should Holocaust denial be illegal in britain

[dudalb]

I note the addition of the word "legitimate" in there, a weasel word, I'm sure. The point is that one researches history, bias and all, and that's historical research. No one said that holocaust denialism is in any way as defensible a conclusion as the more mainstream one.

Holocaust denial is crackpot history, A rough equivilent in science would be the Hollow Earth theory.
But that being said,The Deniers should have a right to express their beliefs..just as we have the rights to ridicule them for buying into such crap.
And I don't want allow the Deniers to protray themselves as Martyrs for Free Speech...which will automatically give them credence with some people.

 

[Francesca R]

II think the urge to criminalise holocaust denial springs from the suspicion that far from it being a sincere belief, it is not something deniers actually believe and they simply want to harm ( . . . Via speech).

That is probably correct a lot of the time. Doesn't make a good enough case for outlawing it.

 

[baron]

The litmus test for things like this should be evidence. You want to claim on a street corner that flooding is caused by gay marridge. OK fine,now prove it. If you can you can rant about homosexuality causing national strife all day long. If you can't then you are launching a vile,unprovoked, bigoted attack on your fellow man(or women,transgender) or no reason other than satisfying your own vile hatred.
However if you want to stand on a street corner and rant about something that can be proved,say the Catholic church covering up child abuse then you can-no matter who it offends because its TRUE.

My comment was tangential. The litmus test shouldn't be evidence at all, there should simply be equality in freedom of expression with no special dispensation given to religious matters. There is no evidence that consciousness exists or that randomness is a product of multiverse branching but I don't believe we should prosecute people for asserting these things to be true.

The proposition that the Holocaust occurred is supported by no more evidence than the proposition that evolution occurred (occurs). Both are incredibly well documented premises. Should we therefore prosecute those who believe in Creationism (a position arguably more damaging than Holocaust denial)? We can dismiss both positions very easily due to the strength of evidence against them, labelling the advocates of the former anti-Semites and the latter straight up morons, with a vanishingly small risk of being wrong. Why the need for anything more?

 

[Belz...]

II think

Is that like a "we" ?

 

[grunion]

Sure.

LOL @ that position.

There.

I think you will require independent objective assessment of your sense of humor for that to stand up.

 

[CapelDodger]

II think the urge to criminalise holocaust denial springs from the suspicion that far from it being a sincere belief, it is not something deniers actually believe and they simply want to harm ( . . . Via speech).

That is probably correct a lot of the time. Doesn't make a good enough case for outlawing it.

To be honest I don't think there's more than specialist interest in changing the status quo anywhere. It's not as if there's nothing else going on in the world. There's the question of fox-hunting in England, for instance. Stuff like that just eats government time.

 

[CapelDodger]

The Austrian law is interesting. Lets not forget that Austria was the epicentre of Nazism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial#Germany

National Socialism Prohibition Law (1947, amendments of 1992)

§ 3g. He who operates in a manner characterized other than that in § § 3a – 3f will be punished (revitalising of the NSDAP or identification with), with imprisonment from one to up to ten years, and in cases of particularly dangerous suspects or activity, be punished with up to twenty years' imprisonment.

§ 3h. As an amendment to § 3 g., whoever denies, grossly plays down, approves or tries to excuse the National Socialist genocide or other National Socialist crimes against humanity in a print publication, in broadcast or other media.

The core of the offence lies in "revitalising the NSDAP", which was the party Hitler joined and built into the Nazi party. "Denying, grossly playing down ..." is taken as prima facie intended to advance that goal. Can't see me demonstrating against that.

 

[psionl0]

Is that like a "we" ?

More like the "Royal We".

 

[Noztradamus]

Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory

 

[Noztradamus]

I don't think that could have been the same event. Taunton isn't in Scotland, and the preacher there not only had a sign, but a loudspeaker through which he was haranguing people. I can see a reason why one might be arrested for that, but not for a mere sign.

That's because it's not this guy.

Not that skeptichaggis cares but here is the guy he is alluding to.
https://www.opposingviews.com/i/rel...miano-arrested-hate-speech-against-gays-video

ETA. this was an earlier arrest in London, I think the later was in Perth

What to do, reason hasn't worked, just arresting him hasn't, time to break out the rubber hoses.

Remember homosexulist feelings matter. unlike those of fornicators or adulterers.

 

[catsmate]

People are rational actors. Others use the label irrational because they cannot tolerate results they disagree with.

Individual people may be rational actors, in groups they are far less so.

 

[Craig B]

homosexulist feelings matter. unlike those of fornicators or adulterers.

How can you equate a sexual orientation with these sexual misdemeanours? It is not possible that a "homosexualist" might or might not be a fornicator or adulterer? Now that "homosexualist" marriage is recognised, that makes both adultery and marital fidelity possible among "homosexualists", doesn't it?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Individual people may be rational actors, in groups they are far less so.

I don't think they are less rational in groups. Saying Bob woud do xin absence of the group an y in the group does not say anything about rationality. I would say it is likely that in the climate of group pressure, Bob makes a rational choice to engage in different activity.

 

[Meed]

If you think for a single second that Holocaust denial is in any way at all legitimate historical reaserch I really don't have anything to say to you.

I didn't use the word "legitimate". I didn't even claim it was historical research. I simply asked the question "How is it not historical research?".

I will however point out the evidence for a minimum of 6,500,000 Jews(not including gypsies etc)were killed by the Nazi era SS(both Waffen and other departments) the Luftwaffe (carried out killings in Ukraine etc)and the Wehrmacht by means of gassing,shooting and starvation is IRREFUTABLE. It is,using the historical evidence honestly IMPOSSIBLE to come to any other conclusion.

Impossible for Vulcans maybe. You neglected to address my argument in which I brought up just a few examples of all the other nonsensical things people believe. Are you of the opinion that it's possible for people to come to the conclusions that the Bible is the word of God, that the moon landing was a hoax, that HIV and AIDS are unrelated, that no plane hit the pentagon, that one's personality is determined by one's "star sign" and that the world is run by alien lizard-monsters disguising themselves as humans, but it's impossible for people to believe that the holocaust didn't happen?

Your argument also makes me wonder why anyone would bother denying the holocaust if it's truly impossible to believe, as you suggest. This would mean that the efforts of holocaust deniers to convince people that they're right is completely and utterly pointless.

 

[skeptichaggis]

OK,there seems to be a assumption that deniers,while disgusting,are normal human beings. They are not. These people see anything that is not physical force(ie imprisonment)as society's weakness, period. They view the fact they can legally pour out racial abuse as empowering. Pretty much every anti Semitic murder carried out in the west is committed by someone who got away with spouting holocaust denial for years.all attackers begin with racial abuse and work up to physical attacks.

OK before I begin let me just say i appreciate that many here have wildly different opinions here than me and I full respect that.
Anyay, NO society,nation or culture on earth has complete free speech. That's due to something called REALITY. You can't stand outside a nursery and say to passers by you want to kidnap a child but your a law abiding guy so you wont,you can't stand outside a airport and say"wouldn't it be great if one had a bomb on it"to people entering the airport. If you did I assure you your right to free speech would avail you little in court. Some years back there were riots in england but none in Scotland. Nevertheless several Scottish citizens were handed long prison sentences for threatening, and in one case saying they "might"join in at any Scottish flashpoint. There was no proof these people were serious but they got imprisoned.

The two hypothetical and one real example above have a few things in common. People were punished for words. Words that in the real case JURYS of ordinary folk decided were so filled with the horror of eminent violence that force had to be used against the speakers/writers.
Holocaust deniers are so filed with hate they fit this category. When they yell "holohoax"as they speed past a Jewish man they are emboldened, they are exultant. You can't speak with these brutes,can't seek to mollify them. They regard people that try that with contempt. When racially abusive people get away with racist verbal attacks they are emboldened to go further.

By the way a certain small social/political band of drinking cronies at the start of the weimer republic also stated with words. They said petty much the same stuff as modern anti Semites,giving them the right to free speech worked out SO well didn't it.
Holocaust deniers are EXTREMELY dangerous.
I'm not talking about removing one iota of free speech from rational human beings. But holocaust deniers are not rational human beings they are sick,twisted scum that society needs to be protected from.

 

[The Atheist]

OK,there seems to be a assumption that deniers,while disgusting,are normal human beings. They are not. These people see anything that is not physical force(ie imprisonment)as society's weakness, period.

I'm going to make a rare assumption here.

I assume you have no evidence to back that claim up.

They view the fact they can legally pour out racial abuse as empowering. Pretty much every anti Semitic murder carried out in the west is committed by someone who got away with spouting holocaust denial for years.all attackers begin with racial abuse and work up to physical attacks.

Same assumption on that bird's next of logical fallacy.

OK before I begin let me just say i appreciate that many here have wildly different opinions here than me and I full respect that.

Yeah, but at least you don't let others' opinions change yours at all. Quite admirable.

Nevertheless several Scottish citizens were handed long prison sentences for threatening, and in one case saying they "might"join in at any Scottish flashpoint. There was no proof these people were serious but they got imprisoned.

And I'm going to assume you don't have any evidence of people being imprisoned for saying they might join a riot, either.

Holocaust deniers are so filed with hate they fit this category. When they yell "holohoax"as they speed past a Jewish man they are emboldened, they are exultant. You can't speak with these brutes,can't seek to mollify them. They regard people that try that with contempt.

And that is no doubt how all Holocaust deniers behave.

Nice touch here, though:

When racially abusive people get away with racist verbal attacks they are emboldened to go further.

When abusive people get away with verbal attacks they are emboldened to go further.

 

[angrysoba]

Skeptihaggis, that is one crazed and evidence-free rant.

 

[CapelDodger]

Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory

If the people reject their own happiness they are guilty of mutiny and must be punished.

The world would turn much more smoothly with people like us in charge. Well, one of us ...

 

[Craig B]

Holocaust deniers are so filed with hate they fit this category. When they yell "holohoax"as they speed past a Jewish man they are emboldened, they are exultant. You can't speak with these brutes,can't seek to mollify them. They regard people that try that with contempt. When racially abusive people get away with racist verbal attacks they are emboldened to go further.

If they engage in abuse, of course they should be prosecuted.

I'm not talking about removing one iota of free speech from rational human beings. But holocaust deniers are not rational human beings they are sick,twisted scum that society needs to be protected from.

No. Whether rational or not, they should be punished for acts, not peaceful expression of views.

 

[Rat]

Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory

Or for the opposite.