In Austria a historian, David Irving, was sentenced to three years in jail for denying the Holocaust happened. I think this is ludicrous. How can a country claim to value freedom when people are jailed for a personal belief? Especially one that is just a dispute of facts. I do not in any way agree with this man or think that what he represents is good or right in any way. However, he is not even saying that something like the Holocaust is permissible, he is simply denying that it ever happened. It is something like a US citizen denying that slavery ever happened, or that the Japanese internment camps ever existed, or that American Indians were forced onto reservations and sometimes slaughtered for no reason. Anyone denying these facts is either ignorant or in denial -- but they are not jailed for it. Furthermore, one could go as far as to laud any of those acts as good and right and not face jail time (although they may be sued in civil court). That is true freedom of speech/press/expression -- we are allowed to believe what ever we want and we are free to share those beliefs in a peaceful manner. How can you claim to be on the side of justice and freedom when you sentence people to jail for their beliefs, however ridiculous or offensive they may be? In the US, acting on inappropriate beliefs (like the belief that incest is okay, for example) can lead to legal ramifications, but simply holding the belief cannot. That is the only way to ensure that the government cannot force people to have a certain religion or set of personal beliefs. That is how we protect the individual from tyranny. By their actions today Austria has aligned herself more with the principles of her disowned son who was the driving force behind the atrocity in question than with those dedicated to freedom who stood against him and his oppressive movement.
See other accounts at Reuters, ABC, FOX News, CNN
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
yeah, that's really really ridiculous.
“How can a country claim to value freedom when people are jailed for a personal belief? Especially one that is just a dispute of facts.”
I’ll take it one step further (if I may). How can a country that has experienced so much manipulation of academic production for political ends jail a person for something like this?
That said, here is the constitutional provision from the Austrian Constitution (adopted 1867) for free expression:
“Everyone has the right, within the limits of the law, to freely express his opinion by word of mouth and in writing, print, or pictorial representation.”
Denying the holocaust in Austria is akin to yelling “FIRE” in a theatre in the U.S. It is an abuse of one’s freedom to the detriment of society. That, as I understand it, is the case. It has nothing to do with his belief, but with the irresponsible claim made in publications that are potentially influential and credible.
This, though, really does get to the issue of free expression in a liberal society. Do individual “rights” have limits or do they trump social responsibility?
But if you sincerely believe that there is a fire in a theatre then is it wrong to try to tell people? Assuming this man is genuine, which may not be the case but we have to assume, then he really believes that the holocaust didn't happen -- he is not just trying to incite evil. Should the government, any government, be allowed to tell its people that certain things are fact and that questioning their accuracy is a crime? That seems wholly problematic.
Do individual rights have limits? Sure, when they infringe on the rights of others (to put it in the simplest terms). That's why the government has the power to outlaw murder, rape, etc. However, the line gets blurry when a person is genuinely trying to improve society (again, we have to assume that he was even though he clearly was hurting it) and his actions do not directly and actively lead to infringement upon other's rights. This man is not being jailed for advocating violence or oppression, and he certainly isn't being jailed for any aggressive actions. He is being jailed because he believes that the holocaust never happened and is speaking out about what he believes to be the truth covered up by the government. If people can be jailed for that then the government has the power to control what we believe.
Yeah, I think you are right. Good call on that.
Post a Comment