German court lifts ban on far-right magazine
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
The ruling is seen by some as a blow to Germany's fight against right-wing extremism, although for others it could be proof of the country's high standards of free speech.
Yes, nothing says free speech like repressing pro-Palestinian demonstrators under vague security rationales.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Assholes should be allowed to publish media, too.
For almost any topic there is a group who wants to ban it, because they don't like it. Lets please everyone. And In the end there is nothing left.
I mean we can't allow everything. But there needs to be a good reason, backed by a law and a judge's verdict.
-
The ruling is seen by some as a blow to Germany's fight against right-wing extremism, although for others it could be proof of the country's high standards of free speech.
Yes, nothing says free speech like repressing pro-Palestinian demonstrators under vague security rationales.
A truly laughable proposition
-
Assholes should be allowed to publish media, too.
For almost any topic there is a group who wants to ban it, because they don't like it. Lets please everyone. And In the end there is nothing left.
I mean we can't allow everything. But there needs to be a good reason, backed by a law and a judge's verdict.
That's not the point tho. In Germany, to prevent another dictatorship, there are laws that forbid going against the constitution, which also guarantees free speech and the right to a personal opinion (Art 5). This medium is constantly publishing unconstitutianal propaganda and sometimes even trying to incite coups that would lead to abolishment of the constitution. So they are actually attacking free speech among other freedoms, like equality and religious freedom.
-
That's not the point tho. In Germany, to prevent another dictatorship, there are laws that forbid going against the constitution, which also guarantees free speech and the right to a personal opinion (Art 5). This medium is constantly publishing unconstitutianal propaganda and sometimes even trying to incite coups that would lead to abolishment of the constitution. So they are actually attacking free speech among other freedoms, like equality and religious freedom.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The Bundesverwaltungsgericht says no. And constitutional scholars state that one has to endure uncomfortable and ugly opinions (Freiheit Tag und Nacht aushalten, goes the saying, I heard.)
It is stated that hate speech and anti-constitutional tendencies are protected under free speech as long as they are not personal insults or Incitement to ethnic or racial hatred. The Bundesverwaltungsgericht came to the verdict, that compact didn't do that, I guess?
My last data point stems from a comment by Tilmann Steffen in die Zeit about the begin and the goals of the trial.To be clear, I'm worried about the current up-rise of right wing parties and groups in Europe (and about the success of the politians who make these extremist statements their own, to gain influence). But I wouldn't want to ignore constitutional rights to protect the constitution.
-
The Bundesverwaltungsgericht says no. And constitutional scholars state that one has to endure uncomfortable and ugly opinions (Freiheit Tag und Nacht aushalten, goes the saying, I heard.)
It is stated that hate speech and anti-constitutional tendencies are protected under free speech as long as they are not personal insults or Incitement to ethnic or racial hatred. The Bundesverwaltungsgericht came to the verdict, that compact didn't do that, I guess?
My last data point stems from a comment by Tilmann Steffen in die Zeit about the begin and the goals of the trial.To be clear, I'm worried about the current up-rise of right wing parties and groups in Europe (and about the success of the politians who make these extremist statements their own, to gain influence). But I wouldn't want to ignore constitutional rights to protect the constitution.
Germany has a history of forbidding extremism on both sides, justify it with the "never again" of our Nazi past, then apply the laws mainly on the left
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cool. Publish the list of subscribers.
-
Germany has a history of forbidding extremism on both sides, justify it with the "never again" of our Nazi past, then apply the laws mainly on the left
Yes. The blind in the right eye symptom seems to be real. Sadly.
It doesn't change anything about the compact verdict from my point of view. But this injustice feels unfair and people do not feel represented and protected by the state (with the known consequences). The state has the Gewaltmonopol (monopoly on the use of force). For me this implies, that the state has the duty to nvoke its rights equally, regardless of the side.