Is/Should being a Nazi in the U.S. be illegal?

[Kuciwalker]

Uber, *us*?

Ever since you became our first SMC, I knew you were a fascist warmonger

Nazism shouldn't be banned, but commiting illegal acts in its name SHOULD.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by JCG
Still, I guess some people think that the freedom to advocate racial superiority and hatred must be protected too....

Your rolleyes have convinced me. I propose that we outlaw any and all opinions that JCG finds distasteful.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
No. What do you think this is? Somesort of repressive regime like Germany or France?

We are just fair. Nazi-Parties (but also other extreme parties) who are openly against our constitution can be declared illegal. It isn´t enough to be extreme right or left.

Means - if they want to abolish our system, they shouldn´t wonder about the reaction.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by Fez


Typical. You got anything useful to add to this?

relax..just having a giggle..

[August Borms]

Originally posted by alva

Yes, Nazism should be banned.

Banning it doesn't make it go away..

It's not about making it go away, it's about removing any potential threats to the state. Not doing anything will allow them to get organised, better funded and setup paramilitary organisations, which, IMO, doesn't seem like a smart thing to do...

[Dr Strangelove]

True Nazism is all about hate and racism.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by August Borms


It's not about making it go away, it's about removing any potential threats to the state. Not doing anything will allow them to get organised, better funded and setup paramilitary organisations, which, IMO, doesn't seem like a smart thing to do...

if you allow them to exist they won't go so far underground. you will be able to keep tabs on them more easily.

if you make them illegal, the die-hards would start underground orginizations, which are far more dangerous.

[JohnT]

"Nazism shouldn't be banned, but commiting illegal acts in its name SHOULD."

Anybody else find this unintentionally funny as well as slightly confusing?

Are you saying that Nazis should have harsher jail sentences for committing the same crimes that non-Nazis commit? Or are you adding an additional charge, the crime of committing crimes in the name of Nazism, on top of the already illegal acts?

In regards to banning Nazism: "It's not about making it go away, it's about removing any potential threats to the state."

One would be hard-pressed to find a more clear and succinct statement of difference between European and American attitudes towards statist authority. Not even our Democrats and other Yank Leftists would say this.

[Ramo]

Freedom of speech means the right to say things we disagree with or it means nothing at all, and all that shtick.

[BeBMan]

Yeah, but if a party openly advocates violence against others in its official doctrine, I think this party should be toast. The problem is that those people/parties use granted rights to deny the rights of others.

[Ramo]

One would be hard-pressed to find a more clear and succinct statement of difference between European and American attitudes towards statist authority. Not even our Democrats and other Yank Leftists would say this.

The American right is usually more friendly towards statism in matters such as this (personal freedoms) than the American left. Look at Ashcroft, etc.

Yeah, but if a party openly advocates violence against others in its official doctrine, I think this party should be toast. The problem is that those people/parties use granted rights to deny the rights of others.

Why? Almost every political party supports a police and prison system (i.e. a mechanism for violence against others). Does that mean almost every political party should be toast? Further, are you saying that every somewhat authoritarian party (i.e. one that denies the rights of others) should be toast?

[Berzerker]

We are just fair. Nazi-Parties (but also other extreme parties) who are openly against our constitution can be declared illegal.

That would include the Democrats and Republicans.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Ramo
Why? Almost every political party supports a police and prison system (i.e. a mechanism for violence against others). Does that mean every political party should be toast?

But this reflects a certain consensus in society. Part of that consensus is that (most) people want certain rights, but they also agree to certain reactions in case of violations against those rights. That is not only a party thing.

Also, the system of law is not controlled by certain parties. So if a party says "murderers should be imprisoned" you still have a fair trial in each individual case, where guilt has to be proven, independantly from political parties.

That is not the same as demanding and practising violence outside any existing law against others.

Further, are you saying that every somewhat authoritarian party (i.e. one that denies the rights of others) should be toast?

No. My first post here said that it is done only in exceptional cases (to be more specific just once in Germany after WWII) because it is extremely difficult according to our law. And it is that difficult because we are aware that it is always somehow problematic to limit rights (not to mention the practical problems which UberKruX metioned above).

There is no automatism to declare all authoritarian parties illegal. But it is an option, if the particular party becomes a serious thread to the current consensus of the society. This derives from our special historic experience (esp. the end of the Weimar republic), and this is what I support.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Wittlich
Should it be illegal to collect your own cache of assault weapons? Most definately.

guns dont kill people.... people kill people, and especially nazi people.... but normal people like me should be allowed to cache all teh assault weapons we want, damn it!

[Ted Striker]

Yes, it SHOULD