'ethnic hatred.'

Actually, I think there should be boundaries. Racist talk is unacceptable. Pure and simple.

I just shared your quote with some German friends with me right now. They had a giggle at it, and said, "he's from Kansas, isn't he? How would he know?" By the way, your defense of free speech for a despicable group that probably wouldn't hesitate to throw you out of this country too is baffling at best. Considering that I'm not planning on murdering anyone because their nose is bigger than mine, or telling a German Turk who has lived here all their life to "Auslaender raus!", my view is pretty common here. You should visit Germany sometime. It may broaden your horizons a bit.

Since this conversation is going nowhere, and you're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you, I offer you two images of when you do not safeguard democratic institutions.

Before:


After:


Democracy dies when you don't protect it. And when you don't believe in it either.

Then my suspicions are confirmed. You don't care a bit for free speech.

I don't understand what you mean.

Free speech is universal. You don't get to pick and choose who gets to speak their mind.

I wouldn't expect a whole lot of people to be overcome with xenophobia and racism, but xenophobes and racists shouldn't be silenced because the majority disapproves.

I'll accept your forfeit.

Oh, and careful there, don't want to offend anyone with your references to H***** and the N****.

The only way to protect democracy is to ensure that everyone is equally free to express their opinions and participate in the political process. Shutting out the people you don't like is the last thing you should do to protect democracy.

Not speech that incites and supports ethnic violence and cleansing. What do you say to the victims that died because of that speech, and the actions that were carried out from them?

That's easy for you to say, sitting across the ocean.

Yeah. Again, I can really tell you've never been here. You seem to think that this is a no-no subject here. However, discussions about the Third Reich are not taboo in the slightest. It's widely discussed in universities, schools, television and in film. You can't go out your door one day without hearing at least a passing mention to the NSDAP regime. Do you know that German schools also require their pupils to visit concentration camps? Please don't show ignorance about this country. You seem to think this place is still stuck in the 1950s mentally. It's a very modern society that can have painful conversations with itself about the past, and it's not afraid of it. If anything, the recent Neo-Nazi murders demonstrate how people have lost faith in the government to properly monitor these extremists.

And what if the enemies of democracy take control of that democracy, as what happened in 1933? Hmmm? Not that I see the NPD as an electoral threat in any kind, but I would do everything I can to see that they never have a seat in the Bundestag.

1. You had and have Plutocracy, not Democracy.

2. People must be allowed to express there views, nobody how stupid they are.

I'm mostly with Mdhookey on this one...
To Kali: Germany is very open about it's past and isn't trying to hide anything, merely prevent it from happening again.

Personally im with Kali here, everyone should have a say in a democratic society even the people who are the crazy neo-Nazis. Yet i understand where MDhookey is coming from as Germany is very insecure about the issue, however at least they will admit some faults and admit to prevent it from ever happening (tough in a undemocratic way) which is alot that can be said for the damn Turks and the Armenian genocide. Speaking of Turks one of the main things i gotten from this that Turkish immigration to Germany was as big as i thought as well as that Neo-Nazism still has impact in the country (Will be very interesting to see how Germany will react to the republication of Hitler's mein kempf and other Nazi related material and history)

But in the end i side with Kali here, but you both make good arguments.