Should it be illegal to deny genocides like The Shoah and The Nakba? I believe it should be, but in extreme circumstances like when these war crimes are being justified and/or called to be repeated.
Yes, when the denial itself amounts to a complete slander of many millions of people, most of them dead and unable to defend themselves. Anyone denying the Shoah is victimizing the MEMORIES of millions dead and is largely as guilty as the original Nazis. It isn't valid to say that the truth will out as most people can't (or won't) recognize the subtler propaganda techniques. People are fooled by cons every day. Shoah denial isn't an assertion as much as a con. Free Speech does not protect fraud. I'm sort of on the fence about creationists and AGW deniers. Science advances by controversy, but these people are using that very fact to advance their agenda, which is a con IMO. However, you don't want to frighten people with legitimate objections. That is a very tough call.
if you say "the Holocaist is a hoax", I think you should be laughed at, not jailed. but if you say "the Nakba was a good thing and we should do it again but next time with gas chambers", you should face a criminal penalty for incitement to racial violence and hate speech.
At some point, "stupidity" is going to have to be criminalized. And "aiding, abetting, and promoting stupidity" is going to have to be a capital offense. Holocaust deniers are just TOO stupid.
I agree with the Nakba statement, but I think its' even more with the Shoah. People don't laugh at some Shoah deniers, some even believe them. Some, and this probably the worst, just use them to make their message more palatable. "You're not a sick sadist if you truly hate Jews, (or Muslims/Blacks) just for being Jews. The Nazis didn't show the logical end of where that kind of thought goes. That never really happened. All a Jewish conspiracy. Aren't the Jews truly horrible people for making all that up? Let's show them what a REAL genocide looks like." And a question about the Nakba. I support the idea of a right of return. These poor people who left because they were afraid were just refugees, much like the Jews were. Why can't they come home?, BUT, how about those who left willingly to fight with the Arabs? I dunno there
No. Just because someone said something did not happen does not make it so. What would be the piont in arguing with a people like that anyway. You will get nowhere at least you will know what kind of a person he. Or she is when they say such silly things. I believe everyone has a right to make a fool of themselves. The question for me why is everyone so hung up on words instead of actions?
Never..... What's to stop a nation from defining their own narrative or a status quo then punishing anyone who goes against the grain?
From the title, I thought this thread was about denying people the right to commit genocide. Glad I read the OP before making any comments.
It should be condemned but it should not be illegal. Advocating genocide should only be illegal if there is also a threat of imminent harm as a result. Which is usualy not the case. We dont need freedom of speech protections for stuff most people agree with. It is precisely this kind of objectionable speech that truly shows how much we value freedom.
when it comes to Nakba and Shoah denial, many engage in slander against the victims of these war crimes, accusing them of being liars. that should be illegal.
Or when Armenians are involved ... that genocide is really a matter of a never-ending debate. In Turkey they don't want to hear the word "genocide", so that if it was a genocide we should declare an entire country, Turkey, criminal [!!]. So, we should pay attention how to manage similar questions, they can become really sensitive.
In any case, being Italian I have voted "Yes, in some circumstances" in fact, just this year our parliament is going to approve a draft of law [Senate has already approved it] about declaring genocide denial a crime. This will give a legal base to prosecute a certain kind of revisionism in Italy, but about some "genocides", as I have said, there is first of all the problem of their definition, which sometime is not shared at international level.
Slander is just a civil offense, and even that must be hard to prove, such as there must be a damage to reputation. Most casual holocaust denialism wont qualify.
It is illegal in Germany, I think, and to a large degree here in Austria. It conflicts with the "freedom of speech" aspect so it is argued in courts sometimes. Very very few people are ignorant enough to deny the holocaust and most of whom have just big problems coping with the reality of things. Let me explain what I mean by this: If for arguments sake your father or mother was a high ranking Nazi official, and well known as one of the worst participants in WW2, some have problems accepting that, because they only remember the loving parent in their youth. Often that is also the case for those Nazis who managed to flee to Argentina and the second or third generation alive today. Naturally they do not doubt what their parents and their parents friends told them about the war. Erich Priebke comes to mind. He got arrested in the mid 90s for his crimes in the 40s. His son remains in Bariloche, Argentina and doesn't believe the claim that 6 million Jews were killed in Nazi concentration camps... This happens more often abroad in places like Bariloche though, because there is less outside information which can dispute the parent's stories. In Germany or Austria it is quite hard to find anybody that ignorant. Usually there is story of not willing to believe that their parents or near and dear family or friend did something... It is very hard to avoid the holocaust stories because they regularly find their way into newspapers and TV. You would have to be pretty isolated to never have been confronted with the holocaust here...
No free speech trumps whether a person wants to deny genocide or not. Truth will win out as long as facts are available.
After the war, the allies wrote the history because they won the war. This is true in most, if not all, cases. Most victors make themselves heroes and the losing side horrible.
Freedom of speech is a precious commodity! This precious gift must be saved against sedition and evil propaganda ... 2 bad elements who like to take the free speech claim for themselves, but do not grant in any sort to others. This is the reason why it is forbidden to deny genocide against Jews in Germany and this correct!
Now that the law has passed, also in Italy it's a crime to deny a genocide [the Holocaust and eventually others]. I don't hide that generally I would prefer the debate to the prohibition by law. Anyway a certain revisionism takes advantage from the nature of the new medias, overall internet. Think to an internet forum ... what they post remains, if moderators don't think it's a not acceptable content. So ... at the end, in some contexts, the legal prohibition works.
