Why is Holocaust denial illegal?

B

BenTheMan

Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love
Valued Senior Member
I am interested to hear what people think of the Holocaust/genocide denial laws in Europe.

Example. The president of the EU, a German woman (whose name eludes me) has made a push to have symbols like the swastika banned in the EU except in religous ceremonies. It is illegal to deny that the Holocaust occured in Austria, as is claiming that what the Turks did to the Armenians in 1915 was anything less than genocide. The West has had a history of vigorously defending freedom of some expressions (Danish cartoons, Rushdie's "The Satanic Verses"), but are seemingly ok with prohibiting other forms of expression.

So the question is, how can one reconcile freedom of expression with laws which explicitly prohibit expression of opinion?

Note: Don't take this as anything other than a philosophical question please. I don't want this to turn into a debate as to whether the holocaust or Armenian genocide actually did occur.
 
Look it is great to have an opinion, however when something is known to be a fact, and the Halocaust is a fact, you're not allowed one any more. Opinions are for things you can't be sure of, believe me you can be damned certain the Halocaust happened.
 
TW Scott said:
Look it is great to have an opinion, however when something is known to be a fact, and the Halocaust is a fact, you're not allowed one any more. Opinions are for things you can't be sure of, believe me you can be damned certain the Halocaust happened.
Click to expand...

opinions is anything anyone says. thats their opinion. Whether they deny or not deny holocaust...its all their opinion...whether they state holocast did in fact occur or did not...its all their opinion.
 
BenTheMan said:
So the question is, how can one reconcile freedom of expression with laws which explicitly prohibit expression of opinion?
Click to expand...

When 10 million lives are affected...and the ones still alive remember that day...freedom of expression is overshadowed by pain and hatred.
 
Opinions are for things you can't be sure of, believe me you can be damned certain the Halocaust happened.
Click to expand...

Not everyone would agree with this---some people argue very adamantly against the fact that the Holocaust occured, for example the current leadership in Iran.

The question is, what basis is there for making laws against expressing outlandish opinions, in a culture where expression of opinion is valued? Example: In the past, we have tried to pass laws against burning the flag in the US, with the lawmakers claiming that the flag was a symbol of freedom, which many Americans have died to protect. But these laws were twice stricken down by the Supreme Court.

When 10 million lives are affected...and the ones still alive remember that day...freedom of expression is overshadowed by pain and hatred.
Click to expand...

I am interested in "freedom of expression is overshadowed by pain and hatred". What does this mean, exactly?
 
When 10 million lives are affected...and the ones still alive remember that day...freedom of expression is overshadowed by pain and hatred.
Click to expand...

At what point does it become ok to deny someone their freedom of speech based on pain and hatred?
 
To silence Holocaust deniers is to get rid of Free Speech.

Even Communists should not be out right silenced. If one cannot deal with them on a rational level, one must suffer for one's incompetancies.
 
at some point when pain of memory is unbearable...
Click to expand...

When its accompanied by guilt and a desire for absolution.
Click to expand...

So, then, it is ok to pass laws that prohibit specific expressions? For example, is it ok to prohibit the display of the Confederate flag or use of the word "nigger"?

To silence Holocaust deniers is to get rid of Free Speech.
Click to expand...

Although I do not agree with these people, I do not agree with laws that ban these thoughts.
 
BenTheMan said:
So, then, it is ok to pass laws that prohibit specific expressions? For example, is it ok to prohibit the display of the Confederate flag or use of the word "nigger"?
Click to expand...

playing saviour and victim are attractive roles, guaranteed to produce lasting fame for those promoting it.

its the basis of a whole religion:)
 
BenTheMan said:
Not everyone would agree with this---some people argue very adamantly against the fact that the Holocaust occured, for example the current leadership in Iran.

The question is, what basis is there for making laws against expressing outlandish opinions, in a culture where expression of opinion is valued? Example: In the past, we have tried to pass laws against burning the flag in the US, with the lawmakers claiming that the flag was a symbol of freedom, which many Americans have died to protect. But these laws were twice stricken down by the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

You missed the point. Opinion does not mean shit against facts. There has not been one credible shred if evidence against the Halocaust. More to the point there is a a plethora of proof that it happened. One can argue that it was inevitable, that it was the worstcrime ever commited, that only a madman could concieve of it, or about's it's impact on society. Trying to claim it did not happen is like claiming the sun does not exist. Except that in the latter case you are not aiding and abetting the some of the worst criminals of all time. For that you should be punished.
 
BenTheMan said:
Not everyone would agree with this---some people argue very adamantly against the fact that the Holocaust occured, for example the current leadership in Iran.
Click to expand...

Case in point: such people are insane, or fascists.
 
Who is truly harmed by Holocaust denial?

It neither breaks your bones nor picks your pocket.

This should be enough reason to place it under "acceptable free speech" in contradiction to such exceptions as "no screaming FIRE! in a crowded theatre".
 
Prince_James said:
Some Europeans have no respect for freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

Possibly they have no desire to repeat history.

The kind of people who indulge in Holocaust denial are also the kind of people that led to the Holocaust in the first place.
 
So they're not allowed to write holocaust denial literature either? That's like robbing the next generation. I guess they could always come to America to write it.
 
SamCDKey:

Regardless, they sign away rights thinking that they can only take away "some" of what you do.

You take away part of a right, you take away all of the right. Eventually, all speech that is deemed "unacceptable" will not be allowed, and the Enlightenment will not.
 
Holocaust denial is illegal because they can use the same laws and attitude to silence people who have evidence that points to guilt on the part of other parties besides those named in the official stories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top