Why is Holocaust denial illegal?

[redarmy11]

To silence Holocaust deniers is to get rid of Free Speech.

Even Communists should not be out right silenced. If one cannot deal with them on a rational level, one must suffer for one's incompetancies.

What about American democratic socialists?

Your posting history on the subject of democratic freedoms now shows some serious incompatibilities. One or more of your comments needs to be withdrawn.

Holocaust denial is illegal because they can use the same laws and attitude to silence people who have evidence that points to guilt on the part of other parties besides those named in the official stories.

Are you speculating? Are you thinking of any parties in particular? If so, do you have evidence?

 

[BenTheMan]

There has not been one credible shred if evidence against the Halocaust. More to the point there is a a plethora of proof that it happened.

If it is so obvious that it has happened, then those who would deny it are just foolish. I think we are in agreement about this. But one can find tons of literature on the internet, as well as in your local library. For example: http://christianparty.net/holocaust.htm (This is not an endorsement of this link.) Also, check the coverage of the recent "Holocaust didn't Happen" convention in Iran by Al-Jazeera. http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=12726

Then, should there be a law against, say, believing that the Earth is flat, or that the Earth is the center of the universe? (People have suffered and died for this cause, in the Inquisition.) Or against the belief that the sun doesn't exist?

Case in point: such people are insane, or fascists.

Yes and they have all of our oil

This should be enough reason to place it under "acceptable free speech" in contradiction to such exceptions as "no screaming FIRE! in a crowded theatre".

Hi Prince, the point that TW has made is that the harm is in the trvialization of the suffering of a people.

That's really illegal in Europe? Heh.

Heh indeed. The Europeans pride themselves in their progressiveness, but Wikipedia says: "Holocaust denial is illegal in a number of European countries: Austria (article 3h Verbotsgesetz 1947), Belgium (Belgian Negationism Law), the Czech Republic..., France (Loi Gayssot), Germany..., Lithuania, The Netherlands ..., Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain and Switzerland... In addition, ...it is also illegal in Israel." I cannot think of any similar laws in America (except for the flag burning laws).

Possibly they have no desire to repeat history.

The kind of people who indulge in Holocaust denial are also the kind of people that led to the Holocaust in the first place.

This, I agree with. This is certainly the motivation behind these laws. But, for example, the Europeans (and a lot of Americans) seem to have such a huge problem with American domestic spying laws, designed to prevent terror attacks on US soil.

The point is, do the ends justify the means? Is it ok to infringe on one's rights in the interest of the common good?

So they're not allowed to write holocaust denial literature either? That's like robbing the next generation. I guess they could always come to America to write it.

David Duke was arrested in Austria for these offences. I don't know if it is "robbing the next generation", so to speak, but it is a suppression of unpopular opinion.

You take away part of a right, you take away all of the right. Eventually, all speech that is deemed "unacceptable" will not be allowed, and the Enlightenment will not.

This is exactly my point. I was trying to think of an example, and the closest thing I could think of was the rascism experienced by African-Americans in the past in this country.

To those who think it is ok to pass laws against denying the holocaust, should we pass laws in America against displaying the Confederate flag and the use of the word "nigger", for example.

Dragon has said:

When 10 million lives are affected...and the ones still alive remember that day...freedom of expression is overshadowed by pain and hatred.

Then I submit to you all that more than 10 million lives have been affected by slavery in the history of America, and that slavery has caused pain and hatred that still exists today.

 

[draqon]

Then I submit to you all that more than 10 million lives have been affected by slavery in the history of America, and that slavery has caused pain and hatred that still exists today.

true

 

[leopold]

I am interested to hear what people think of the Holocaust/genocide denial laws in Europe.

it's illegal to deny the holocaust in the EU?
all i have to say is the holocaust was a shame and i go to jail?
laws like that suck.

Example. The president of the EU, a German woman (whose name eludes me) has made a push to have symbols like the swastika banned in the EU except in religous ceremonies.

religious ceremonies? what kind of nazi propaganda is this?

It is illegal to deny that the Holocaust occured in Austria, as is claiming that what the Turks did to the Armenians in 1915 was anything less than genocide.

see above

The West has had a history of vigorously defending freedom of some expressions (Danish cartoons, Rushdie's "The Satanic Verses"), but are seemingly ok with prohibiting other forms of expression.

the west? i thought we was talking about the EU.
but now that you mention it i do believe a person should be able to deny the holocaust without going to jail for it.

So the question is, how can one reconcile freedom of expression with laws which explicitly prohibit expression of opinion?

you can't.

Note: Don't take this as anything other than a philosophical question please. I don't want this to turn into a debate as to whether the holocaust or Armenian genocide actually did occur.

let me clarify, freedom isn't free, it requires responsibility.
it really boils down to who is responsible, in this case the EU, which is wrong.
the person should be responsible.

 

[BenTheMan]

Holocaust denial is illegal because they can use the same laws and attitude to silence people who have evidence that points to guilt on the part of other parties besides those named in the official stories.

Please explain this Meta. Are you saying that Hitler's regime is not culpable for the Holocaust?

 

[BenTheMan]

all i have to say is the holocaust was a shame and i go to jail?

I don't think it's that easy!

religious ceremonies? what kind of nazi propaganda is this?

Hitler hijacked the swastika from the Hindu, who have used it as a symbol of luck for thousands of years.

the west? i thought we was talking about the EU.

The west = Europe + America.

you can't.

I agree with this. No matter how ridiculous the opinion, it should be protected.

Draqon---

true

Then are you a proponent of similar laws in America?

 

[MetaKron]

Please explain this Meta. Are you saying that Hitler's regime is not culpable for the Holocaust?

Hitler's regime was not solely responsible for the Holocaust any more than Saddam Hussein's regime was solely responsible for gassing the Kurds that particular time.

 

[draqon]

Draqon---

Then are you a proponent of similar laws in America?

yes.

 

[redarmy11]

Hitler's regime was not solely responsible for the Holocaust any more than Saddam Hussein's regime was solely responsible for gassing the Kurds that particular time.

Well, they certainly had their collaborators - some more culpable than others. It would be fair to say that the Nazis were primarily responsible though - wouldn't it? Care to flesh out your views on this a bit more?

 

[MetaKron]

I think that there were those who egged them on because they knew of the millions and maybe even billions of dollars that could be made from them.

 

[redarmy11]

I think that there were those who egged them on because they knew of the millions and maybe even billions of dollars that could be made from them.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Metakron: instead of making vague allusions can you please state your views on this clearly and comprehensively... or say nothing? Thanks.

Anyway.

My own opinion on why Holocaust denial is illegal is this: it's easy for us - the generations that have never experienced a world war - to take democracy and its associated freedoms, including freedom of expression, for granted, and to forget that people have fought and died to defend them many times over.

Opinions, therefore, that are not only erroneous - and repeatedly shown to be so - but which also give succour to those who seek to abolish all the freedoms our forefathers fought for need to be suppressed.

It sounds more than slightly paradoxical to say that, by suppressing free speech you're defending it but - in the case of Holocaust denial - that is exactly the intent and the effect. In declaring it illegal we're not only honouring the dead but reminding ourselves that free expression isn't a given - eternally and inalienably ours - but a prize to be defended from those who'd take it from us.

 

[MetaKron]

You offer me the choice of saying nothing. How delightfully generous of you.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

Holocaust denial only serves those who are seeking to incite hatred.

These people can shove their free speech fascist motives up their arse.

 

[redarmy11]

You offer me the choice of saying nothing. How delightfully generous of you.

Choices are what your grandaddy fought for. But I'd much prefer it if you could put these...

Holocaust denial is illegal because they can use the same laws and attitude to silence people who have evidence that points to guilt on the part of other parties besides those named in the official stories.

Hitler's regime was not solely responsible for the Holocaust any more than Saddam Hussein's regime was solely responsible for gassing the Kurds that particular time.

I think that there were those who egged them on because they knew of the millions and maybe even billions of dollars that could be made from them.

...together into a comprehensive statement of your opinion.

I value your freedom of expression.

Go for it.

 

[BenTheMan]

MetaKron's point was that the laws exist because they serve to protect those who share responsibility for the holocaust---is this correct?

Draqon---are you in favor of outlawing all racial slurs?

My own opinion on why Holocaust denial is illegal is this: it's easy for us - the generations that have never experienced a world war - to take democracy and its associated freedoms, including freedom of expression, for granted, and to forget that people have fought and died to defend them many times over.

redarmy---I heartily agree with you that freedom had to be bought with blood (I won't point out the obvious irony between your name and your statements ). I am curious---what do you feel about the flag burning laws?

Opinions, therefore, that are not only erroneous - and repeatedly shown to be so - but which also give succour to those who seek to abolish all the freedoms our forefathers fought for need to be suppressed.

I fail to see how allowing Holocaust Deniers to propogate fallacies aides those who seek to abolish our freedoms. Specifically, what freedoms were gained by the Jewish suffering during the Holocaust? Can you explain this a bit more?

Holocaust denial only serves those who are seeking to incite hatred.

SpuriousMonkey---this may be. What do you feel about the Danish cartoons from last year? Or the New York Times article about Koran defilement at Guantanimo? Both incidents certainly led to an incitement of Muslim hatred in the Middle East twoards America. The latter even led to riots and several deaths. Should we filter what we say based on the fact that it may incite hatred?

I value your freedom of expression.

Touche.

 

[BenTheMan]

MetaKron---if there is some conspiracy to protect those truly responsible for the Holocaust, should we infer that the countries who have such laws are in some way responsible?

 

[BenTheMan]

Also, who has made money from the Holocaust?

 

[MetaKron]

Holocaust denial only serves those who are seeking to incite hatred.

These people can shove their free speech fascist motives up their arse.

I'm going to have to remember you said that.

 

[draqon]

Draqon---are you in favor of outlawing all racial slurs?

no, not in favor. I am in favor of suppressing them with nonviolent ways thou. like small financial bill for saying a slur. ...or like a personal ticket of racism...thus saying something racial 5 times and hear by people will mean you have to take community lessons on the wrong understanding of racism...and than it goes downscale after that if he/she doesnt cooperate.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

This thread keeps popping up. SciForums should have a mechanism for directing people to existing threads instead of having the same discussion over and over again and not even knowing it.

As I have said on the other threads, the big problem with outlawing beliefs or opinions is that outlawing something is not the same thing as making it cease to exist. If you make Holocaust denial or any of the trappings of Nazism or antisemitism illegal, all you do is make the people who hold those beliefs and opinions go into hiding. They never have a dialog with us; they just keep talking to each other. At some point the president of some backwater country like Iran will invite them all over to have a festival in a place where the rest of us don't have access, and they'll start to feel like they've got legitimacy.

You want your cockroaches out in the open where you can keep track of them. You do not want them sneaking around under the linoleum.

Or, to quote Louis Brandeis again: "The best disinfectant is sunshine."