Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 284 posts

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#81

Post by nailer »

everdev wrote: post #21
aceofspad4s wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racism does not have to be about "the inferiority of another race". Racism can be "I don't think it's good for the economy that so many people from outside are coming" or "this culture is completely incompatible with ours and I don't want these people here". It's a pretty lax word. By outlawing "racism" you're outlawing discourse.

Anti-Immigration != Racism Saying you don't want immigration isn't racist if it applies to more than just immigration from certain racial groups. However, her tweet was not about that. She called out Muslims as having certain behaviors which is clearly racist.

> She called out Muslims as having certain behaviors which is clearly racist.

No. Islam is not a race.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#82

Post by abiox »

shaki-dora wrote: post #62
abiox wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if the law states that companies are deputized to act as police and enforce the law of the land, then i guess they have to comply. do the companies engaging in policing actions receive the same protections and considerations as actual police and government officials when it comes to legal issues involved with the act of law enforcement? i feel it's better that the state should be expected to take responsibility for a…

Companies aren't "deputised". They are just required to follow laws. It's nothing new, nor limited to Germany, nor nefarious: US companies are routinely required to cooperate with the government. When they submit tax information, have the foodstuffs they sell inspected for contamination, when they ask for your driver's license before selling you alcohol or when they put a "you must be this tall" cardboard cutout at t…

what i mean is: if a law just says 'people can't say mean words', is every private company expected to thereafter analyze all words that exist on it's platform (be it twitter, or sms text, or gmail, etc) make a determination as to whether those words violate the law, and are then expected to take some action, based on it's assessment that a crime or civil offense has been committed?

that's what i mean by deputized. if the law doesn't say the company is required to take an action, the company should be mostly indifferent to the law's interaction with third parties. further, it's a bit silly for a law to say that a company should make assessments of criminality or civil offenses, especially if they aren't provided the same legal privileges that police receive for doing the same thing.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#83

Post by wildmusings »

icebraining wrote: post #76
wildmusings wrote: post #15

Show me a committee you think qualified to determine what is hate speech, and I will show you a group fallen men, like the rest of us, who will ultimately abuse their power for political ends.

Of course, the same is true for any power that any group (or individual) might have. You need something more to distinguish this particular case.

Censorship attacks the very ability to question the actions of those with power.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#84

Post by krona »

MikkoFinell wrote: post #27
everdev wrote: post #8

This is exactly the moral dilemma with free speech vs hate speech. Do you use fascist techniques like criminalizing speech to stop the spread of fascist ideas? Or do you simply hope fascist ideas don't take hold? The former is a scary slippery slope but Germany doesn't have a great track record with the latter.

Fascists aren't what they used to be. They used to be a far-right fringe, but fascism lately is more of a thing on the left.

If you're interested in developing that line of thought, I suggest reading Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning which is well researched and deeply insightful.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#85

Post by Grollicus »

olivermarks wrote: post #70

That term 'hate speech' - what does it actually mean? This seems like another assault on free speech to me and there is a danger in limiting the online Overton Window to a massive bland snooze fest. The current joy of the internet is being able to read all sorts of perspectives from 'sensible' to radical and I really hope that continues...I worry for all the citizen journalists and investigators who have been so magn…

'hate speech' is an oversimplification chosen by the media. The law acually forces large social media companies in germany to remove illegal* content from their site within one week.

Context is that Facebook has been ignoring illegal* content on their site and generally made an ass out of german law enforcement, so they got a law to rein them in.

*illegal: libel, Volksverhetzung (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volksverhetzung), supporting illegal organizations (eg. advertising IS beheading videos), calls on people to commit crimes, child porn, porn without consent

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#86

Post by icebraining »

Houshalter wrote: post #64
everdev wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It happened 70 years ago. Obama has a good line, something similar to: If you were in a restaurant in 1930s Vienna surrounded by great art, music and intellectuals you may have been forgiven for thinking that wonderful setting would continue on forever. Unfortunately, a short time later millions we're dying on a continent engulfed in war. When the stock market is up we think it'll keep going up. When we have peace we…

These people aren't "nazis" or "fascists". They have beliefs that would have been considered completely normal and moderate in 1940's US. The people that defeated the Nazis would be considered Nazis today. It's obscene how far left the overton window has moved. Opposing immigration is a pretty long way from Nazism.

Accusing the police of trying “to appease the barbaric, Muslim, rapist hordes of men” by putting out a tweet in Arabic is not just "opposing immigration".

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#88

Post by Houshalter »

icebraining wrote: post #86
Houshalter wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These people aren't "nazis" or "fascists". They have beliefs that would have been considered completely normal and moderate in 1940's US. The people that defeated the Nazis would be considered Nazis today. It's obscene how far left the overton window has moved. Opposing immigration is a pretty long way from Nazism.

Accusing the police of trying “to appease the barbaric, Muslim, rapist hordes of men” by putting out a tweet in Arabic is not just "opposing immigration".

Yes, I'm sure if someone called Catholics pedophiles and backwards barbarians, they would be treated similarly. Or Muslims themselves making similar comments about homosexuals or Western women. Somehow these laws only ever seem to be used against conservatives.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#89

Post by kofejnik »

everdev wrote: post #21
aceofspad4s wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racism does not have to be about "the inferiority of another race". Racism can be "I don't think it's good for the economy that so many people from outside are coming" or "this culture is completely incompatible with ours and I don't want these people here". It's a pretty lax word. By outlawing "racism" you're outlawing discourse.

Anti-Immigration != Racism Saying you don't want immigration isn't racist if it applies to more than just immigration from certain racial groups. However, her tweet was not about that. She called out Muslims as having certain behaviors which is clearly racist.

the left are constantly calling out Christians for certain behaviors, is this racist?

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#90

Post by Amezarak »

everdev wrote: post #47
dilap wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no dilema. It's just an excuse for control. Letting Nazis speak will not actually convert modern society into Nazis.

It happened 70 years ago. Obama has a good line, something similar to: If you were in a restaurant in 1930s Vienna surrounded by great art, music and intellectuals you may have been forgiven for thinking that wonderful setting would continue on forever. Unfortunately, a short time later millions we're dying on a continent engulfed in war. When the stock market is up we think it'll keep going up. When we have peace we…

> It happened 70 years ago.

Nazism and other German nationalist movements were repressed early on by (generally communist) mob violence and later on by the state. That led directly to the rise of brownshirts (to counter the mob) and the radicalization of the Nazis - when people see that their belief system as being oppressed by the law, some of them conclude that when legitimate paths to power are denied, violence is justified.

The Coming of the Third Reich by Richard J Evans covers the rise of the Nazis in great detail, and it didn't happen because Nazis were going around with hate speech.

This has been one of the many justifications for free speech for a long time. In general, I think the "but Nazis!" argument against free speech should be viewed with immense suspicion - it basically boils down to a pretty serious antidemocratic sentiment; you can't let people talk, because then they might convince the plebs to vote for Nazis.

Post reply on HN