
Nazi Propaganda: Out of the Cage - smacktoward
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2015/06/12/nazi-propaganda-moeller-forbidden-films/
======
jfaucett
So the real question in the article boils down to a moral dilema: Should a
government ban ideologies which it considers could lead to detrimental
outcomes for society, when said ideologies do not directly cause physical
damage on anyone or thing?

I think the critical part of that question is how you define goverment.

If you believe governments are ligitimate non-corrupt institutions that are
representative of the people and have the citizens - and all the citizens -
best interests at heart, then you will likely think banning "bad" ideologies
is a good idea. If your thoughts towards government move in more negative
directions i.e. you cannot trust the government's moral judgements of right
and wrong - you'll likely be against the general case of banning ideas.

Historically speaking governments seem to do very poorly at separating good
ideologies from bad ones - i.e. Nazis entartete Kunst, various banned books
such as Animal Farm in the USSR. A scroll down the list of banned books
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_govern...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_banned_by_governments))
reveals this fact.

I'm sure there are other interesting pros/cons to this question, anyone else
care to give a try?

~~~
GunboatDiplomat
I can never understand the urge to ban books, ideas, political ideologies, and
similar. It strikes me as beyond bizarre. Even if you trust your government to
be good and efficient as possible, how could you possibly feel that it's ok
for someone else to decide what you can read, what you can say, what you can
believe, and what you can espouse?

I think the people who argue for that are either in power, believe that their
ideology is beyond reproach, or have not thought through the implications of
it.

~~~
frozenport
Is it okay to ban a book which contains the written and complete text to
assemble an atomic bomb?

~~~
elorant
Why? I can’t build an atomic bomb since I don’t have the resources and the guy
who has the resources probably doesn’t need a manual in the first place.

~~~
detaro
While it is possible to design a bomb without access to knowledge the atomic
powers keep secret[1], if you get it wrong it's a really costly mistake to
make, both in materials and time. Documentation for a tested design seems very
valuable.

[1] the US military had a pair of physics PhDs try to design a bomb sometime
in the 60s, and apparently they succeeded, but that is only one data point.
Not sure if there is any public knowledge about other states' nuke programs.

------
lossolo
They reprinted "Mein Kampf" (book by Adolf Hitler) lately in Germany. 50k
books sold in matter of days...

~~~
67726e
Isn't the reprint an annotated version meant for analysis? That isn't to say a
skin head can't pick it up and read it, but it's more than just a reprint.

~~~
jevinskie
You say that as if it is a bad thing that neo-Nazis can freely read books. I
would be much more upset about, say, the United States banning certain people
from reading certain books than allowing undesirable people to read
undesirable books. German citizens already lost that freedom.

~~~
JamilD
Exactly; is our ideology so fragile that we can't tolerate or allow dissenting
speech?

~~~
bad_user
I have nothing against books and I'm firmly against censorship. I've read
about half of Mein Kampf myself, only because of curiosity.

However, when it comes to extremists, I think you're wrong. You see, this is a
war of attrition they are playing, bringing forth the same arguments,
discussing the same hateful ideas, only packaged differently, over and over
again. And you see, the moderates, the liberals, the ones combating such
ideas, get tired and move on, or are silenced through harassment. There is no
useful dialog one can have with a far right supporter. And you think debates
are healthy, yet they wouldn't give you that privilege if they were in power.
The irony being that the liberties we liberals believe in are being used
against us.

~~~
A_COMPUTER
You're not wrong, but you've got a political blind spot if you don't think
there are people on the left that do the same thing re. repackaging and
resubmitting ideas, or if you don't see the contingent of the left that is
against free speech.

~~~
xzi
There's part of the Right which is against free speech too. Has been for
decades. All those campaigns against "immoral" literature, movies, music,
television. The "Watch what you say" Bush Administration. The Republican-led
state governments who prevent their own scientists from talking about climate
change. The right-wing religious colleges which police not only what is said
and done on campus, but also heavily regulate off-campus behavior as well.
Even the heavy censorship and downvoting in online right wing communities and
subreddits. Why these groups get a free pass from many people who yell at the
left about free speech, I'll never understand.

Maybe the response will be something along the lines of "The Right is so big
and covers so many people you can't blame all of them." But you could say the
same about the Left. Covers many, many ideologies and sub-ideologies.

~~~
A_COMPUTER
Generally nobody has to be reminded that many on the right aren't fans of free
speech. But people have to be constantly reminded that there are people on the
left that aren't fans of free speech.

