Free Speech in Germany is Dead



You can take the girl out of East Germany, but you can’t take East Germany out of the girl.

Mark Steyn in reference to Chancellor Merkel.


A point of historical reference.  Weimar Germany had laws against what today would be defined as “hate speech”.  They set the precedent for the Nazis banning speech regarded as “un-German”.    Frau Merkel is setting a dangerous precedent for those who follow after her.

More to explorer


  1. In the words of Dr. Jordan B. Peterson: “Who gets to define hatred? (dignity, extreme, violated, oppose and free society)? The one you least wish. The Catholic Church’s prayers against Hitler were punishable by death. The Nazis were a one party system that brecked no opposition.
    Janet Napolitano defined all returning vets as “extreme right wingers” because the vets knew how to fire a gun. All pro-life persons were also defined as “extreme right wingers” because we found Roe v. Wade to be a politicized miscarriage of Justice.
    Hatred is not one of the capital sins. Hatred of pollution, crime and sin is a virtue.
    And the taxpayers did build the bridges, schools, hospitals and roads on our public square. The taxpayers do own the municipal buildings and lawn, all public land and waterways, in joint and common tenancy.
    In the words of Carl von Stauffenberg: “Sacred Germany” Sacred Germany, like Caesar, is owned by “their Creator”, God.

  2. Note: Restriction of hate speech has the effect of facilitating more hate speech as was the case in Weimar Germany as it makes victims of the speakers and provides free publicity for their cause..

    in the article “Copenhagen, Speech and Violence” interviewed Flemming Rose, the foreign editor of the Danish daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten who set the record straight:

    "Weimar Germany did have hate-speech laws, and they were applied quite frequently. The assertion that Nazi propaganda played a significant role in mobilizing anti-Jewish sentiment is, of course, irrefutable. But to claim that the Holocaust could have been prevented if only anti-Semitic speech and Nazi propaganda had been banned has little basis in reality. Leading Nazis such as Joseph Goebbels, Theodor Fritsch, and Julius Streicher were all prosecuted for anti-Semitic speech. Streicher served two prison sentences."

    The outcome of silencing hate speech is not what those who advocate for it would expect as Rose continued to explain:

    "Rather than deterring the Nazis and countering anti-Semitism, the many court cases served as effective public-relations machinery, affording Streicher the kind of attention he would never have found in a climate of a free and open debate. In the years from 1923 to 1933, Der Stürmer [Streicher's newspaper] was either confiscated or editors taken to court on no fewer than thirty-six occasions. The more charges Streicher faced, the greater became the admiration of his supporters. The courts became an important platform for Streicher's campaign against the Jews. In the words of a present-day civil-rights campaigner, pre-Hitler Germany had laws very much like the anti-hate laws of today, and they were enforced with some vigor."

  3. Humor is always at the expense of someone. So, it always starts with humor and we are well on our way with censorship here in the USA. Although I can still remember many of the Polish jokes told to me as a kid with a Polish mom, I don’t think any of our current censors are interested in apologizing.

  4. “Humor is always at the expense of someone. So, it always starts with humor and we are well on our way with censorship here in the USA.”
    Humor is human. Ridicule on the other hand is censorship.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: