Political Correctness Fails Again

[Jim O]

Anti-nazi use of swastika outlawed


A banner with a crossed out swastika flaps in the wind in front of Berlin's new synagogue

Juergen Kamm, the owner of a small German mail-order business, makes a modest living fighting neo-nazis. His firm sells sloganeering T-shirts, music albums and books as part of a campaign to rid the country of extremists. “Smash Fascism!” one hotselling badge urges.

no_nazis.jpg

Last week, however, a court in the city of Stuttgart ruled that, under German law, Mr Kamm might as well be a nazi himself. His crime? Selling items bearing swastikas, the nazi symbol that has been forbidden in Germany since the end of World War II.

Never mind that Mr Kamm’s company, Nix Gut, loosely translated as No Good, displayed the swastika only inside a crossed-out circle or as part of other designs intended to impugn nazis and their ilk. A panel of judges agreed with State prosecutors in Stuttgart that any reproduction of the symbol, no matter the context, risked making it socially acceptable again in Germany.

“The danger of familiarisation is ever present,” presiding judge Wolfgang Kuellmer ruled. “In particular, this mass-market business risked undermining its taboo status.”

The decision has been greeted with a chorus of boos. Critics attacked the authorities in Stuttgart for picking on Mr Kamm at a time when neo-nazis had staged a resurgence in Germany.

Last month, a political party affiliated with neonazi groups won 7.3 per cent of the vote in the northern State of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, making it the third State in Germany where such parties have seats in the legislature. In May, the Federal Government reported that violent attacks committed by neo-nazis, skinheads and other rightwing extremists increased by 24 per cent last year.

In Berlin, leading politicians have promised a new law if the Nix Gut decision is upheld on appeal. Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries said if the ruling was not overturned “then something is wrong with the law”.

Since the end of the Third Reich, it has been illegal in Germany to display the swastika, give Hitler salutes or embrace other symbols of the nazi era. The maximum penalty in most cases is three years jail.

There are many exceptions, with special licences being granted to artists, educators and film-makers. Past court opinions carved out exemptions for public display of the swastika as long as the intent was to protest against what it stood for.

Mr Kamm, 32, has been fined the equivalent of about $6000. Worse for him, the judges ordered the seizure of 16,000 pieces of swastika-bearing merchandise as well as thousands of mail-order catalogues.

“Not only can our customers clearly and without a doubt tell that our material is anti-nazi, but any other person — any normal citizen — could immediately tell as well,” Mr Kamm said.

His 15-employee firm continues to sell its products, swastikas included, while the case is on appeal.

Source: The West Australian Online

[Helmut Von Moltke]

LOL!

Seriously though, it's getting old. The taxpayers of the EU are having all their money going down the drain combating several skinhead nutjobs who aren't much of a threat anyway. The Eu continually make a big issue out of the little sect of the e xtreme right, to make it seem like they are on the edge of the 4th Reich, to gain popularity amongst people still beleving the victor's history, and to get money. Instead of wasting time and effort on skinheads, why don't the EU do something useful with their teaxes like restoring old Western values, or stop the Bush regime or the world melting pot of globalization?

Talking of skinheads, it is funny that they are called 'neo nazis', as there is no current National Socialist party in Germany. The name is used to evoke old political fears. Really, how dangerous are they? Are they as dangerous as the Brownshirts marching into Munich in 1923 in the Beerhall Putsch? All they do is spray graffiti, or push dogsh*t into the mail flaps of terrified foreigners. They would never have the guts to walk into a Jewish or Black area, knowing that they would receive the rough end. The same with the extreme left wing, trying to evoke memories of the old days of the RAF by repeating old political correctness, attacking German veterans of WWII, as seen with the case of Grass, and try to undermine already deteriorating Western values.

Needless to say, with pacifist Globalist governments who waste resources and money on a non-existent threat from a few skinhead idiots and an intact extreme left, Europa is going down the drain big time.

God bless Europa!

K

[barrett.t]

I agree with you Jim its political correctness gone mad. The guy is not a Nazi He should be left alone to express his opinion. In America this would not happen as it would come under the freedom of speech act. In Europe they curtail the freedom of speech. In Britain you cannot criticise the Muslim religious faith or you might be charged with inciting religious hatred. We have been criticising and mocking extreme Christians for centuries to an extent . They riot once over a play and the law changes. But they can spread their racial hatred, homophobia and sexism plus religious discrimination. The world has gone mad. Further, the Nazis would just die off if we all ignored them. I think that they should have their say as long as they do not advocate murder. Or push things through letter boxes that must be quite frightening for the person who owns the letter box. They are possibly negative attention seekers who hate themselves. The far left is just as bad they go on marches in Britain when the National front are marching as well. The Anti Nazi league then try to smash their faces in, the National Front that is. To teach them that their hatred is wrong? If we all just ignored them they would have nothing to react to.

[barrett.t]

I have never heard of that before old soldiers being attacked for fighting for their countries. These people are very sad I sometimes think that its not the issue at hand, these people would find any reason to hurt people. I find that utterly disgusting that men who were brave enough to fight for their country are attacked by cowards, who probably would not have the guts to do the same. The only guts that they have is too attack old men who by know are easy prey for their hate.

[Klaus]

"The danger of familiarisation" I love that quote. You would have to live in a cave if the swastika isn't familiar.

[Jim O]

Originally Posted by Klaus

"The danger of familiarisation" I love that quote. You would have to live in a cave if the swastika isn't familiar.

Isn't that the truth?

Yes, in the US freedom of speech cannot be infringed upon by the government. It is in the constitution's first amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That isn't to say that one can say whatever they want whenever they want. The "right" only extends so far as to when it infringes upon the rights of others. Take the "shouting 'FIRE' in a crowded theatre" example where someone might get trampled to death in the ensuing rush out of the exits. Or the conspiracy to commit a crime. Or inciting the armed overthrow of the government. These are all aspects of "free speech" that are not protected.

[Klaus]

What if I am a smoker, just got off a 13 hour flight and had no matches? I would shout "fire" on the top of my lungs. Naaa. seriously: It is great to have such a law. But laws are made by people and people change their opinions about laws.