Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Are Germans a Subset of Themselves?

Cultural Enrichment News

As regular readers know, we’re against “hate speech” laws of any kind. Let citizens speak their minds, limited only by the traditional prohibitions against libel, slander, fraud, and incitement.

But if there are going to be laws forbidding hateful speech, they should apply to everyone, and not just those who insult the Culture Enrichers. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

What’s interesting about the following article is that a recent decision by a German court opens up exactly this possibility: persons of German background may be covered by statutes that up until now were only used to protect Turks, Arabs, Africans, etc.

The article was translated from the German by JLH, who has this to say about it:

Here is an example of how PC interpretation of law — with the help of lawyers and bureaucrats — hog-ties ordinary citizens. There is evidence here that some German are getting tired of being second-class citizens in their own country. It’s also nice to know that English and American jurisprudence isn’t alone in its use of obfuscatory gobbledygook.

And the translation from Politically Incorrect:

Are Germans a subset of themselves?

“Pig-gobblers,” “German sluts” or S**t-Germans” — those are only some of the hate speech terms youths with an immigrant background use to denigrate Germans.

It recalls the pensioner from Munich shortly before Christmas 2007, who was not only brutally beaten, but also called a “S**t-German.” Or an incident that occurred in Berlin in January 2008. A group of youths of Turkish and Arab origin abused passengers at a bus stop as “S**t-Germans” and attacked them physically.

The state’s attorney in Berlin saw no legal way to proceed against the perpetrators for ethnic harassment according to paragraph 130 StGB. The protection of the law extends only to “portions of the population” to which, according to precedent, (ethnic) Germans as a whole do not belong. Therefore, comments hostile to Germans are not legally perceived as ethnic harassment, but, at most, as (simple) insult. On the other hand, a German in this country who harbors hatred for foreigners has to reckon on a stiff penalty for ethnic harassment.

The countrywide voter organization ANGRY CITIZENS wished to remedy this unequal treatment, and submitted a petition to the Bundestag [Parliament], proposing that, in future, hate speech against Germans would also be interpreted according to 130 StGB. Over 11,000 citizens — among them, many PI readers — signed this petition.

The petition was rejected. To be sure, the announcement of the justice ministry which communicated the rejection contained two interesting statements.

Among other things, it says: “Basically, there is nothing against the assumption that Germans can be regarded as part of the population in the sense of 130 StGB.”
- - - - - - - - -
A remarkable statement. since state attorneys, courts and legal scholars still maintain that the Germans in their entirety are not part of the population and therefore not protected by the anti-ethnic-harassment paragraphs.

A few paragraphs later, the statement becomes even clearer. “The petition committee considers the penalties of 130 StGB to be proper and is of the opinion that the regulations offer sufficient possibilities for punishment of corresponding crimes, quite independent of the nationality or origin of the perpetrator or the victim.”

In plain language, this means:

Not just foreign minorities, but also Germans are protected from ethnic harassment under 130 StGB. At least according to the legal interpretation of the justice ministry, which has joined the Bundestag (in this opinion).

ANGRY CITIZENS intends to send the committee’s document to all district attorneys in Germany. Every prosecutor will be informed of the judicial possibilities offered by 130 StGB for prosecution of anti-German hate speech.

Moreover, ANGRY CITIZENS intends to contact leading teachers of criminal law and interpreters of the penal code and advise them of the Justice Ministry’s statement in respect to 130 StGB. If the content of the committee’s statement on 130 StGB finds its way into the relevant legal literature, that would contribute to a new assessment of hate speech against Germans.


For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.

5 comments:

stephengash said...

It would have been more more useful to have allowed Germans to act the same against muslims and the law used to allow muslims to act against Germans.

There wouldn't have been such conflict in the first place.

DP111 said...

stephengash said...It would have been more more useful to have allowed Germans to act the same against muslims and the law used to allow muslims to act against Germans.


What you propose is that Germans start to behave in the way a normal society of would. Unfortunately, Germans like us in Britain, have become too civilised to behave in a normal manner ie excerise the right of self-defence. Then there would be no conflict.

The way we are headed is towards a conflict of the pressure cooker type - it will blow up.

Then there is this

I won't put a cap on immigration vows the Home Secretary
By Tim Shipman
15th July 2009

Home Secretary Alan Johnson last night refused point blank to cap the number of immigrants coming to Britain.

And he said he does not 'lie awake at night' worrying about the population hitting 70million.

Official figures show at the current rate of increase the British population will hit the milestone within 20 years, with a further seven million immigrants placing a burden on public services.

I won't put a cap on immigration vows the Home Secretary

DP111 said...

Following on from I agree with Auster at VFR

Britain is so far gone that only a revolution can save it. Britain needs a million people marching on Parliament. It needs a national strike. It needs blood in the streets. Not the blood of the other side, but the blood of English patriots when they take a stand and refuse to disband when the police tell them to. This website has never before advocated any act of civic lawbreaking. But this is life or death. The pacific nature of the British, their suppressed emotions, their don't-make-a-fuss quality, which was once a key to their greatness, has made them passive tools of a leftist regime that seeks their destruction. That regime must be overthrown and destroyed, and the people who lead it excluded from politics for life.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/013674.html

Robin Shadowes said...

DP111 is probably right. The britons needs to take things in their own hands or their country will be doomed to transform into a theocratic caliphate within 20 years. The worst thing is, that if Britain falls, many other european states will also fall like domino tiles soon after, as UK is not the only country badly affected by muslim asylum-tourism.

Jedilson Bonfim said...

Just to add a little extra information to what DP111 and Robin Shadowes have discussed, this story on the Porkistani immigration superhighway to Britain, though from the über-dhimmi paper The Economist, still includes disturbing facts about the wholesale import of Porkis into the UK:

One reason why shop signs on the streets of Bradford are still written in Urdu, half a century after the first Pakistanis came to Britain, is that population flows between the two countries remain large (see chart). Each year 250,000 Pakistanis come to Britain to visit, work or marry, and some 350,000 British citizens (I guess they mean Porkis loyal to the Umma, and the Umma only, holding British passports) journey in the opposite direction, mainly to "visit family" (quotes not in the original, since The Economist would probably never consider "de-Westernization" trips to Porki as a reason for those "family visits.") Links are reinforced by ingrained marriage customs: six of ten ethnic Pakistanis in Britain pick a spouse from Pakistan (who probably happen to be their first cousins as well, since consanguineous marriages are the norm for over 50% of Porkis and Saudis.)