>Germany has banned a far-right website for spreading 'racist, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic content' and arrested two people in a clampdown on hate crime.
>Germany's Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere said the clampdown was 'a clear sign that the rule of law doesn't allow hate crime'.
>The server was located in Russia to prevent German authorities gaining access, it added. German officials asked Russia to switch it off in the coming days.
>The head of Germany's domestic intelligence, Hans-Georg Maassen, told reporters on Tuesday that 'there is the danger of a gray zone developing between far-right extremists, right-wing conservatives and citizen protesters with significant potential for violence.'
(Archived) /pol/ thread:
Is 4chan next?
I don't know what content exactly was posted on that site. It would be justified if they called for crimes. Racism is covered by the freedom of speech imo. Telling people to commit a crime is not.
>as long they didn't tell people to hurt/kill anyone it wasn't justified
Here is a German source. The owners of "Altermedia" got arrested.
>is 4chan next
No because 4chan is American and America has freedom of speech. "Hate speech" laws are a European thing. This is actually why Voat moved to America, so they didn't have to worry about Europe's hate speecht laws affecting their site
Why would 4chan be the next? Our admin is a japanese living in France. 4chan's servers should be moved to another country tho, like Nevis, Nothern Cyprus, Malaysia, Panama, etc, because they don't have mandatory data retention laws.
>Censorship or justified?
I'm not sure what Germany's laws are on political expression, but I don't think censorship in any form should be condoned. If the site was actually facilitating crimes (e.g. people were organizing themselves into groups and hunting down minorities) and the site's owner(s) did nothing to prevent this, then that goes beyond being an issue of free speech. At that point, shutting down the site is a justified form of mitigation.
If I walk into an auditorium full of people and yell, "I'm going to blow up every motherfucker in this building!" I shouldn't act the least bit surprised when the police come in and bust my ass for issuing a public threat. By (U.S.) law, you can't incite violence against others, whether you're issuing a threat in a crowded auditorium or posting threats of terrorism on Internet message boards.
As far as I know Altermedia was quite irrelevant, even within hardcore right circles in Germany. Furthermore the server is located in Russia. Makes me wonder why shut it down now? I think it was done in context of the current refugee crisis in Germany (and Europe) in a move to appear tough on crime and extremist ideology, and Altermedia was simply an easy target that wouldn't put up a fight (Symbolpolitik). Along with the new Facebook censorship and the general social shaming for being a racist, it's more about crushing dissent.
I honestly think about leaving this Germany, because to me it feels like the fore-shadowing of a civil war or at least a violent resolve.
What do you guys think? Overly dramatic?
I'm on the left, but it's shit like this that makes it so I can't call myself a "progressive", and have to call myself a "liberal" - censoring speech is against what I thought were the most basic principles of my ideological camp. All this bullshit with cutting out hate speech, providing "safe spaces", etc. is getting fucking retarded. Now the left has it's own type of social authoritarianism to compete with that of the right.
I know this is happening in Germany and not the USA, but over here if this is becoming the position of the Greens and the Dems, then there's gonna need to be a body of people who are socially "libertarian" and economically democratic. What's that gonna be? Is there gonna be an anarcho-syndicalist party? Shit doesn't make sense
Are they physically hurting people or promoting violence? Are they suppressing the rights of individuals?
If the answer is no to either of these questions, the censorship is absolutely unjustified.
Some of the religious right have always been pro-censorship, but most of the right is largely against most outright censorship. A growing number of leftists, particularly SJW/feminists, are pushing for more censorship. But even on the left, outside of the SJW crowd most people wouldn't support censorship. So politically it would be hard to ban "hate speech." And even if they did, SCOTUS would shoot it down. Neither side of SCOTUS would support a ban on hate speech
>I'm on the left, but it's shit like this that makes it so I can't call myself a "progressive", and have to call myself a "liberal"
This, and feminism in general has made it so I sometimes hesitate to call myself even a liberal. It was fine when feminism was a secondary view for most liberals, but now that it's become central for so many on the left I feel more alienated. But I'm definitely not a conservative and am pretty far left on most issues except hating men, so I guess I'm more liberal than anything else
SCOTUS refuses to acknowledge (or see cases about) laws that limit are in direct contrast to the second amendment. Don't think for a second they actually give a damn about the constitution.