あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]scorcher24Bayern (Fürth, Mittelfranken) 28ポイント29ポイント  (116子コメント)

The problem with this mob mentality is, where does it stop? At Nazis? Or do we continue with people we are just not comfortable with too? Like Muslims or because someone looks like a Salafist?And is driving nazis out of society really what we need and want? As long as they just sit there and talk to each other I don't see much of a problem.

No matter how you look at it, it is discrimination of a political belief. That they are extreme right winged, does not matter. Every belief is equal and we should not start this. Because if we do, we are just like them. Freedom and free speech has it's price. To sit next to someone who has a political belief you don't like is one of them.

[–]cyberdork 22ポイント23ポイント  (26子コメント)

Did you even watch the video?
2-3 people simply started to argue with them, the vast majority of the guests didn't even react to the scene. There was no shoving or anything like that. The neo nazis then just left, because they were sick of arguing. How on earth can you call that 'mob mentality'? So a group of 2-3 people is a mob to you? Anyhow, the only reason this is news is because some guy filmed this rather harmless scene with his mobile.

And that neo nazi is not simply some dude with an opinion, he was multiple times convicted of criminal assault (gefährliche Körperverletzung).

[–]Paedda 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

The problem is the implication that the owner of the beergarden should have thrown him out. Why on earth? The Nazi was not demonstrating, not screaming propaganda or something, not even quietly displaying offending symbols. Just his person being there.

Even if he is a criminal, the justice system is (or should be) dealing with that. If he has paid his fines or done his time, I'm not to apply some additional persecution on my own.

That BILD twists this into "courageous citizen expels neonazi" is annoying. What's courageous about that?

[–]elgubbo 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

where exactly is the implication in his comment that the beergarden should have thrown him out?

[–]ballsinyourm0uth -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

The headline at Bild.de contains the implication that the owner of the beer garden should have thrown him out: "Wirte sollen entschlossen reagieren"
http://www.bild.de/regional/muenchen/nationalsozialismus/hasselbach-fliegt-aus-biergarten-hirschgarten-wirt-redet-42144576.bild.html

[–]Paedda -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Not in his comment, but in the original BILD news alert:

In einem Münchner Biergarten sitzen bekannte Neonazis: Der Wirt reagiert nicht. Was nun?

Known Neonazis sit in a Munich beergarden, the host doesn't react. What to do?

And in the article:

"I hope that in the future, others will react and say they won’t accept neo-Nazis in their restaurants, beer gardens, and so on.

Starting a discussion is fine, albeit a bit impolite. But I grant you, you do not have to be polite to nazis. Especially if you were assaulted by their kind in the past. I think I would just have left myself, though.

[–]Sarkaraq 2ポイント3ポイント  (20子コメント)

And that neo nazi is not simply some dude with an opinion, he was multiple times convicted of criminal assault (gefährliche Körperverletzung).

And he received his sentence, didn't he? So, why would you feel superior to the German jurisdiction and apply your own punishment?

[–]elgubbo 7ポイント8ポイント  (19子コメント)

they are just talking to them - they do not punish him in any way. they use their right of free speech in telling him that they think he sucks

[–]Sarkaraq -4ポイント-3ポイント  (18子コメント)

they do not punish him in any way. they use their right of free speech in telling him that they think he sucks

That's not how free speech works in Germany. "You suck" is an insult, isn't it? That's not

just talking[...].

[–]elgubbo 6ポイント7ポイント  (17子コメント)

Okay let me reword that. Telling someone that you think bis political belief sucks is free speech. The guy talking to him does not insult him

[–]Sarkaraq -5ポイント-4ポイント  (13子コメント)

Stocker (the guy talking to Hasselbach) talks in a loud and aggressive way, calls him "Nazi" (to me, that's an insult, to Hasselbach it might be a compliment), admits that he is enraged and even wants the innkeeper to throw Hasselbach out which violates the AGG.

That's not just polite small-talk.

[–]elgubbo 4ポイント5ポイント  (3子コメント)

"Nazi" in this context is not an insult. he sees himself as a neonazi so you cannot insult him with that word. It would not violate the AGG - not at all. You don't know what you are talking about.

[–]Sarkaraq -3ポイント-2ポイント  (2子コメント)

"Nazi" in this context is not an insult. he sees himself as a neonazi so you cannot insult him with that word.

As I said, Hasselbach may consider it to be a compliment.

It would not violate the AGG - not at all.

How?

§1 AGG: "Ziel des Gesetzes ist, Benachteiligungen aus Gründen der [...] Weltanschauung [...] zu verhindern oder zu beseitigen."

§ 2 AGG: "(1) Benachteiligungen aus einem in § 1 genannten Grund sind nach Maßgabe dieses Gesetzes unzulässig in Bezug auf:
8. den Zugang zu und die Versorgung mit Gütern und Dienstleistungen, die der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung stehen.

That's pretty clear. The innkeeper isn't allowed to expel guests from his Biergarten because of their world view. That's what free speech means.

Let's ask the Bundesverfassungsgericht: "In einem pluralistisch strukturierten und auf der Konzeption einer freiheitlichen Demokratie beruhenden Staatsgefüge ist jede Meinung, auch die von etwa herrschenden Vorstellungen abweichende, schutzwürdig."

http://www.servat.unibe.ch/dfr/bv033001.html#015

You don't know what you are talking about.

No reason to use ad hominem.

[–]elgubbo 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

the key here is "die der Öffentlichkeit zur Verfügung stehen." - the owner has every right to expel anyone for (almost) any reason he likes. thats why bouncers exist. Look up "hausrecht" and "privatautonomie".

[–]audaxxx 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

Now we have Social Justice Nazis arguing that we should treat those hateful people, who stand against everything that is good, nicer. Oh, and we shouldn't call them Nazis, we need a political correct term that hopefully won't insult them. We have to let them know that the society welcomes them, that their behavior is totally fine!

/s

[–]Sarkaraq -3ポイント-2ポイント  (7子コメント)

Did you just call me a Nazi? Interesting. I wasn't aware that defending the Grundgesetz was considered to be right-wing extremist. Today I learned, I guess.

We have to let them know [...] that their behavior is totally fine!

No, but we shouldn't attack people because of their world view. It's totally fine (and suggested my be) to tell them that their (former) behavior is not fine, at all.

[–]audaxxx 2ポイント3ポイント  (6子コメント)

I did call you a Social Justice Nazi, which is more or less the same than a Social Justice Warrior, but for Nazis. You care for their feelings. You want to create save spaces for those poor discriminated persons.

No, but we shouldn't attack people because of their world view. It's totally fine (and suggested my be) to tell them that their (former) behavior is not fine, at all.

This is so naive. The last time that people didn't stand up (enough) against Nazis something very bad happened.

Also, do you think that an immigrant could eat and drink in peace in a Nazi-pub?

[–]elgubbo 14ポイント15ポイント  (4子コメント)

No matter how you look at it, it is discrimination of a political belief. That they are extreme right winged, does not matter. Every belief is equal and we should not start this.

And i have every right to tell him that i think his political belief sucks. its not discrimination. he was not thrown out. he left on his own accord.

[–]I-fuck-horses -4ポイント-3ポイント  (3子コメント)

And i have every right to tell him

And I have every right to tell you what the parent commenter told you. Righteous people like you won't stop with Nazis. If you are successful it will become part of your repertoire whenever you dislike someone/something.

[–]audaxxx 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Indeed, people who stand against Nazis are bad persons who do that only for personal gain and that sweet, sweet state sponsored ANTIFA-money.

/s

[–]Arvendilin 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

As a student, I could need some additional money, where do I sign up? =D

[–]elgubbo 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes that is your right and i won't say it is wrong to do so. But parent commenter does say its wrong.

[–]Luett_un_Luett 15ポイント16ポイント  (2子コメント)

Every belief is equal and we should not start this.

No, every believe is not equal. The believe that human dignity shall be inviolable (as stated in our constitution) is clearly superior and not equal to the believe that there is a worldwide jewish conspiracy and that we should eliminate the jews (as believed by e.g. the Nazis).

[–]I-fuck-horses -5ポイント-4ポイント  (1子コメント)

So the Nazi tried to spread that world view in the Biergarten? This must be missing from the video.

[–]audaxxx 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are moments when they don't spread that bullshit, yeah. For example, when their mouth is full of Currywurst they have to stop talking until they swallowed.

[–]tmaster7331World 36ポイント37ポイント  (26子コメント)

It's really easy: no tolerance for intolerance. Nothing against free speech, but if there are people that actually argue AGAINST free speech, they deserve to be shut down.

[–]alper 4ポイント5ポイント  (4子コメント)

Not at all, tolerance means also tolerating intolerance.

[–]tmaster7331World 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

It would, but that is no good tolerance. Tolerance isn't always the thing you aim for. Or would you tolerate your neighbour you know to be a murderer? (Extreme example)

[–]alper 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Tolerating intolerance, not tolerating crime.

The case is for lassitude with resolve. Quashing intolerance usually breeds more of it and usually it's not that harmful. Even if it is harmful it can be withstood without too many ill consequences. But if it becomes threatening it should be destroyed with all means.

[–]tmaster7331World 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, as hate speech is a crime and those neo-nazis are neo-nazis, because they actually do give hate speeches.. The line is really thin, and I'd rather get rid of that disgusting, intolerant and hateful people than preserving those extreme forms of "free speech". The concept is great, I just don't think it does always work.

[–]Arvendilin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are some things you just can't tolerate, I'm not saying get forcefull or anything but stuff like the guys did here, which is stating that they think his ideology is wrong and stupid is completely okay.

Nazis did thrive and still do thrive on people tolerating and not acting and not caring =P

[–]dexter_sinisterUSA 9ポイント10ポイント  (14子コメント)

Why should arguing against free speech be shut down? If you're harassing, intimidating, or assaulting people in addition to arguing against free speech, then there are plenty of laws against the former.

[–]Luett_un_Luett 18ポイント19ポイント  (11子コメント)

Because he isn't just some random guy with a disgusting opinion but one of the leading Nazis in southern Germany. He isn't just someone with a different opinion but he is someone who is actively fighting and leading the fight against the very basics of our society. He's fighting our constitution, our country. He is an inner enemy. That's why he should be treated as shown in this article.

[–]Mr_C_Baxter 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are wrong. Living in a Democraty implies that you have to deal with other opinions, whether you like them or not. He didnt do anything wrong in the beergarden so he has a right to stay there. And i am saying this while believing that nazis are wrong. But i also dislike your opinion, so should i be allowed to throw you out whereever i please?

[–]plspiritBayern 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

and who determines who is the enemy? in my world it's still the law not some random mob

[–]Luett_un_Luett 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

and who determines who is the enemy?

He himself

[–]alper -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Free speech exists less in Germany than it does in many other nations.

[–]LawL4EverGermany 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm not sure I'd say "many other nations", but that's mostly because I don't really know much about free speech laws in countries other than the USA and Germany, but you're right that arguing against free speech is probably illegal in Germany (not an expert on this but afaik it is, at the very least it should be an edge case). I don't get why you're being downvoted tbh.

[–]plspiritBayern 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

how ironic, if you shut down people arguing against free speech, you yourself are arguing against free speech and according to you deserve to be shut down.

no, that's not how it works, free speech is for everybody.

[–]tmaster7331World 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

That's not ironic at all...

[–]plspiritBayern -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

i·ro·ny1 ˈīrənē/ noun noun: irony

the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

so speaking out to get yourself shut up is not ironic?

that's like arguing for weapons to bring peace by shooting yourself.

[–]I-fuck-horses -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Was he being intolerant? Or was he "just there". You should punish actual behavior, not (someone's) existence. Can you tell me what you are trying to accomplish? Make him change his mind? Or just pure terror, to make him/them afraid? Which of course won't work because you are unable to do enough terror. So it's just mutual escalation.

I would not mind if you had a working thought-out strategy, but you don't. All you have is righteous anger and force without thought.

[–]tmaster7331World -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, I don't know. I personally would not have him kicked out. But I don't mind if others do.

[–]hondaaccords -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

... That is effectively banning free speech

[–]elgubbo 16ポイント17ポイント  (23子コメント)

this was not mob mentality.

https://www.wikiwand.com/de/Philipp_Hasselbach

this guy is not someone that "looks like" a nazi but is a nazi leader in southern germany. He is violent and promotes hatespeech.

He was confronted verbally.

This is not mob mentality but free speech in action.

[–]eean 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

The old "First they came for the Nazis and I did not speak out" argument, lol.

Freedom and free speech has it's price. To sit next to someone who has a political belief you don't like is one of them.

Sitting silently by someone who you disagree with politically is absolutely not one of the costs of freedom and free speech! Your argument is amazingly counterintuitive: "Freedom means being required to stay silent".

This reminds me of the right-wing folks who campaign against what they see as the tyranny of political correctness in the US. They make freedom of speech arguments as well, but really they are making freedom-to-not-be-criticized arguments.

[–]scorcher24Bayern (Fürth, Mittelfranken) -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

Go ahead, push me into the right corner even though I don't belong there. It is so convenient isn't it? To label someone who you disagree with as a right winged Person. So easy to dismantle any argument with it, without actually listening to it first. Go ahead, have the easy way. Because that is not what I said and you are just interpreting what you want to read.

[–]eean 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That wasn't what I said either. I was making a comparison to where I've heard this anticriticism argument before. I'm sure you aren't the only person on the left (or where ever you are) that finds political speech distasteful.

[–]labbeduddelFrankfurter Bub 17ポイント18ポイント  (13子コメント)

you realize that his political affiliation is 1 hair away of being a crime. This guy has had issues with the law before.. He is not just a guy that just talks. We don't need people like him, and, I don't see why we have to keep Nazis in society... I think the country fought hard to get rid of that, to see it coming back

[–]dirkt 18ポイント19ポイント  (2子コメント)

And that's why we leave prosecution of crimes to the police, and not to the mob. And if he commits a crime by expressing his beliefs, that has no connection to his right to sit in a Biergarten and drink beer.

Yes, I don't like neonazis. Yes, I'd rejoice if he left. Still, if I start overstepping my bounds in actually molesting people like these, I'm no better than they are.

[–]coolsubmission 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

no you are. But nonetheless it's your right to tell them your opinion. If they decide to leave it's their problem. If they whine about it later on it's pathetic.

[–]dirkt 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Of course it's your right to tell them your opinion. I never said otherwise.

[–]sebiroth 5ポイント6ポイント  (7子コメント)

you realize that his political affiliation is 1 hair away of being a crime.

Well whenever he what he says /does is criminal, there are ways to deal with it, right? If not, who are you to judge? You'll find enough people in this country who would argue that following the Qur'an is "one hair away" from undermining our constitution.

He is not just a guy that just talks

Fine then. Let's treat him appropriately for that.

I think the country fought hard to get rid of that

Which country? Germany? When exactly?

I think we DO have a significant problem with law enforcement (police, verfassungsschutz) turning a blind eye to actual right-wing crime.

The thing about "Freedom of speech" is that it is pretty worthless as soon as you make it "Freedom of certain speech". There are laws against certain transgressions such as slander, personal insults and even things like §130(3) (which is actually problematic as it already constitutes a form of censorship). These really suffice.

I find it irritating how many superficially liberal-minded people take this "no tolerance for intolerance" talk for granted.

[–]labbeduddelFrankfurter Bub 6ポイント7ポイント  (4子コメント)

so are you a fan of §130? Should we let people talk freely about the wonders of Nationalsozialismus, just because they can?

It is no censorship in anyway, because there is no sane discourse about it. People who usually whine against §130 hide under the excuse of "having a healthy debate about what happened", but we know what happened, it's very well documented. A shitty excuse to justify a bunch of holocaust deniers... As long as people who were in a freaking KZ live, this paragraph should still be valid. These people don't have the balls to go in front of a holocaust survivor to explain them how we misunderstood Hitler.. no?

BTW... I am also for branding any form of extremism illegal, Salafism must in my opinion be named an extremist organization with terrorist groups. This doesn't mean I'm painting all muslims with the same brush, because not all of them agree with extremism. There is though, NO FUCKIN NPD member that can have a sane view of society.

[–]sebiroth -4ポイント-3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Thanks for illustrating my point. Did you know that Salafism per se is not necessarily an extremist view that leads to extremist action? At least no more than orthodox judaism, communism or whatever -ism you choose. Also, it is not an organization. Yet you in your ignorance would decide that these people must be persecuted.

It doesn't matter what laws I'm a fan of or not, and it is not my intention to defend holocaust deniers by any means. But it's no wonder that there's hardly any "sane discourse" because you can't have any discourse if one of the positions is prescribed by law.

And regarding your last sentence (since this discussion has been Godwin'd from the start): declaring people insane and arguing that we don't have to "keep them in society" is exactly the way to the dark side, dude.

[–]labbeduddelFrankfurter Bub 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

but what discourse could be had with holocaust deniers or nazi sympathisers that is sane?

[–]sebiroth -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

but what discourse could be had with ______ that is sane?

Fill in the blank with something different. Jews, Christians, "Putinversteher", whatever you like. Maybe you get the point. The possibility of discourse will always be a good thing, if only to show that the arguments of one side are false/idiotic/"insane"/whatever.

[–]I-fuck-horses -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Strange, I didn't see them do any of that. They were just there o drink beer, not to spread their propaganda.

[–]Luett_un_Luett 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

Are you serious? So we should just have a jolly good time with a leading and proven violent Nazi around? We should shut up and let the Nazi be because in this very moment he isn't smashing up someone innocent as he uses to do?

The thing about "Freedom of speech" is that it is pretty worthless as soon as you make it "Freedom of certain speech".

What are you people even talking about? The article is a about a f'cking Nazi and a brave Guy standing up against that Nazi by using his "Freedom of speech".

[–]I-fuck-horses -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

Harassment is not free speech. It's harassment. I'm sure I would have participated, but at least I'm aware that's my lowest instincts ruling my behavior.

[–]plspiritBayern 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

not a crime means not a crime, no matter how far away from crime it is.

if you miss the goal by 1mm it's still not a goal

I think the country fought hard to get rid of that, to see it coming back

and that's exactly why you can't have shunning of beliefs, mob justice and free speech not applying to a subset of the population.

that is what the nazis did, what the communists did, what it's like in north korea and the islamic state today (in extreme forms) i don't want any of that, and if the price is to tolerate an intolerant asshole, so be it.

[–]alper -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The German state intentionally reinstituted the nazis after the war. They could have also shot them all but they didn't.

[–]m4xin30n 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

Because if we do, we are just like them. Freedom and free speech has it's price.

Sooo... How do you plan to counter people who try to undermine and exploit freedom of speech? Waving your finger and saying "dudududu, dass darfst du aber nicht, du boeser Mensch?"

It is called 'civil courage', and is well in the rights of every citizen who wants to defend the basic democratic laws in Germany.

'Freedom of speach' does not mean 'Freedom to hate'.

[–]dirkt 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

Zivilcourage bedeutet nicht, sich die Aufgaben der Polzei anzumaßen und anfangen, selbst Gewalt auszüben. Das ist strafbar, und zwar aus gutem Grund. Man kann ihm gerne die Meinung sagen, aber das ist auch alles. "Aus dem Biergarten rausschmeißen" kann ihn nur der Besitzer oder die Polizei, kein Möchtegern-Mob.

Ja, du kannst also nur mit dem Finger wedeln. Du kannst das laut genug tun, dass er von selbst geht, aber das ist alles.

Ich hasse Neonazis auch, aber man muss die Grundlagen unserer Gesellschaft selbst respektieren, sonst ist man wirklich nicht besser als diese Gesocks.

[–]HereForTheFish 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Ja, du kannst also nur mit dem Finger wedeln. Du kannst das laut genug tun, dass er von selbst geht, aber das ist alles.

Und genau das ist hier doch passiert, wo liegt dein Problem?

[–]dirkt 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dass der Vorposter behauptet hat, man müsse mehr tun.

[–]coolsubmission 5ポイント6ポイント  (5子コメント)

Because if we do, we are just like them.

wtf?! Don't you relativize a bit too much? Your opinion is really "If i sit next to a violent neo-nazi and tell him that i don't like him and he should fuck off" then i'm just like him?!

[–]plspiritBayern 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

absolutely, vigilante justice is not good, ever. this guy, even if he's the biggest asshole in the universe, has the same right to be in that beergarden than anyone else.

and no it's not suddenly ok if the guy is a nazi a communist or a muslim

No matter how you look at it, it is discrimination of a political belief.

yes. it works both ways, with people you agree with and disagree with, and as long as nobody breaks any law, the people forming the mob are in the wrong.

that's the basis of our Rechtsstaat, the basis of democracy, the basis of freedom and liberty. We can't throw that out of the window for anyone.

[–]MartianSkyBayern 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree. As long as they don't exhibit any hateful or inappropriate behaviour, language or demeanor, they should be left alone - as long as people behave like decent human beings, they should be treated accordingly. For all you know, they might be trying to get out of the scene.
OTOH, in my view, brandishing any typical nazi "dress code" - combat-boots with white laces, pertinant clothing-brands, etc. makes them fair game for public shunning and pillorying because that dresscode is intended to intimidate and expose hateful political viewpoints. (especially when they appear in groups) But AFAICT this was not the case here.

[–]TotesMessenger -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)