[Plaro]

Imagine you are a director of a school, academic class, discussion club, or simply a forum like this one. You have full decree upon this policy.

The policy making involves an issue such as this: Will it be acceptable withing your institution to source or quote Mein Kampf? That is within a discussion or Essay for example.

[Igor Antunov]

If you're doing a project on hitler then sure, I'd allow it.

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

Yes, allowed, as long as it's relevant who cares?

[Kman]

Its called freedom of speech, ofc they should be allowed to do that.

Banning these books only make them even more dangerous.

If you just allow people to read these books then you take away their aura of danger and thereby their appeal.

[telluro]

So long as it's relevant... Most books pre-dating WWI have passages that read like Mein Kampf anyway.

[Onomautopia]

Definitely. The irony is that those who would ban citations to Mein Kampf have a mindset closer to that of the Nazis than those who wouldn't.

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

Definitely. The irony is that those who would ban citations to Mein Kampf have a mindset closer to that of the Nazis than those who wouldn't.

Uh, no. That's retarded. There is no deathcamp for those that read Mein Kampf and there never will be. In fact it's not even talking about banning Mein Kampf. If it were a Jewish university I'd probably ban it. Does that make me a nazi?

[Onomautopia]

Uh, no. That's retarded. There is no deathcamp for those that read Mein Kampf and there never will be. In fact it's not even talking about banning Mein Kampf. If it were a Jewish university I'd probably ban it. Does that make me a nazi?

No, but it does mean that you are happy to ban books just because you disagree with them - behaviour which is indicative of a closed minded, authoritarian mindset that the Nazis shared.

If freedom of speech only covers popular opinions, it is utterly meaningless.

[Potemkin]

The policy making involves an issue such as this: Will it be acceptable withing your institution to source or quote Mein Kampf? That is within a discussion or Essay for example.

Of course I would permit it. There might be legal problems in Germany, however, where it is still a banned book. However, as telluro has pointed out, most of the 'ideas' in Mein Kampf are just recycled bits and pieces from pre-WWI ultra-conservative thinkers (using the word very loosely). Hitler was hardly the most original thinker who ever lived. Those books are not banned, so why ban Mein Kampf?

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

No, but it does mean that you are happy to ban books just because you disagree with them - behaviour which is indicative of a closed minded, authoritarian mindset that the Nazis shared.

Wow, so everyone that doesn't agree with your loony liberal ideas about free speech is suddenly a Nazi? You say closed-minded and authoritarian as if that's the worst thing that was ever wrought unto the world and as if the Nazis typify the behavior of such a group. It's like saying all liberals are radical vegetarians just because they happen to fall under the same type of ideology. As soon as you want to classify things based on prejudicial and mostly unfounded assumptions as apposed to discussion, thought, logic, or fact, that's when a dialog becomes impossible.

So please explain to me what about those things make an action wrong and why the Nazis are the first and only group to ever do such a thing. And don't just say you're making a like comparison because the discussion is on Nazis, that's clearly not an answer. Comparing any idea or any person to a Nazi contains a conotation that everyone is aware of and would only not be aware of from ignorance or stupidity, and I doubt you're either.

[Kman]

Cheesecake you do not believe in freedom of speech if you do not believe your enemy deserves it also.

The problem with the policies you want is that they are so easy for evil people to pervert and abuse, it might start out working fine banning certain books, but then all of a sudden evil men are sitting on the boards that decides on what should be banned and then all of a sudden good books that criticize valid issues are being banned.

I can give you a good example, Canada established something called human rights councils 100 years ago aprox, they worked as de facto courts that did not have to follow the same judicial procedures that normal canadian courts do.

Im sure in the start these courts some good things but over the years they became corrupted and perverted to the point that in the year 2005 they where fining a christian preacher 20.000$ for writing a letter to a local newspaper explaining why he thought homosexuality was a sin (he also received a life time ban on expressing his opinions in public), these so called ''Human rights councils'' also started persecuting and fining people that criticized Islam.

This is a video of a guy named Ezra Levant who was hauled to the HRW because he published the Muhammed cartoons.
I have seen most of the youtube videos with Ezra Levant and they give a good picture about how banning certain opinions/books can lead to terrible things in the long run.

this is a funny video about him also

[telluro]

However, as telluro has pointed out, most of the 'ideas' in Mein Kampf are just recycled bits and pieces from pre-WWI ultra-conservative thinkers (using the word very loosely). Hitler was hardly the most original thinker who ever lived. Those books are not banned, so why ban Mein Kampf?

Not necessarily ultra-conservative though.

Of the three big ideas of Mein Kampf:

1. Austria is not a nation; it is an empire made of at least two nations, which should separate; blood makes man, not citizenship;
2. The Jews are a subversive, parasite nation;
3. The German Army was betrayed by the politicians.

the first two were somewhat normal Enlightenment ideas, even for liberals and socialists. The first is merely a continuation of 19th century nationalism.

And the third was quite a popular contemporary idea, I believe.

[Onomautopia]

Wow, so everyone that doesn't agree with your loony liberal ideas about free speech is suddenly a Nazi?

That's a straw man. I merely said that Nazis and others who support the practice of banning expression they disagree with share a similar mindset in regards to opposing viewpoints, not that all such people were Nazis too.

It's like saying all liberals are radical vegetarians just because they happen to fall under the same type of ideology

It's like saying liberals have a mindset similar to that of radical vegatarians, albeit much less extreme.

The comparison to the Nazis was only pointing out the irony in authoritarians censoring authoritarians, it wasn't supposed to be taken so seriously.

[telluro]

Freedom of expression is highly overrated and I do find it a bit ridiculous that it's touted as some highest achievement of Western society. We still mostly get bots repeating the same kind of cliched half-opinions under the pretense of free expression. Now, quality of expression - that's something I'd root for.

[Potemkin]

As Chairman Mao once said, "No knowledge, no right to speak."

[ingliz]

Other - It would depend on the context of its use

[Kman]

Freedom of expression is highly overrated and I do find it a bit ridiculous that it's touted as some highest achievement of Western society. We still mostly get bots repeating the same kind of cliched half-opinions under the pretense of free expression.

Well it has obviously worked pretty well for the US, they have the oldest democracy in the world.

Now, quality of expression - that's something I'd root for.

''Ok from now on I judge your opinions as inferior to mine so you are not allowed to speak or share your opinions''.

That is what that line of thinking leads to.

[telluro]

No, it could lead to the same system, but which emphasises quality rather than freedom as such. The constant emphasis on freedom of expression simply masks a deeper kind of "brainwashing".

Other than that, ALL political opponents of ANY political system will be shut up one way or another. Perhaps portrayed as loony, as conspiracy theorists, traitorous, far right or far left, extremist, etc... All systems, including the democratic system, have their heretics. Some ram a truncheon down your throat, while some discredit you completely and utterly so that even your livelihood is threatened.

[The Immortal Goon]

So long as it's relevant, have at it.

[Lightman]

Oh, Plaro, stop complaining about the deletion of that post. It's against the forum rules, live with it. Besides, the servers are hosted in the UK, where that could possibly (I'm not quite sure how British law works) be seen as a contravention of the law. There was no relevance to the topic of hand in the post to begin with, anyway.