EU aims to criminalise Holocaust denial

[The_Professor]

"...Unless one takes a European perspective, or abstracts (and thus bleeds the issue of emotional power and historical context) the ideas to having the situs of an imagined or idealized state or region, one has no business talking about the matter ... responsibly."

Kinda arrogant to say this, isn't it?

Actually, it is more arrogant to assume an American perspective on European matters. Ergo, understanding a European issue from a European perspective is then only way to effectively debate this issue. Knowledge of the culture, daily life and lifestyles, etc. certainly would help as well.

If this were happening in America, I would be the first to shout out against it. But its not, and all the indignations evident in this thread are "american arrogance" at its worst.

Bull chips.

You can understand the fundamental issues, regardless of whether you live there on not. JS claims to understand American issues all the time. Understanding nuances, though, now THAT is an entirely different matter.

[BT]

JS claims to understand American issues all the time.

As well he should. He lives in America. Across the state line from Dalton. And even though he is a Vols fan, we share a distaste for all things Gator.

[The_Professor]

Heck, I've lived here all my live and I do not understand all of it!

Got that message; time to bow out...

And, you are just jealous of our success! Ha!

GO GATORS! And, after that, Go DAWGS!

[Universe Prince]

Actually, it is more arrogant to assume an American perspective on European matters. Ergo, understanding a European issue from a European perspective is then only way to effectively debate this issue. Knowledge of the culture, daily life and lifestyles, etc. certainly would help as well.

If this were happening in America, I would be the first to shout out against it. But its not, and all the indignations evident in this thread are "american arrogance" at its worst.

Bullshit. If we were talking about the experience of the Holocaust or the experience of being subjected to denials of the Holocaust, you and Domer might have a point. But we're not, and you don't. There is nothing arrogant about discussing ideas from outside the direct experience of others. (If there is, then all of us here at the Saloon are as arrogant as can be.) I don't believe I've seen anyone suggest that there is anything invalid about the experience of those who want Holocaust denial illegal. The problem with the law is not the experience of those who want it. The problem with the law is the idea that the law represents. And there is nothing about that idea that excludes anyone non-European from having a legitimate opinion about it.

I'm sure there are good arguments to be made for the law (not saying I'd agree with them, but disagreement does not equal bad). Yes, I may have an American perspective, and how can I not since I am an American born and reared in America, but that doesn't mean the objection to the law is not valid. The argument that Americans cannot have an opinion about the law without being guilty of "American arrogance", however, is not a valid argument, and it only serves as a device to try to silence those whose opinion on the matter you don't like.

[domer]

No, Prince, they (the Europeans) are simply considering how to set the rules for THEIR lives (and THEIR society) in light of a horrible history that happened on THEIR continent. You have no business telling them how to manage their affairs on such an issue. Period.

[sirs]

No, Prince, they (the Europeans) are simply considering how to set the rules for THEIR lives (and THEIR society) in light of a horrible history that happened on THEIR continent. You have no business telling them how to manage their affairs on such an issue. Period.

Funny how in Domer's mind criticising a blatantly bad idea is somehow analogus to "telling them" how they're to run themselves & their society.  So basically, Domer is "telling us" how we're to run our lives and government everytime he critiques anyone else.     

[Plane]

No, Prince, they (the Europeans) are simply considering how to set the rules for THEIR lives (and THEIR society) in light of a horrible history that happened on THEIR continent. You have no business telling them how to manage their affairs on such an issue. Period.

Doesn't this depend on how we do it?

Our right to use force is absent and our right to use leverage is limited , but why should our right to kibitz have a limit?

What our American Experience has taught us is available to them to evaluate , accept or reject , should they be better off with their provincialism protected?

[Universe Prince]

No, Domer, you're not paying attention. I did not criticize them for deciding on their own laws. I criticized a single law and the idea that the law represents. I am not telling them how to do anything. I am expressing disagreement with one of their decisions, and I gave my reason for that disagreement. There is nothing unreasonable about that. Your insistence that Americans cannot dare to express disagreement with the law because Americans are not European is not only unreasonable, it's nonsense.

[Plane]

No, Domer, you're not paying attention. I did not criticize them for deciding on their own laws. I criticized a single law and the idea that the law represents. I am not telling them how to do anything. I am expressing disagreement with one of their decisions, and I gave my reason for that disagreement. There is nothing unreasonable about that. Your insistence that Americans cannot dare to express disagreement with the law because Americans are not European is not only unreasonable, it's nonsense.

Does this mean that ,reciprocally ,Europeans actually have a right to express an opinion on American law and custom?

[Universe Prince]

Does this mean that ,reciprocally ,Europeans actually have a right to express an opinion on American law and custom?

I don't see why they would not. Do you?

[Plane]

Does this mean that ,reciprocally ,Europeans actually have a right to express an opinion on American law and custom?

I don't see why they would not. Do you?

Oh horror!

That European opinions can run rampant  in the USA without being tempered by actually having the American experience.

It is hard to imagine the extent of harm potential in this.

[_JS]

My point gentlemen, was not that you cannot have a valid opinion because of course you can. In fact, the world is a better place because various nations learn from one another's experiences, procedures, and ideas.

My point was not that anyone here could not make valid assertions about the European Unions new law (well, it is more of a proclamation of a framework from which the EU states must build a law).

What I was advising was that one should consider where the EU is coming from in determining this law. I'm sure that Domer and any other legal experts we have around can tell you that law is anything but black and white (most of the time). There are many cultural and societal elements to the legal system in any nation. These stem from collective histories and national events that affect the population at large and thus the legislatures. Laws are also affected by the political system involved.

My point was that many of you are arguing from one very manichaen viewpoint: freedom of speech - end of.

[_JS]

To think otherwise is sheer folly. The French, by 1941, were a shell of a force, the Brits were literally backed up against a wall, the Aussies were few in number and on and on. Js, your statements are inaccurate.

Lanya began explaining it to you.

The French, the Brits, the Aussies...seems like you're leaving someone out...

I'm not saying we didn't do a hell of a job, especially in the Pacific. Yet, in Europe we were not the country that really stopped the German Army. We were not the front that German soldiers feared to fight on. Our casualties were low and we like to think it was because we fought with better tactics and an improved western style. But it also helped that we never really fought in the major land campaigns of Europe until the war was nearly won.

That doesn't mean that we didn't do a great job and that Eisenhower wasn't a great general. I'm just saying that the High School version of American History is a little skewed (as it likely is in quite a few countries).

And yeah, Dalton really is the carpet crapital of the world. Though I live a little ways to the North West today. Are the Gators still paying their players?

[Universe Prince]

My point gentlemen, was not that you cannot have a valid opinion because of course you can.

I know that was not your point. It appears to have been, however,  Domer's and Blase's point.

My point was that many of you are arguing from one very manichaen viewpoint: freedom of speech - end of.

I think by manichean you mean dualistic, black-and-white. I don't agree. Saying that freedom of speech is an important right worthy of protection does not mean I see this as a simplistic good vs. evil. I'm not arguing there should never be any laws about speech. I'm merely arguing that this law against Holocaust denial is, imo, wrong.

[Lanya]

<<I'm merely arguing that this law against Holocaust denial is, imo, wrong.>>

As great a wrong as was the Holocaust?