[deleted]
Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
141–150 of 228 posts
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can start a group called the "Destroy The Government Now Neo-Nazis" in the US with no fear that it will ever be banned. Gang injunctions (sufficiently, but not exclusively) prove that this is not true.
Neo-Nazis are good white Christian folks. Domestic terrorism and gang laws don't apply to them. (I wish I was joking.)
“The US is structurally sympathetic to Neo-Nazis” is a different, and more difficult to refute, argument than “the US doesn't ban groups”.
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you aren't allowed to speak freely and they are controlling what people can and can't wear? So they do deny freedom of speech and freedom of expression to people that the government doesn't like (in this case Neo-Nazis). The amount of mental gymnastics people do is astounding.
"So they do deny freedom of speech and freedom of expression to people that the government doesn't like " Of course they do, every state on earth limits freedom of speech. In germany regarding certain topics even more so. But nazis are still allowed to express their ideology. This is a difference to a time, when also this was forbidden. (for example in the NS area)
[flagged]
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s not the American way but I’m quite ok with Germany doing this. Why? Germany has literally criminalised thinking the wrong things and denies people to associate freely based on the things that they happen to think. It doesn't stop those people thinking those things and it doesn't stop people from associating with each other.
Do you really want people to stereotype all Germans as Nazis and Holocaust deniers? Because I'm pretty sure this is what would end up happening if the German government did not go to the trouble of explicitly banning these things, regardless of how few people actually advocated them. It's practically a free boost in optics and national pride that benefits pretty much all Germans at basically zero cost, because it's o…
> Do you really want people to stereotype all Germans as Nazis and Holocaust deniers? Because I'm pretty sure this is what would end up happening if the German government did not go to the trouble of explicitly banning these things, regardless of how few people actually advocated them.
No it wouldn't. This is a ridiculous argument.
> It's basically a free boost in optics and national pride that benefits practically all Germans at basically zero cost, because it's only banning the most obscenely offensive and pointless idiocy.
The cost is individual liberty. Which BTW if you haven't been paying attention has been eroded severely all over the globe in almost every western country over the last two years. So no it is not zero cost.
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's ok because the thoughts they ban are not novel, they had their time and were thoroughly executed on. You'll have hard time convincing anyone that thought "Jews are inferior race and should be exterminated" should have the same right to be considered as any other. When we already thought this thought extensively and even based our actions on it and it led only to unprecedented nhuman suffering.
> It's ok because the thoughts they ban are not novel, they had their time and were thoroughly executed on. "Because it is not new it is okay". Sorry that isn't very convincing. The issue is that if you ban one set of ideas you have set a precedent to ban other ideas that aren't as odious. Using the same justification you can criminalise believing in the Earth is flat or any other fringe idea. > You'll have hard time…
> Sorry that isn't very convincing.
If you the idea is crap and it proved that it's crap by leading to genocide why would we award it any protection?
Do tou think next time around, it will lead to something beneficial to mankind?
> Using the same justification you can criminalise believing in the Earth is flat or any other fringe idea.
It did not lead to genocide. The first time it does I hope it's banned to hell.
> I am saying they should be considered equally.
And what's your argument to support this request regarding the specific idea I cited?
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
"So they do deny freedom of speech and freedom of expression to people that the government doesn't like " Of course they do, every state on earth limits freedom of speech. In germany regarding certain topics even more so. But nazis are still allowed to express their ideology. This is a difference to a time, when also this was forbidden. (for example in the NS area)
[flagged]
"It is very simple really. "
Is it?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30289162
You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you? Or about the things I think other people should do to you?
(are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.)
But I actually do think, the limits should be as small as possible and for all I care, the nazis should be free to have their swastikas Tattoo to their front head.
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you really want people to stereotype all Germans as Nazis and Holocaust deniers? Because I'm pretty sure this is what would end up happening if the German government did not go to the trouble of explicitly banning these things, regardless of how few people actually advocated them. It's practically a free boost in optics and national pride that benefits pretty much all Germans at basically zero cost, because it's o…
> Do you really want people to stereotype all Germans as Nazis and Holocaust deniers? Because I'm pretty sure this is what would end up happening if the German government did not go to the trouble of explicitly banning these things, regardless of how few people actually advocated them. No it wouldn't. This is a ridiculous argument. > It's basically a free boost in optics and national pride that benefits practically a…
> The cost is individual liberty.
What about the average German's liberty of not having his country publicly badmouthed due to the actions of a few crazy nutcases? It's hard to seriously argue that this wouldn't happen, given Germany's post-WWII history. (Also I'm not sure why you're bringing up the 'last two years', the prohibition has been in place for far longer than that.)
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do rooms work like a blog/feeds/readers? I thought they were more like Signal's groups.
I think threaded discussions are planned, but so far it is only for linear discussions.
That's very different from the relevant Telegram groups. Those function more like a blog on the web — non-subscribers can search for them, only the group's owner(s) can post, and everyone else can just read. And they work for very large audiences, 100k readers is no problem.
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#149This is clearly a bait and switch. If illegal actions are being perpetrated (e.g., death threats) then prosecute them. What this is all about is incremental conditioning towards normalizing censorship for "local law" violations … the same kinds of wanton "laws" conjured up by all the dictatorial regimes that all the western societies are quickly drifting towards. The German government has even tried attacking Gab, an…
>This is clearly a bait and switch. If illegal actions are being perpetrated (e.g., death threats) then prosecute them. They are. The operators of the channel have an open arrest warrant for inciting hatred, denying the holocaust and death threats against public and private persons. > wholly based in the USA because it does not like things on the website that are no only legal in the USA, protected by the fundamental…
> That changes when the "wholly USA" website is being used by German citizens, who are under jurisdiction.
Then Germans will have to prosecute those going to the website and using it or remove it from German DNS servers. Germany has no right to try and limit the rights of US citizens by extension of limiting those of Germans.
> I's not about "disparaging things about the ", it's about running a website or service and not reacting to the fact that actual nazis are using the service. (You know with the eugenics and everything!)
As much as I hate the Nazis, Nazi sentiment is not illegal in the USA as long as they stay within the law. The German government has no right to push their ideology and laws here. Again block Germans from the site or sue to have Parler block German user IP addresses (good luck with that, it won't last 5 minutes before the judge laughs and says "next case")
Re: Telegram now censoring channels in Germany for “violating local laws”
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"It is very simple really. " Is it? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30289162 You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you? Or about the things I think other people should do to you? (are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.) But I actually do think, the limits sho…
> You don't think, there are limits to the things I should be allowed to say about you?
No.
The only concession I would consider is a call to violence if there is an real and immediate threat. Not internet death threats.
The second I may concede would be defamation under a very strict standard e.g. You were claiming someone broke a law.
> Or about the things I think other people should do to you?
People can say anything they like to me or about me. What they cannot do is vandalise my property, take my property or assault me.
> (are you aware, that there is a difference btw. between literally killing people and people dying of starvation because of incompetence? Apparently not.)
If you are talking about the Communists. The communists killed and imprisoned a huge number of people. Also some of the famines were entirely predictable and in some cases were deliberate.