Comment by hyperman1 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by hyperman1 | Hacker News Reader

The West European bans on holocaust denial must be seen in their historical context.

After WWII, there was a massive backlash against german collaborators. Everyone even slightly suspect of being pro german was at risk of being looted, tortured or killed by their furious neighbours.

Mob rule had to be replaced by lawfull governement, and this required appeasing the mob. Part of it were dishonest trials, a blind eye against some revenges. A very small price to pay was forbidding the denial of the crimes that the Nazis had done.

I am not proud of this part of our history but it was probably necessary.

However, we are a few generations further now and a lot of relevant people are dead now. Maybe the time is ready to review this rule. Discussing this stuf is especially important as we seem to remake some of the errors that led to the war

Agreed, and curious to see you downvoted. It's one of the most ridiculous parts of European law imo.

In Belgium I can write a thesis about whatever lie I want. Our king is dead and an imposter took his place, the Belgium genocide in the Congo never happened, etc, etc..

But If I write that the holocaust never happened I face jail time.

Of course it happened! And anybody who writes a book denying that should be ridiculed, and openly countered (verbally).

We effectively have free speech (... except for this one very specific thing)

In case anyone else was curious, I found this webpage about the limits of free speech in Belgium very helpful, particularly the examples: https://www.unia.be/en/areas-of-action/internet/the-limits-o...

Actually, in most countries who do this, Holocaust Denial only became a crime in the 1980s and later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial

Interesting, I did not know that. I can guarantee you there was a very strong taboo against it when I was a kid.

The holocaust deniers certainly aren't dead. The denial is the one of the early steps of facist subversion and should remain banned. It's time to review the rule when nobody is denying it anymore.

Do you believe that humans in general should not be trusted to read/hear certain things? If yes (I guess), do you believe the censorship cannot be exploited politically by those in power?

Can't you see that censoring an idea will lead people who are simply curious to think that there must be something in it, or else why would they ban it?

Far better that idiocy should be on public display where it can be mocked and destroyed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com