- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
You must log in or # to comment.
I’m so used to bad news I read that as decriminalize
Fucking GOOD.
Hopefully we’ll also have laws against denying the holocaust israel is inflicting on palestine TOO.
Whoa. That sort of thinking requires nuance. We don’t do that here.
Maybe 50+ years after every palestinian is murdered.
That’s a conflict of interests.
Good, but add Armenian and Gaza genocide denial to the list too. Or make it genocide denial in general.
According to the bill, denial of the Holocaust or other serious international crimes, such as those defined under the statutes of the International Criminal Court, would be punishable by a fine or a prison sentence of up to two years.
Armenian and Gaza is fully confirmed, but human rights violations of Xinjiang not so much, it’s semantics at that much, like calling the modern Turkish state genocidal for destroying the culture of Kurds in northern Syria, when it was not explicitly to destroy the people itself
Its forced assimulation just like what the US did to the natives of America. If what the US did was genocide (it is), then what PRC is doing to Xinjiang and Tibet is also genocide.
Fair enough, but the term genocide is far too inclusive, I’ve heard people use cultural genocide instead.
I’d swear that there is a message group specifically for .ml users to jump in whenever any criticism is leveled at China.
You can swallow this Sinophobic garbage if you like
why do you think this is a useful thing to say
I return the question?
I thought I might gain a deep forbidden insight and transcend this earthly plane.
Criticism of China? Sinophobia.
Criticism of Israel? Antisemitism.
Where does it end, Yurophobia next?
When did China relentlessly bomb a population and starved them to death?
What is this even in relation to?
No, “cultural genocide” is not genocide. There is a pretty clear legal definition:
… any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; © Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Culture is a part of ethnicity, however.
It’s pretty hilarious how tankies suddenly start quibbling over definitions once China is mentioned.
Where’s that definition from?
Raphael Lemkin, who first coined the term, defined genocide as “the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group” by means such as “the disintegration of [its] political and social institutions, of [its] culture, language, national feelings, religion, and [its] economic existence”.[2]During the struggle to ratify the Genocide Convention, powerful countries restricted Lemkin’s definition to exclude their own actions from being classified as genocide,[3][4] ultimately limiting it to any of five “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”.[5] While there are many scholarly definitions of genocide,[6]almost all international bodies of law officially adjudicate the crime of genocide pursuant to the Genocide Convention.[7]
From that wiki page, and I appreciate the just barely academically masked sass about why it’s such a narrow definition
sure toootally the same
Well one is way more recent
please tell me when the Chinese carpet bombed a population and let them starve to death?
My guy, what does this have to do with my comment
The difference is that the US did actual genocide against the natives of America
I fucking love Finland.
JD Vance will be pissed.
I need people to pay attention to the popularity of denial of the mass killings by Nazis of transgender people. One of the doctors who performed the first vaginoplasty, on Dora Richter, did also go on to participate in brutal abuses in a concentration camp. Like a dung beetle, a group is rolling around this tiny kernel of truth, coalescing in a ball of shit that ends up like this.
There’s something so vile about this. It has to be deliberate.
DuckDuckGo and Google have always had at least one denialist result in every single Google search I have made about the Holocaust. Back in 2010 - in high school, I remember reading half of a book online which seemed to be the memoirs of an American World War 2 soldier, than abruptly realizing that he was starting to say some really strange things. Never anything quite wrong, but off. I did a little googling, a bit more research, and then started running into names like David Irving.
It’s just such a damn difficult problem to fix. They are insidious. Deniers know that the Holocaust happened. They know that trans people were brutalized and massacred by the Nazis, whether you feel like the “purpose” of the mass killings makes it a genocide or not.
They don’t care. They want stupid people to believe it, because then you can get the stupid people to look the other way. To laugh at people pointing out the patterns.
One of the doctors who performed the first vaginoplasty, on Dora Richter, did also go on to participate in brutal abuses in a concentration camp.
TIL, design of the freezing experiments and he later wrote on them. Worked at the Charité at the time of doing the vaginaplasty, from what I can tell seems to have been a star surgeon. Surgery attracts psychopaths, he probably could not give less of a fuck about the ethics of anything but was interested in the technical aspects. Dora Richter’s surgery was a joint effort with Ludwig Levy-Lenz, generally credited as the father of sex reassignment surgery and working at the Hirschfeld Institute itself. Not terribly surprising they collaborated with the Charité on a novel procedure, it was and is one of the very best hospitals in the world. Not indicted in the Doctor’s trials, you probably do not want to read up on what those people did. I’m serious.
All holocausts?
According to the bill, denial of the Holocaust or other serious international crimes, such as those defined under the statutes of the International Criminal Court, would be punishable by a fine or a prison sentence of up to two years.
Interested to see how this plays out.
Prohibiting Holocaust denial is relatively easy, because we have the benefit of it being history, and we have an ample historical record and a clear consensus among historians. Plus, no one can credibly claim that the legislatures were not thinking of the Holocaust when they wrote the law.
However, how are they planning on applying the law to contemporary international crimes? People make accusations of them all the time. And the other side always denied them. And the actual facts are generally obscured by a massive fog of war that can take years to see through, if ever.
There is also plenty of history where the answer is less clear. Do we really want courts involved in determining if the 15th century conquest of the Canary Islands counts as a genocide. Or if some unnamed mass grave an archeologists unearths was caused by an invading army killing all of a city’s adult males, or simply a burial site for fallen soldiers?
What about the book of Esther. Taken literally, it ends with what is arguably a genocide committed by the Jews against the Persians. However, outside of some Israeli hardliners reinterpreting that ending for contemporary political purposes, it is widely understood that that ending is a literary device, not a literal telling of events. Did my Hebrew school teachers violate this law when they told me we didn’t actually kill 75,000 Persians? [0].
What about the ongoing genocide against white Afrikaners going on in South Africa today? Am I violating the law when I say that genocide is not real, and just something the rightwing in the US invented for domestic political purposes. If the US has such a law, could Trump use it to jail his political opponents who criticized his recent stunt of accepting 60 Afrikaner refugees?
Do we defer to an international body like the ICC or ICJ? In that case, you have just outlawed disagreeing with those bodies.
The UN has repeatedly found it to be a massive human rights violation. Does disagreeing with those findings violate this new law?
[0] As an aside, secular historians generally consider all of Esther to be fiction.
Well the way German law works out that it comes down to established historical fact. As in, the professional consensus of historians, heard as expert witnesses. The wording of the law is (paraphrased) “Acts committed by the NS regime that fulfil the UN definition of genocide”, the historians decide what happened, who did it, judges decide whether it fits the definition. Invoking precedence, in German law, is like invoking someone’s doctoral thesis on a matter of law: It’s a piece of reasoning judges will have to take into account because it’s an argument before court but it’s by no means binding. As such having an ICJ judgement will be helpful, but it does need to be up to standards.
Good, now criminalise Genocide denial.
They did. This is unequivocally a good thing
It should be illegal everywhere. Germany knows how to deal with Nazis (well, unless they’re part of a party)
Germany considers criticising Israel antisemitism.
all criticism?
Meaningful criticism.
lol, on all topics?
Others were the ones who dealt with Nazis not Germany.
Let’s not whitewash the forced compliance of Germany with what was imposed on them by the nations which had to fight them to stop them as some kind of achievement of Germany.
Germany kept most of the Nazis around - not the “upper management” but certainly the “middle management” and below - doing the jobs in the State appartus that they did before.
Probably explains both the rise of the AfD and how still now after Israel has been for over a year fully and unashamedly acting in a way painfully similar to Nazism - just with different ubermenschen and untermenschen (or as Israeli politicians say it, “chosen people” and “human animals”) - almost the entirety of the German political class continues to unwaveringly support them, overtly because of the dominant ethnicity of that nation, a purely Racist rationale.
Change from the inside changes mindsets, change imposed from the outside mainly changes the visible expressions of the mindsets rather than the mindsets themselves.
Probably explains both the rise of the AfD and how still now after Israel has been for over a year fully and unashamedly acting in a way painfully similar to Nazism
The far- right has been on the rise all over Europe, not just Germany.
Over a year? Are you fucking kidding me? They’ve been acting that way for decades.
I don’t think that what Israel did before was at the level of being “painfully similar to Nazism”.
Before the last year and a half they were acting as an Apartheid state, but they weren’t actually working hard at making a XXI century version of the Holocaust happen as they are right now.
Before it was bad, but now it has reached the level of Evil.
They’ve been systematically eradicating palestinians for a long time. It just wasn’t legally recognized as a genocide by many. Fun things they’ve been doing before that is stuff like forceful relocations, murder, and denying water and medicine to civilians
Common nordic W
Based! Fuck Nazis
you will apply this law with the same rigour to every genocide right? right?
W Finland
Always trust Finland!
Censorship just hides it. Better would be to educate them. Make them meet with survivors, send them to the remaining concentration camps.
I don’t know if this is really censorship in that way. Like yeah don’t hide the genocide, hide the denial, because it doesn’t deserve a platform. Holocaust denial has no basis in reality, especially considering it’s one of the most well documented genocides of all time.
Don’t censor history, teach the children about all the bad shit humans have done.
Holocaust denialism is censorship. It’s an attempt to hide reality itself by controlling the narrative. If anything, outlawing holocaust denialism is anti-censorship, as it’s helping ensure that Nazis won’t be able to suppress the truth about what happened.
Someone claiming that outlawing holocaust denialism is censorship is trying to flip the script and overwrite reality (or just repeating someone else who is doing so, I guess). It’s like saying “Hey! Stop censoring my attempt to censor others! This is censorship!” It’s a mind game, an attempt at manipulation through deception. Look up the term DARVO: Deny, Accuse, Reverse Victim and Offender. That’s what saying “Outlawing holocaust denialism is censorship!” is: Reversing the Victim and Offender.
Lies and misinformation and other attempts to deceive and suppress the truth are not a form of free speech. Quite the opposite, they’re what results when free speech remains unprotected.
Exactly
There aren’t that many survivors left, but you wouldn’t know judging by the noise some jewish.groups make while clamoring for reparation.
This is effective censorship – of a bad thing, but still censorship.
Education is the way, don’t let people forget history, remind them of all the horrors the nazi regime inflicted on gays, gypsies, political dissidents, criples, … Remind them genocides are still occurring: in Palestine and elsewhere.
