Denying the holocaust

Post Reply New Topic

Should denying the holocaust be legal?

Disclaimer: I do not deny the holocaust and am not interested in discussing whether or not the holocaust took place. I am interested in discussing whether it should be legal to deny the holocaust.

If someone believes the holocaust didn't happen (I dunno why anyone would think that, but hey), making that view illegal is TOTALLY unconstitutional. It's not like they're advocating mass murder, is it?

Since all sorts of idiotic fantasies are spoken every day without any necessary punishment Holocaust deniers should be free to do their bit. Turkey is rather sensitive about their massacre of Armenians but the history remains clear. It doesn't hurt anybody if insane people proclaim insane things.

As voltaire said (paraphrasing obviously) 'I may object to the thoughts that you hold but I will defend to the death your right to express them'

something like that anyway. which one was 'the' holocaust anyhow? I thought there had been numerous mass genocides in human history..
The one in Rwanda? or the NKVD orchestrated Holomodor? or is that something different again? Perhaps about the 40 million people who died during the prosecution of the second world war? Pol Pot? Or potentially about Mao wiping out entire Chinese ethnic groups the 10 of millions?

Surely it's objectionable to imply one genocide should subconsciously take an imperative position in the psyche - that's like brainwashing! haha NO thanks!! brain washing is for drones haha not for me!!

Jared Diamond explores the human tendency to commit genocide at length in his Pullitzer prize winning non fiction book 'The third Chimpanzee'

Highly recommended!

Last edited by Concenik on 29 Mar 2009, 12:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bear in mind you're not only addressing an audience to whom the American constitution is relevant.

EDIT: I assume that's what you're referring to; even though you're British, your people don't have a constitution.

Short of incitement to riot or panic and suborning a felony there should be no restraint on free expression. People have the right to tell whatever lies they wish (as long as they are not commiting fraud). They are free to lie, to hoax and to defame (as long as what they say is true, otherwise it is libel or slander).

No political view should be prescribed, ever.

ruveyn

I think there are two possible ways to go:

1) penalise denying the Holocaust, but also making all other stupid and obviously false statements, like "evolution is just a theory" or "the Earth is only 6000 years old". or "Anna is wrong" :p

2) total freedom of speech

I'm all for number 2, actually.

edited to add: this is an intellectual, rational decision I made, but when I hear BS like that of Benny the Pope about "condoms making the problem of HIV worse" I feel like putting him in the worst jail somewhere in Kongo with no chance to ever get out but alas, I don't let my emotions blind my reason :p

(I know what I'd do if I ever met him in a dark alleyway though)

Last edited by anna-banana on 29 Mar 2009, 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It's an interesting topic to me because the countries where it is illegal to do this are largely educated and "developed", there's just a differing notion of liberty to that which I'm familiar with and used to. In several cases, other instances of "genocide" are also illegal to deny.

For the record, it's illegal to deny the holocaust in Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, and Switzerland. In Spain, denying the holocaust was only made legal a couple of years ago, and Slovakia has swayed back and forth on the issue.

OK. Dumb question time... Why were laws introduced making it illegal to deny the Jewish holocaust? The only two things that spring to mind are:

1. Denial would offend survivors of the death camps or the families of those killed... Ok but surely not worthy of a law forbidding it.

2. There is an old idiom along the lines of "Those that forget the lessons of history are condemned to relive it". So in other words if everyone ended up believing the Jewish holocaust never happened then such a thing could happen again and people would be less suspicious... thinking "no, can't be happening - people don't disappear by the million into death camps"; making a repeat of history more likely.

Anyone know?

I know, I just have a habit of citing the American constitution, not sure why really, LOL.

The US constitution should be international, I reckon, nobody else has anything good to refer to! At least you guys have rights to erode, we just have to TRUST that our government won't screw us over...

ruveyn said:

that doesn't make sense surely?

I think that I would probably be tempted to deny the holocaust - whichever one, even if I did or didn't believe in it - if it was illegal to just even say so - I'm in Germany but not German - so it is kind of tempting actually. I think it's wrong when authorities think they have the right to tell people what they can and can't say in the world. It's a dangerous premise which probably leads to things like genocide. Basically people are too easy in accepting being controlled by 'institutions' and 'governments' - I don't think it's the way things should be at all.

It's weird. this thread tells you if you've edited your post ( ) but many others don't - who decides that? the OP?

You can lie all you want, as long as your lies are true. Makes perfect sense to me...

I think I've already made my views on censorship quite clear in the past.

An excellent Voltaire quote. I normally see it translated as "I disapprove of what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it." It actually is a misattribution, though it probably well sums up Voltaire's views on freedom of expression.

I can see how that may have been confusing given the way it was written.




The above, as I see it, is the correct interpretation of ruveyn's remark and there's no inconsistency there.

Ah ha! Many thanks Hector!! 'it all makes sense now' lol

When you snip words out of the middle of a sentence, you often lose some meaning. Not surprising. I believe the parenthetical statement was only relevant to "defame" and not to the whole list of "lie, hoax, and defame."


If you edit your post before anyone else posts after you, it does not get marked as edited. If you edit after there have been new replies, it starts counting your edits.