"California, here we come," used to be a positive expression. Now, it means something far worse for Americans in other states, after passage of two soft-on-crime propositions.
That problem with that approach is its basically your subjective definition of what’s obscene or hateful. I mean, that’s fine usually. When it comes to laws, though, that affect not just you, it’s important to have a definition of it, or to clearly characterize its elements so that one can argue what hate speech is.
Naturally, our country doesn’t have a legal definition of it, so, hate speech doesn’t exist legally.
Whoever publicly or in a meeting approves of, denies or downplays an act committed under the rule of National Socialism of the kind indicated section 6 (1) of the Code of Crimes against International Law in a manner suited to causing a disturbance of the public peace incurs a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeded five years or a fine.
This one sounds like something fearful capitalists would implement for Communism lol.
Have you seen me struggle to figure out how to define rule 1?
Civility and related stuff is actually really hard to define. “I know it when I hear it” is valid enough.
And yes, Germany does not have freedom of speech. America does. That’s why America doesn’t have hate speech laws.
Remember, the government defines “hate speech”, it’s whatever the government doesn’t like. It’s not what you think hate speech is.
I mean, look at the UK and how they abuse hate speech laws, it’s a great example of how the idea of free speech and idea of outlawing hate speech are incompatible.
And McCarthy was about those with security clearance. Allegiance to hostile nations is still something that’s looked for.
How do you define it? Germany has laws around their socialist past. Should America have laws against socialism and democrats since that is where the Nazis got their ideas?
There is a fundamental (and probably intentionally) failure of history here.
Germany was never socialist, nor were the nazis. Just as North Korea is technicallt callee the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” while not being a republic or democratic, the nazis weren’t socialists because they have the word socialism in their official name. Official names can, and in this case are bullshit. There was a socialist movement in Germany, but the nazis co-opted and destroyed socialism. Many of the political prisoners in the holocaust were communists and socialists, taken away because they were communist or socialist.
Should America have laws against socialism and democrats since that is where the Nazis got their ideas?
The nazis didn’t get any ideas for socialism. They destroyed the socialist movement, as it was antithetical to their goals.
But they did learn from the U.S., and how the conservatives in Texas treated immigrants. At the time, they would only allow people of color through if they went through harsh chemical cleaning treatments under the guise of getting rid of lice. The nazis took that idea and ran with it. And nowadays the U.S. treatment of immigrants is not much better thanks to conservatives.
I think I’d define it as inciting hate with the aim of persuading people to actions harmful or offensive to the target group…or something like that.
Should America have laws against socialism?
You know what? I wish America would try that. It’ll either result in us becoming aware of socialism actually is and/or it’ll attempt outlaw everything good under the sun like advocating for minimum wage laws, UBI, harm reduction policies, etc, such that it’ll be opposed by almost everybody that isn’t a soulless ghoul.
I think I’d define it as inciting hate with the aim of persuading people to actions harmful or offensive to the target group…or something like that
The first part is already illegal. That’s an action. Offensive ? That’s a vague term. People here love to call republicans fascist. That would hit your description of hate speech and would be criminal.
If someone refused to use pronouns. That would be illegal.
Calling me cisgender would be illegal since I find that offensive.
See how quickly this spirals out of control ?
German has laws against national socialism, ironically because we forced the laws on them after the war. We were trying to purge nazism.
We don’t want speech to be criminalized as we are a country of ideas. You may not like the idea but somebody may not yours. Yet, you bough have the right to have your ideas.
I don’t believe in the term as you are using it. The freedom of speech is paramount to a free nation.
We already have laws against speech that compels violence but otherwise people should be free to say what they want.
What is hate speech to you, then?
Just like obscenity. You know it when you hear it.
That problem with that approach is its basically your subjective definition of what’s obscene or hateful. I mean, that’s fine usually. When it comes to laws, though, that affect not just you, it’s important to have a definition of it, or to clearly characterize its elements so that one can argue what hate speech is.
Naturally, our country doesn’t have a legal definition of it, so, hate speech doesn’t exist legally.
In contrast, Germany, with its unique history, does have hate speech laws: Section 130 of the German Criminal Code prohibits “Incitement of Masses” (Firefox translated this for me… )
This one sounds like something fearful capitalists would implement for Communism lol.
Have you seen me struggle to figure out how to define rule 1?
Civility and related stuff is actually really hard to define. “I know it when I hear it” is valid enough.
And yes, Germany does not have freedom of speech. America does. That’s why America doesn’t have hate speech laws.
Remember, the government defines “hate speech”, it’s whatever the government doesn’t like. It’s not what you think hate speech is.
I mean, look at the UK and how they abuse hate speech laws, it’s a great example of how the idea of free speech and idea of outlawing hate speech are incompatible.
And McCarthy was about those with security clearance. Allegiance to hostile nations is still something that’s looked for.
And that’s the problem. We are founded on civil disagreement.
“I think [protected race or class] should be slaughtered” is not a form of civil disagreement.
Hate speech is inherently uncivil.
How do you define it? Germany has laws around their socialist past. Should America have laws against socialism and democrats since that is where the Nazis got their ideas?
There is a fundamental (and probably intentionally) failure of history here.
Germany was never socialist, nor were the nazis. Just as North Korea is technicallt callee the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” while not being a republic or democratic, the nazis weren’t socialists because they have the word socialism in their official name. Official names can, and in this case are bullshit. There was a socialist movement in Germany, but the nazis co-opted and destroyed socialism. Many of the political prisoners in the holocaust were communists and socialists, taken away because they were communist or socialist.
The nazis didn’t get any ideas for socialism. They destroyed the socialist movement, as it was antithetical to their goals.
But they did learn from the U.S., and how the conservatives in Texas treated immigrants. At the time, they would only allow people of color through if they went through harsh chemical cleaning treatments under the guise of getting rid of lice. The nazis took that idea and ran with it. And nowadays the U.S. treatment of immigrants is not much better thanks to conservatives.
I think I’d define it as inciting hate with the aim of persuading people to actions harmful or offensive to the target group…or something like that.
You know what? I wish America would try that. It’ll either result in us becoming aware of socialism actually is and/or it’ll attempt outlaw everything good under the sun like advocating for minimum wage laws, UBI, harm reduction policies, etc, such that it’ll be opposed by almost everybody that isn’t a soulless ghoul.
The first part is already illegal. That’s an action. Offensive ? That’s a vague term. People here love to call republicans fascist. That would hit your description of hate speech and would be criminal.
If someone refused to use pronouns. That would be illegal.
Calling me cisgender would be illegal since I find that offensive.
See how quickly this spirals out of control ?
German has laws against national socialism, ironically because we forced the laws on them after the war. We were trying to purge nazism.
We don’t want speech to be criminalized as we are a country of ideas. You may not like the idea but somebody may not yours. Yet, you bough have the right to have your ideas.
You don’t want solutions, you want to be mad.
That’s a silly thing to say. Who’s mad?