Mandatory jail term for Nazi salute under new hate crime rules in Australia

[ihavecrabs111@lemmy.world]

I don’t really understand this whole “free speech” thing. If it were ww2 would you be worried about nazis having free speech or would you do what needed to be done?

[timewarp@lemmy.world]

More like Israel why do you show your population non-stop propaganda & conscript them to join your military & engage in psyops & social media influence on your behalf. This is all verifiable on Wikipedia BTW with references.

Also no one cares that they get called Nazis. I care when you start locking people up for expressing themselves in ways that are non violent. Lock up all the Nazis assaulting people you want, but when you start assaulting people for what they wear or hand signs they make, then you become the violent criminal.

[chonkyowlbear@lemmy.world]

Nope. They were perfectly legal as they were ordered by the government.

[misterfrog@lemmy.world]

I'm gonna be generous and assume the original commenter meant "Aboriginals on average have significantly worse outcomes compared to non-aboriginal Australians due to historical persecution"

[mrnobody@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

Freedom of speech was created so citizens could feel safe criticising the government, not so they could spout hatred about people who were different to them. You can say whatever the fuck you want, up until it makes others unsafe, that doesn't mean oh they say bad words and im offended, or i don't like them promoting that candidate over the one i like that has christian* values. No, that means you words and actions intentionally incite hatred and violence.

All this hiding behind free speech shite thats been happening for a very long time has just given the shit cunts the courage to be shit cunts. And now because the US shat the bed and its been spreading the world, the rest of the world needs to sanitise.

[occamsrazer@lemmy.world]

You are intentionally mischaracterizing my stance and then being preachy and condescending about it. It's pretty annoying so I'm going to move on.

[source_of_truth@lemmy.world]

Obviously not.

[fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de]

That's a fair and accurate statement.

"Aboriginals don't have rights" is false, hyperbolic, and unhelpful.

[othermark@lemm.ee]

Any good tech companies in Australia? How hard are the citizenship requirements if you avoid all the Mel Gibsons?

[obsolete@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

I can't see this actually happening since people who continue to commit crime, are re-released on bail.

[mrsulu@lemmy.ml]

Redefining the freedom of speech can be a slippery slope. It will depend upon who is in power and their personal views. Hate speech is something that can be targetted. There would need to be statutory limitations to prevent misuse of the legislative principles. If the Germans can do it right, so can we, wherever we live.

[pixlbabble@lemmy.world]

Slippery slope

[hanrahan@slrpnk.net]

time has just given the shit cunts the courage to be shit cunts

There's something to be said for that, knowing they are shit cunts.

[tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone]

Maybe Musk should take one of his Boeing Cyberplanes to Australia

[risingswell@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

Labor got me two pay rises, basically pays for my daily coffee.

[fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de]

That's just in this term though.

There's a ratchet effect over many decades.

[kalcifer@sh.itjust.works]

I don't think this behavior should be socially tolerated; however, I don't think it's a good idea to police it through the use of governmental force.

[demdaru@lemmy.world]

This isn't WWII, we aren't in war. By letting go of free speech you are letting goverment tell you what is ok to talk about, and by doing that you allow them to expand taboo. In times of need like today, that is necessary evil, however normally that is something out of horror.

For example, whether you agree or not, at the end of WW II communism was seen as almost as bad as nazizm, and in USA I think, may be wrong, that it was seen as worse. What's bad is that every social policy is coupled with it mentally. If free speech wasn't a thing, USA could tell it's citizens that talking about nazizm, communism, social policies or unions is strictly forbidden under threat of, at least, financial fine.

[kalcifer@sh.itjust.works]

I think a distinction can be drawn between this and what Australia is reported to have done. Imo, this is an example of social intolerance, and I'd argue that there is a sharp distinction between that and policing behavior through the use of governmental force. So, I don't see this excerpt as being a supportive argument for Australia's new law; I see it as being an example of how the issue can be handled socially.

[siredcalot@lemmy.today]

My thoughts exactly. I have absolutely no sympathy for Nazis, or anyone else who thinks mass murder and genocide were good policy.
But one of the things that makes a free society different from Nazi Germany, is free expression. If we limit free expression to only things the people in charge want expressed, no matter how noble the intent that starts us down a very dark path very quickly.

The way we fight Nazis and racism is not by beating them up or jailing them. It's by teaching each other and our children why they are wrong, by learning and understanding what it is like to have racism directed against you. And thus, we defeat racism not with force but with empathy.

As far as I'm concerned, this is the sort of policy that would make Hitler proud. It's the sort of policy that would be enacted in Nazi Germany, or Soviet Russia.