German police raid 36 homes over hateful postings on social media

[Deleted]

Trying to raid people who post racism stuff, is a poor attempt. Its fighting against wind-mills. The main reason why people are so angry is something else. Unsecured borders of the EU. This is just my opinion. Another thing is: Many are just so angry, because they cant do ANYTHING. Now even if they would never offend some immigrants in real life, they do this in the internet (with the anonymity). One has to understand some of our people, who are just angry and dont know what else to do.

You act as if the minority you talk about has any voter background higher than 8%. Literally noone is scared of "unsecured borders", thats a boogeyman of the right wing, in special the german AFD.

Seems like we have some social bots here on this thread, who literally repeat the same bullshit as like the OP.

[ranzino]

No, they can not.



.....

In your book, the AFD also is a democratic party, i assume. And in your book, Russia Today is a valid media outlet. As you quote their stereotypes.

who gave a middle finger to protesters ?

AfD is part of 13 parliaments on federal state level and is en route to sit in federal parliament, comes the election in september. they are part of democracy.

[Deleted]

who gave a middle finger to protesters ?

Has anyone ever been punished for a middle finger?

No.

So why should Gabriel be punished?

AfD is part of 13 parliaments on federal state level and is en route to sit in federal parliament, comes the election in september. they are part of democracy.

The AFD is a right wing populist party working together with the russian "united russia" party, which is putins state party. The AFD is being observed by the Verfassungsschutz, as their spokesman asks for "Deutschland den Deutschen", which is neo nazi talk. The AFD is being paid by private associations, who get money from both the swiss SVP and the russian state party.

They are far from being democratic. They are autocratic in core, and the successors of "Die Republikaner" and the NPD, nationalist parties.

[Toogoodman]

Since when were there ever good kind of Nazis

Its a usual quote "the only good type of Nazi, is a dead Nazi"

OT: Nazi Zombies were pretty cool in CoD

- - - Updated - - -

Those people are real criminals.

See, I think the problem is that anything, literally anything can be interrupted as "incitement of racism". Obviously things like inciting riots, inciting violence towards groups of people, and things along the lines of people getting physically hurt is something that should be, and is illegal in most western countries, if not all of them. Inciting racism however, that's something that's so vague, you can interpret anything as racism, and a lot of people say basically everything is racist. Obviously, spouting off racial slurs, and things like that are obviously racist, but you could say "i like your hair!" to a black person, and that could be labeled as racist.... So I think its a fine line, and allowing the Government to tell you whats racist and what isn't racist is very dangerous, as said earlier, it could lead to political witch hunts, which is what this looks like.

[ranzino]

....

The AFD is a right wing populist party working together with the russian "united russia" party, which is putins state party. The AFD is being observed by the Verfassungsschutz, as their spokesman asks for "Deutschland den Deutschen", which is neo nazi talk. The AFD is being paid by private associations, who get money from both the swiss SVP and the russian state party.

They are far from being democratic. They are autocratic in core, and the successors of "Die Republikaner" and the NPD, nationalist parties.

Democracy is not pink and fluffy unicorns and unless AfD is banned, people are able to vote them into parliaments and they will do so in september.
you may call them a bad example of parlamentarism, but still...

[Deleted]

Democracy is not pink and fluffy unicorns and unless AfD is banned, people are able to vote them into parliaments and they will do so in september.
you may call them a bad example of parlamentarism, but still...

I dont see them as part of the democratic parties, as they are deeply autocratic. Their leader, Frauke Petry, even wants to remove the german Grundgesetz. Another of their leaders, Gauland, wants to incorporate every right wing extremist party as possible because he thinks that would make their party stronger. They have friendships with the identitary movement, which is a right wing extremist movement with "völkisch" mindest.

No, sorry, but the AFD is not democratic at all. Yes, they will be part of the upcoming election, and they will not gain more than 5%, as they already fear to be unable to bypass that barrier to even get into the Bundestag. They are weaker than ever and not be any kind of threat for the democratic parties.

They never will gain power with their extremist views, no matter how much one of their pary leaders, the crazy Beatrix von Storch, granddaughter of Hitlers Financial minister, wants that.

Putin loves them. But that will not help them in the upcoming election. Quite contrary, the only right wing party in germany which has a chance to get in parliament is nothing but a group of russian brown nosers.

[ranzino]

I dont see them as part of the democratic parties, as they are deeply autocratic. Their leader, Frauke Petry, even wants to remove the german Grundgesetz. ....

Wat IS a "democratic party" to you ?
Well....technically you and everybody and their grandma are able to promote that, says the last article of Grundgesetz. GG was changed often enough too; it's not sacrosanct.

[Toogoodman]

No, i am sure everyone should protect a dictator who infests western social media with propaganda.

- - - Updated - - -



They already were illegal before, or those people would not have been punished. The law you talk about wants to punish social media outlets if they dont ban illegal content, as like public insults or sedition. Currently, social media is not being held responsible for their content, and the government wants to make laws to give them responsibility. Its just about allowing justice to fine social media outlets like facebook or twitter, if they dont react in a given time.

Putins media outlets try to pretend that germany is adding laws that allow them to punish controversial opinions about immigration, which is just not true. There is no limiitation for anyone in germany to have controversial opinions about immigration, liberalism and democracy, you just may not ask people to get guns and kill everyone for that sake, as you also may not publically denounce groups of people or personalities.

See, the issue here is that social media outlets, such as Facebook, twitter, pintrest....etc don't ban stuff like this. As it currently stands, they cant even ban radical Islamist pages that spew recruitment (ISIS had a twitter for months). Also, these are usually US based media platforms (social media), and usually adopt their host nations laws, trolling on FB and twitter may be illegal in Germany, but in most countries, youre free to shit post

[Deleted]

See, the issue here is that social media outlets, such as Facebook, twitter, pintrest....etc don't ban stuff like this. As it currently stands, they cant even ban radical Islamist pages that spew recruitment (ISIS had a twitter for months). Also, these are usually US based media platforms (social media), and usually adopt their host nations laws, trolling on FB and twitter may be illegal in Germany, but in most countries, youre free to shit post

Trolling is not illegal, and i never said trolling is. Illegal are public denounciations and sedition. Please quote me correctly next time.

- - - Updated - - -

Wat IS a "democratic party" to you ?

A party that:

1.) is working within the limits of the democratic rules

and

2.) is not wanting to remove the german constitution which protects the rights of the people

AFD is not either of these.

Well....technically you and everybody and their grandma are able to promote that, says the last article of Grundgesetz. GG was changed often enough too; it's not sacrosanct.

Actually, the first paragraphs of the GG are protected by the eternity clause. Any new constitution that removes these rights is no rightful successor of the Grundgesetz.

[Moon-Man]

Germany is in worse state than ww2 with Hitler in it.

Merkel is worse than Hitler. At least Hitler was thinking about his people, Merkel hates her own people.

[NineSpine]

Germany is in worse state than ww2 with Hitler in it.

Merkel is worse than Hitler. At least Hitler was thinking about his people, Merkel hates her own people.

You know Hitler executed millions of Germans, right?

[Deleted]

Germany is in worse state than ww2 with Hitler in it.

Merkel is worse than Hitler. At least Hitler was thinking about his people, Merkel hates her own people.

So much about bashing germany.

[Toogoodman]

Trolling is not illegal, and i never said trolling is. Illegal are public denounciations and sedition. Please quote me correctly next time.

I mean, Illegal are public denunciations and sedition is trolling, that's what trolling is. Most trolling is nasty, hateful, mean shit, it is what it is. I've never met a dedicated troll who doesn't do this stuff, that's just life. No one has the right to not be offended, or else we would live in a pretty shitty world, because anything one person says, can be offensive to another.

[Deleted]

I mean, Illegal are public denunciations and sedition is trolling, that's what trolling is.

No, it isnt.

In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement.

Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontention (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

And i talk about the violent version of sedition which is illegal.

An insult is an expression, statement (or sometimes behavior) which is disrespectful or scornful. Insults may be intentional or accidental. An insult may be factual, but at the same time pejorative, such as the word "inbred".

The insults i talk about are violating human dignity, and therefor illegal.

Ergo: You try to pretend germany wants to make trolling illegal, which just isnt the case. Insulting and denouncing people is something completely different, so is sedition.

You still may troll as much as you like, as long you do not insult people, and as long your trolling request is not about sending those people to start armed riots.

[ranzino]

....

A party that:

1.) is working within the limits of the democratic rules

and

2.) is not wanting to remove the german constitution which protects the rights of the people

AFD is not either of these.



Actually, the first paragraphs of the GG are protected by the eternity clause. Any new constitution that removes these rights is no rightful successor of the Grundgesetz.

Eternity clause is an article within GG.
Remove the whole GG and nothing remains; you could rewrite the first articles easily and call the new thing Verfassung and done. Human rights are not only valid if worded by the GG.

[Toogoodman]

Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky

Just googled this place, its like another planet, I honestly didn't even think a City existed on that side of Russia, that's literally in the middle of nowhere

[Deleted]

Eternity clause is an article within GG.
Remove the whole GG and nothing remains; you could rewrite the first articles easily and call the new thing Verfassung and done. Human rights are not only valid if worded by the GG.

You are not allowed to remove the GG when you replace it with a constitution that violates the Eternity clause. You actually do not know what you talk about. Every new constitution that wants to remove the articles covered by Art 79 GG is illegal from the POV of the current established constitution. As a citizen, you are allowed to fight against those who want to violate Art 79 GG. You are allowed to go into resistance.

[Vargur]

Wow, Germany. What the hell happened to you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_...ent_in_Germany

[ranzino]

You are not allowed to remove the GG when you replace it with a constitution that violates the Eternity clause. You actually do not know what you talk about. Every new constitution that wants to remove the articles covered by Art 79 GG is illegal from the POV of the current established constitution. As a citizen, you are allowed to fight against those who want to violate Art 79 GG. You are allowed to go into resistance.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewigke...igkeitsklausel

well, nothing is forever, it seems.

[TSThrillwell]

You guys defending this are acting as though "incitement to racism" is a clearly defined crime, like stealing or assault. It isn't. This is the same government that covered up the details of mass sexual assaults for fear of inciting racism. Does that mean that the act of reporting a crime committed by an immigrant is inciting racism? Who knows? The language is just too open for it to be a law at all. The specific issue with a law like this is not unlike the potential for the president and secretary of defense to declare a citizen an "enemy combatant" here in the US, and then have them detained with no legal recourse. The language is so open that it COULD happen to anyone, and I said when Obama signed it that my issue wasn't fear of him, but the naivety of assuming that the president will always be a good person who wouldn't abuse it. Now we have an unstable baby of a man in the White House, and the reason he hasn't abused it yet is probably because he's too stupid to understand that it's a thing he can do at all.

This is similar. You're defending it because right now it's being instituted by people you like and used against people that you don't like, but what if anti-immigrant sentiment swells in Germany and there's a right wing take over of government? These laws still exist. And when some Deutsch tumblerite posts a wall of text about how white people are the problem, what's to stop them from carting that person away?

The reason you protect the right to speech from open ended assault "for the greater good" even when the person in violation is someone you disagree with is because in doing so you're protecting your own speech. Everyone's speech. The most difficult step in fighting a developing tyranny is for people to say "Yo, I get what you're trying to do here, maybe even respect it, but that is tyrannical as fuck."

If the people arguing against you weren't doing it in the most juvenile way imaginable, they might be able to express that.

I don't want to live on this planet anymore.