V-Dare reports that a Jewish group is trying to regulate the internet by law and by industry collusion in order to "combat online hate speech, Holocaust denial and anti-Semitism…"
This is so foolish. Censorship is always directed against ideas that have a germ of truth, and not against obvious falsehoods.
13 comments:
Do you think that there is a germ of truth in the denial of the Holocaust ?
Yes, there are people who express legitimate facts and opinions about the Holocaust, and who are called Holocaust deniers. There are countries with laws against Holocaust denial, and many of them make it a crime to even express certain opinions. I do not agree with those laws, and I do not trust any Holocaust info from those countries.
Are you a Holocaust denier ?
No, I am not a Holocaust denier. The Nazis wiped out millions of Jews. If you want to quiz me on the details, I am afraid that Nazi history is out of my expertise.
I understand. You are not a Holocaust denier. You just agree that that Holocaust deniers express legitimate facts and opinions in denying the Holocaust.
You are not a Nazi history expert.
No, I did not say that. If you want to disagree with me, then give me an example of censorship that is just against obvious falsehoods. The European/Canadian Holocaust denial laws do not just prohibit obvious falsehoods, according to the Wikipedia article.
Yes, there are people who express legitimate facts and opinions about the Holocaust, and who are called Holocaust deniers.
So you don't agree with Holocaust deniers ? You just point out that there is a germ of truth in the denial of the Holocaust, and Holocaust deniers express ligitimate facts and opinions.
What is the germ of truth ? What legitimate facts and opinions do the deniers express ?
You have used the term "Holocaust denier" very loosely, and you apparently wish to censor some political opinions with which you disagree. I believe in free speech. I asked you for an example of where I might be wrong, and you could not give me one.
OK, based on your use of the term, Holocaust denier, "people who express legitimate facts and opinions about the Holocaust, and who are called Holocaust deniers."
What is the germ of truth ? What legitimate facts and opinions do the deniers express ?
Holocaust denier is not my term. If I were defining the term, I would define it in terms of people who deny demonstrable facts. If you want to know what people are being called Holocaust deniers, and what they opinions are, I suggest that you google them. I was making a comment about censorship. I have shown you that the Holocaust denial laws attempt to censor legitimate opinions. If you have some counterexample to what I said, go ahead and post it. Otherwise, I can only assume that you are trying to provoke a straw man argument on a different subject.
You're right, I'm not arguing vs. anything you've said about censorship and free speech.
I was just interested in what type of facts or opinions they are "denying". I don't know if their opinions are legitimate or not ?
I googled Holocaust deniers, and found Mark Weber's opinion. He is supposed to be the leading Holocaust denier, but he appears to accept the gist of the Holocaust. I also found Noam Chomsky, who should not be called a Holocaust denier at all. He does have some eccentric political views. There are also people who are anti-Israel or pro-Arab or have some other motivation.
As I write this, there is someone on MSNBC complaining about those who question Barack Obama's birth certificate. He says that it is racist to question the legitimacy of a black President.
I don't follow how a "Holocaust denier" can be someone who accepts the gist of the Holocaust, but maybe I'M using the term to loosely ?
People frequently accuse others of being racist for questioning unsuppported, facts.
Post a Comment