Ban on Nazi-symbols?

[Dreamer128]

EU may consider ban on Nazi symbols

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - Negotiations on EU legislation against racism and xenophobia are to be re-launched in the wake of the public outcry caused last week by Prince Harry's fancy dress outfit with its swastika armband.

A Luxembourg EU Presidency source said that talks on a law combating racism and xenophobia, which have been stalled since early 2003, are to be revived.

Discussions on the new law began in 2002 but have been on ice since early 2003 due to Italian objections.

Luxembourg's decision to put this issue back on the political agenda follows calls by senior German politicians for a Europe-wide ban on the Nazi symbols.

On Monday (17 January), the European Commission did not rule out the idea.

A spokesperson for justice commissioner Franco Frattini said "it may be worth looking at the possibility of a Europe-wide ban, to explore that possibility at least".

Freedom of speech

However, such a ban would open up freedom of speech issues.

"Banning symbols cannot ban evil and risks playing into the hands of those who would seek to subvert the very liberties we most champion", said Chris Davies, leader of the UK Liberal Democrat members of the European Parliament.

It would also be very difficult for legislators to codify such a ban say EU officials.

They would have to find wording that banned Nazi symbols but did not incriminate those who use them in a satirical manner to lampoon nazis.

Similarly, it would have to be considered which Nazi symbols would be used and whether such a ban would cover symbols from other regimes - such as communism.

The outrage caused by Prince Harry's outfit - it was a German soldier's uniform with a large swastika displayed on an armband - comes just ahead of the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, the nazi death camp.

The anniversary, on 27 January, is to be attended by several world leaders including Russian President Putin, Israel's President Moshe Katzav, French President Jacques Chirac and Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski.

(EUObserver)

[johnny]

If that means they can't show any nazi symbols on tv in movies or documentaries, or in historical books, then i'm against it, that just doesn't make any sense.

But if it prevents people to parade around in uniforms like that prick Harry did, i'm all for it. Those things belong in a museum, not on the streets or on parties.

[uss]

Originally posted by Dreamer128: "Banning symbols cannot ban evil and risks playing into the hands of those who would seek to subvert the very liberties we most champion", said Chris Davies, leader of the UK Liberal Democrat members of the European Parliament.

Regarding the ban, I agree with this guy.


And about the whole Harry's costume incident, personally I think it's silly. I remember my father telling me about how a few years ago in Estonia, two heads of different counties went to an important birthday party, one with a Nazi uniform and the other with a Soviet uniform. It didn't even reach the press.

Oh well, I guess this shows a difference between Estonian and British mentality.

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by johnny: But if it prevents people to parade around in uniforms like that prick Harry did, i'm all for it. Those things belong in a museum, not on the streets or on parties.

So much of British humour involves the Nazi's, I think you have to take into account that there's nothing 'taboo' about wearing it for a laugh in the UK. I would say that it was a very stupid thing to do given his position, but it was only a party after all. I'm not sure it makes him a prick either..

[johnny]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: quote: Originally posted by johnny: But if it prevents people to parade around in uniforms like that prick Harry did, i'm all for it. Those things belong in a museum, not on the streets or on parties.

So much of British humour involves the Nazi's, I think you have to take into account that there's nothing 'taboo' about wearing it for a laugh in the UK. I would say that it was a very stupid thing to do given his position, but it was only a party after all. I'm not sure it makes him a prick either.. [/QUOTE]But wouldn't that be "TV humour"? I don't exactly see the joke if i run into someone dressed as a nazi on the street. On the contrary, i'd probably smash his head in.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: quote: Originally posted by johnny: But if it prevents people to parade around in uniforms like that prick Harry did, i'm all for it. Those things belong in a museum, not on the streets or on parties.

So much of British humour involves the Nazi's, I think you have to take into account that there's nothing 'taboo' about wearing it for a laugh in the UK. I would say that it was a very stupid thing to do given his position, but it was only a party after all. I'm not sure it makes him a prick either.. [/QUOTE]My feeling exactly sham, well not the British humor part, though we have Col. Kink and Sgt. Schulz for us CoC's old enough to remember Hogan's Heros. From what I can tell it was a costume party, who hasn't chosen a stupid costume for one of those things before. But hey he's you people's prince, do with as you wish.

As for banning the Swastka, It's a symbol that has been used in many cultures throughout history. For the Nazi part of it, if it is banned, will that force those that believe in the Nazi line to go under ground, or more under ground? I think they should be alowed to wear it so they are easier to spot, keep an eye on. If they are underground then they work on the very foundations of society, but if they are alowed to rise to the surface, they can be held up to reticule. An example is the KKK, at one time they could wear full hoods that covered their faces, so they remained anonymous, they held power. The people you dealt with everyday could have been a KKK member, and no one would have been the wiser. But once they were no longer alowed to hide their faces, then everybody in town knew who they were. Their power was gone, if something happened people knew who to look for, instead of the unknown anonymous visitor in the dark.

[johnny]

Erm...ever since '45, nazi movements ARE underground. Whenever they want to arrange a meeting, it's done in secret. If they show themselves publicly, which occasionally happens, there will be riots.

[shamrock_uk]

Its not underground in the States I don't think? Do correct me if I'm wrong JD, but I've certainly seen Nazi meetings portrayed in films as being held out in the open with police having to keep violence from protesters down.

Edits: There seem to be several American Nazi parties advertised on the net. Here are a couple of links. Obviously don't click them if you'll be offended by Nazi propoganda.

http://www.nsm88.com/articles/nazi.html

http://www.americannaziparty.com/about/index.shtml


Also a wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Nazi_Party

I presume that makes them legal then... One of the Nazi sites is hosted by 1st-amendment.org (or something similar) so I would imagine that's their legal basis. Looking it up, a summary of the 1st amendment says:

Bill of Rights Amendment I 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.

Looks like freedom of expression is valued over causing offence in the US. From the UK's point of view, I think this is too excessive (ie. forming a Nazi party is just 'not on') but I don't think a ban is the way to go either. Do it the British way and strike a middle-ground between Europe and America [img]smile.gif[/img]

Lots of edits

[ 01-18-2005, 10:32 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by johnny: Erm...ever since '45, nazi movements ARE underground. Whenever they want to arrange a meeting, it's done in secret. If they show themselves publicly, which occasionally happens, there will be riots.

Yeah, that's because they are banned, so they hide in the dark cravasses of society. They're like cockroaches, turn the lights on and give them nowhere to hide. Expose them and hold them up for shame, for nearly 60 years they have hidden and reproduced in secret.

By banning their symbols, they are alowed to feel they are being persecuted.
Persecution weeds out the weak and make the strong, stronger. Let them out in the light and ignor them, nothing is more a powerful weapon to the human pshycie then to be ignored, marginalized(sp?). All of us want to be accepted, it's part of human nature. That's the way I'd skin that cat, but there are many ways to skin a cat.

[ 01-18-2005, 10:26 AM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[uss]

Originally posted by johnny: quote: Originally posted by shamrock_uk: quote: Originally posted by johnny: But if it prevents people to parade around in uniforms like that prick Harry did, i'm all for it. Those things belong in a museum, not on the streets or on parties.

So much of British humour involves the Nazi's, I think you have to take into account that there's nothing 'taboo' about wearing it for a laugh in the UK. I would say that it was a very stupid thing to do given his position, but it was only a party after all. I'm not sure it makes him a prick either.. [/QUOTE]But wouldn't that be "TV humour"? I don't exactly see the joke if i run into someone dressed as a nazi on the street. On the contrary, i'd probably smash his head in. [/QUOTE]Would you also smash the person's head in if you'd see him in a costume party?