Poll: Would you ban the Nazi Flag?

[ChristineM]

I voted other
The swastika is an ancient christian symbol that was purloined by the nazi party. Nany churches are adorned with the swastika. I dont think banning it is a good idea.

 

[SomeRandom]

It's a very simple poll question for you to vote on and debate. Do you believe that the Swastika, the flag of the NSDAP or "Nazi" Party should be banned in the United States (or your own country). The vote is private, you can change your votes if you decide to later and the poll will close after 14 days/two weeks. What do you think on the subject?

Edit: Here is a link to a discussion and poll on banning Communist symbols from 2016. (16 out of 18 votes were against such a ban.)

I’m in two minds about this.
On the one hand I think that freedom of speech is a core human right everyone should have. Also a Nazi flag lets me know who to avoid quite easily lol

On the other. A common tactic of fascists, especially these days, is to hide behind the ideal of free speech, which essentially enables them to radicalise young kids.

So which is better?
I don’t think banning the Nazi flag will accomplish much, because in these times, extremist groups tend to hide behind all sorts of “dog whistles” and double speak to allow for plausible deniability. Allowing themselves to blend in with the “normies.” Who they can radicalise.
Also as has been pointed out already, they’ll just rebrand

We really need to arm zoomers with all sorts of background information about rhetoric, it’s usages, it’s techniques and what a person can infer from it.
I doubt that will happen, just what I’ve observed as a nerd spending too much time online

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Fascist and Nazi symbols are banned in many countries, in others they are simply not shown because of the peer pressure that they engender.
At the very least they should be discouraged.

 

[Yerda]

I don't know. Maybe.

I do like the idea of being able to identify the scum who would fly it, but I'd rather not have the symbol for mass murder of Jews being flown in public. And that's what it is. It's a symbol that says "I stand for the genocide of the Jewish people".

"Also, lets murder the queers, blacks, socialists, gypsies, disabled etc"

 

[epronovost]

It's a very simple poll question for you to vote on and debate. Do you believe that the Swastika, the flag of the NSDAP or "Nazi" Party should be banned in the United States (or your own country). The vote is private, you can change your votes if you decide to later and the poll will close after 14 days/two weeks. What do you think on the subject?

Edit: Here is a link to a discussion and poll on banning Communist symbols from 2016. (16 out of 18 votes were against such a ban.)

In mine, Canada, nazi and neo-nazi groups are already banned. Very few, neo-fascist groups openly carry symbols of the third reich to avoid being recognized as such. A varnish of deniability is required for them to operate.

In a general fashion, if flying the nazi flag is done by some incredibly stupid and hateful people on a exceedingly rare basis, I don't see much problem with that. If there is a a coalescing movement of neo-nazi or a uptick in hate crimes, it would be time to ban the flag if only to prevent mainstreaming of that ideology or the ability for them to organize. You want your nazi lonely; thinking they are the only ones in the region and afraid of being rejected or imprisoned if they reveal their allegiance. Make no mistake, nazi are dangerous hateful people. Give them a smidge of power and confidence and they will cause harm. I don't like this new trend of people loosing all sense of value and proper governance via a social contract that has spread where basically banning any symbol, speech or behavior is completely taboo and forbidden. It completely ignores the paradox of tolerance, equivocate benign reformist political movements with murderous ideology that if espoused would lead to genocide and war and destroy the very basis of social contracts in the first place. A paranoiac fear of being censored should lead to anything goes neither should a paranoiac fear of being arrested lead to having no criminal laws.

 

[Rival]

Why in God's Name should this disgusting flag ever be flown on British soil when we fought so hard to ensure that never be the case?

 

[Laika]

Why in God's Name should this disgusting flag ever be flown on British soil when we fought so hard to ensure that never be the case?

would you feel the same way about the french tricolour given the amount of time we've been at war with "those dam frogs"? There might be some very sharp croissant, baguettes and other baked goods I could throw at you.

 

[Rival]

would you feel the same way about the french tricolour given the amount of time we've been at war with "those dam frogs"? There might be some very sharp croissant, baguettes and other baked goods I could throw at you.

No, lol.

 

[exchemist]

Fascist and Nazi symbols are banned in many countries, in others they are simply not shown because of the peer pressure that they engender.
At the very least they should be discouraged.

I just don't think it is worth the trouble and the risk of it being counterproductive.

It's too easy to pass a law banning something - everyone can feel virtuous. But then some poor sods (the police) have to enforce the bloody thing. And, pound to a penny, once it is banned, some bunch of obstreperous gits will come out of the woodwork to test the system, creating "free speech martyrs" and all that carry on, wasting the time of the courts and the police.

In my view the time to ban these things is when there is a problem serious enough to ban the organisations wanting to fly it - and that means real, hard enforcement by the anti-terrorism agencies.

 

[George-ananda]

I voted 'No'.

I'll err on the side of free speech if I err at all.

 

[Twilight Hue]

You do realize that if enough things that are contradictory to the values of the free country are allowed, the country will no longer have the same values, right? Are you not interested in preserving those values?

Sure. That's why laws are there for actual protection. Free expression however ought not to be suppressed.

A person should have the right to display a nazi or rebel flag as much as a person wants to display a pride flag or a Christian flag.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

This seems like a good place to consider Popper's Paradox.
The US is so obsessed with free speech that it's allowed quite a lot of radical extremist groups to ferment, and have more platforms and powers than if they were soundly rejected from public spaces. We come to be numbed to and used to extremist viewpoints, to the extent that we start 'both siding' and 'give them a chance.'

Free speech to the extremes that are values by some Americans has made the US less free, not more. It'd go so far as to say it's at least one of the reasons why we are the last in every civil rights battle we've ever had.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I view the Nazi flag as equivalent to incitement of violence and calling for genocide, similar to flags of ISIS and other terrorist organizations. As such, I believe it shouldn't be allowed to fly publicly. My only concern would be that the swastika shouldn't be banned when it is used in a strictly religious context detached from Nazi associations, but I'm inclined to believe that should be fairly straightforward to figure out based on context on a case-by-case basis.

As for the argument that Nazis would simply rebrand, the solution seems to me quite simple: ban any signs associated with incitement of violence or calls for genocide. It's neither a novel nor an outlandish idea either, since multiple countries already ban Nazi groups and their associated symbols.

I view free speech as a means to an end, not an end by itself. When unrestricted free speech of specific groups threatens the physical safety or freedoms of a specific group or groups, it should be limited accordingly. I suspect recognition of this principle is part of why countries that recognize hate speech such as Germany and Sweden are faring so much better than the U.S. with its (in my opinion) myopic and overly lax idea of "free speech" that is now actually backfiring and helping to allow fascists and theocrats to threaten democracy and freedoms of others.

 

[Debater Slayer]

You do realize that if enough things that are contradictory to the values of the free country are allowed, the country will no longer have the same values, right? Are you not interested in preserving those values?

This.

I believe in preservation of certain values and cultural elements. One of those is that one's freedom ends where another's safety and freedom begins. A flag that signals endorsement of genocide, torture, and other forms of violence on the basis of race, sexual orientation, etc., directly undermines both the freedom and safety of others. I see it as no different from openly supporting criminal activity including murder and terrorism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No. I want to see the fools who would present one, and know who they are.

My thoughts exactly. And lets not forget the Confederate Battle Flag. I am sure that there are others, but those are the two most obvious ones that I can think of.

First Amendment and all that aside, let the fools label themselves.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I voted 'No'.

I'll err on the side of free speech if I err at all.

I suspect it would be much easier to err when the cost of doing so would be paid by others rather than oneself. This, in my opinion, is a crucial point to keep in mind when one decides that symbols of genocide and mass cleansing shouldn't be banned while being outside the groups targeted by said symbols.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Fascist and Nazi symbols are banned in many countries, [...]

Exactly, including some that simply dwarf the U.S. in multiple measures of human rights and quality of life. Overlooking this when arguing that banning such symbols would make the U.S. a worse place seems to me akin to the line of thinking underpinning American exceptionalism. The U.S. is neither special nor exceptional; it exists in the same world where banning such symbols and strongly condemning what they stand for have helped multiple countries flourish after World War II.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I still believe in free speech. I may find some symbols offensive, but I don't think I can demand the "right" not to be offended.

 

[George-ananda]

I suspect it would be much easier to err when the cost of doing so would be paid by others rather than oneself. This, in my opinion, is a crucial point to keep in mind when one decides that symbols of genocide and mass cleansing shouldn't be banned while being outside the groups targeted by said symbols.

I believe in strict law enforcement if they do anything illegal. Showing a symbol does not qualify.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I believe in strict law enforcement if they do anything illegal. Showing a symbol does not qualify.

Would you say the same about showing a symbol in support of al-Qaida or ISIS?