Freedom of speech under attack in Germany? Hardly

In recent times, conservative-leaning commentators in Germany have claimed that open debate is increasingly being stifled. They argue that we're no longer permitted to openly discuss a whole host of taboo subjects, and that freedom of speech is under attack. But that's not true. On the contrary, the rise and electoral success of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party — which promotes economic liberalism and social conservatism, yet also panders to the far-right — means we now have a broad spectrum of opinions represented in public discourse.

The AfD gives a voice to those favoring free markets and traditional societal values, feeding these views into the political process and the media. The party's rise began with its fierce criticism of the euro and political efforts to rescue the currency. Today, it holds seats in Germany's national parliament, the Bundestag, and all 16 of Germany's state-level legislatures. The AfD rejects a ban on old diesel cars, and dismisses talk of global warming as "climate hysteria." No other political party in Germany propagates such views. And while surveys show that such views are shared only by a minority of Germans today, they certainly deserve their place in public discourse. It is thanks to the AfD that this is the case. The party has, therefore, broadened the scope of opinions present in public and political discourse today. Freedom of speech, in short, is thriving.

At the same time, there must be a limit to what we can consider acceptable opinions. Far-right figures in the AfD, after all, have been doing their utmost to normalize right-wing extremist views in recent years. Party co-leader Alexander Gauland, for example, downplayed Germany's Nazi past and the Holocaust as a "speck of bird poop" in German history. Germany’s hate speech rules, known locally as NetzDG and which came into full force Monday, demand that social media giants promptly remove potentially illegal material, some of it within 24 hours of being notified, or face fines of up to €50 million. Enforcement of the rules has reignited debate about their practicality in an age when a tweet, Facebook post or YouTube video can spread virally around the globe within minutes. The law also highlights the problems that policymakers, in Berlin and elsewhere, now face when trying to police what can, and cannot, be posted online, as they try to balance people’s legitimate right to free speech with others’ desire to be protected against harmful material.

“I would consider it a huge coincidence if this didn’t have to do with the new law,” Passmann said of being blocked, adding that during the last couple of months, she has "tweeted things that were significantly more extreme” without being blocked.

Titanic, a German satirical magazine, was similarly barred after parodying anti-Muslim comments on its own Twitter account. At the other end of the political spectrum, Beatrix von Storch, a leading figure in the far-right Alternative for Germany party, was blocked on Twitter and Facebook after posting anti-immigrant messages. Twitter would not comment on either case, but said under certain circumstances, potentially harmful tweets may run against the company’s existing terms and conditions and not be linked to the new German hate speech rules.

 The leader of Thuringia's AfD parliamentary group, Björn Höcke, dismissed Berlin's Holocaust memorial as "a monument of shame," and stoked racist prejudices when he described African asylum-seekers as inherently prone to procreate. AfD lawmaker Markus Frohnmaier, meanwhile, engaged in blatant xenophobic scaremongering when he proclaimed on Twitter that Germans had a duty to face down "lethal knife-wielding migrants.” Statements like these trivialize Germany's dark past and propagate racist sentiments. And they encourage anyone with a latent or firmly held far-right worldview to openly express it. This is a highly dangerous state of affairs and no longer has anything to do with a healthy, democratic exchange of diverse opinions.

    DW

Freedom of speech under attack in Germany? Hardly

In recent times, conservative-leaning commentators in Germany have claimed that open debate is increasingly being stifled. They argue that were no longer permitted to openly discuss a whole host of taboo subjects, and that freedom of speech is under attack. But thats not true. On the contrary, the rise and electoral success of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party which promotes economic liberalism and social conservatism, yet also panders to the far-right means we now have a broad spectrum of opinions represented in public discourse. The AfD gives a voice to those favoring free markets and traditional societal values, feeding these views into the political process and the media. The partys rise began with its fierce criticism of the euro and political efforts to rescue the currency. Today, it holds seats in Germanys national parliament, the Bundestag, and all 16 of Germanys state-level legislatures. The AfD rejects a ban on old diesel cars, and dismisses talk of global warming as climate hysteria. No other political party in Germany propagates such views. And while surveys show that such views are shared only by a minority of Germans today, they certainly deserve their place in public discourse. It is thanks to the AfD that this is the case. The party has, therefore, broadened the scope of opinions present in public and political discourse today. Freedom of speech, in short, is thriving. At the same time, there must be a limit to what we can consider acceptable opinions. Far-right figures in the AfD, after all, have been doing their utmost to normalize right-wing extremist views in recent years. Party co-leader Alexander Gauland, for example, downplayed Germanys Nazi past and the Holocaust as a speck of bird poop in German history. Germanys hate speech rules, known locally as NetzDG and which came into full force Monday, demand that social media giants promptly remove potentially illegal material, some of it within 24 hours of being notified, or face fines of up to 50 million. Enforcement of the rules has reignited debate about their practicality in an age when a tweet, Facebook post or YouTube video can spread virally around the globe within minutes. The law also highlights the problems that policymakers, in Berlin and elsewhere, now face when trying to police what can, and cannot, be posted online, as they try to balance peoples legitimate right to free speech with others desire to be protected against harmful material. I would consider it a huge coincidence if this didnt have to do with the new law, Passmann said of being blocked, adding that during the last couple of months, she has tweeted things that were significantly more extreme without being blocked. Titanic, a German satirical magazine, was similarly barred after parodying anti-Muslim comments on its own Twitter account. At the other end of the political spectrum, Beatrix von Storch, a leading figure in the far-right Alternative for Germany party, was blocked on Twitter and Facebook after posting anti-immigrant messages. Twitter would not comment on either case, but said under certain circumstances, potentially harmful tweets may run against the companys existing terms and conditions and not be linked to the new German hate speech rules. The leader of Thuringias AfD parliamentary group, Bjrn Hcke, dismissed Berlins Holocaust memorial as a monument of shame, and stoked racist prejudices when he described African asylum-seekers as inherently prone to procreate. AfD lawmaker Markus Frohnmaier, meanwhile, engaged in blatant xenophobic scaremongering when he proclaimed on Twitter that Germans had a duty to face down lethal knife-wielding migrants. Statements like these trivialize Germanys dark past and propagate racist sentiments. And they encourage anyone with a latent or firmly held far-right worldview to openly express it. This is a highly dangerous state of affairs and no longer has anything to do with a healthy, democratic exchange of diverse opinions. DW