A MURDEROUS, ANTISEMITIC, terrorist attack, live-streamed, in chilling imitation of the Christchurch Massacres, has shocked and dismayed the German nation. Proof, if any was needed, that strict legal prohibitions against the iconography and language of far-right extremism confers no special protection against the deadly designs of its adherents. No country is more assiduous in banning hate speech and Nazi paraphernalia than the German Republic, and yet, the impulse to murder Jews and Muslims has not been thwarted.
Sadly, that is not the lesson which the Censorious Left has been inclined to draw from this latest tragedy. Almost immediately, sophomoric statements appeared on social-media deploying the horror of the attack against the defenders of free speech. These latter were accused of supporting the right of homicidal Nazis to debate their views in the marketplace of ideas. Perhaps intuiting that this accusation was unlikely to be taken seriously, the Censorious Left opted to advance the (marginally) more moderate suggestion that while the philosophies of the Right may not in-and-of-themselves be objectionable, exposing vulnerable individuals to their malign influence under the rubric of free speech would only end with homicidal Nazis shooting up synagogues and mosques.
But, this line of argument leaves the Left as exposed to censorship as the Right. If granting right-wingers a platform is a bad idea because giving free rein to right-wing ideas will only end in murder, massacre and genocide, then granting platforms to the Left must also be forbidden. If the logical terminus of right-wing thought is Auschwitz, then the logical terminus of left-wing thought must be the Gulag. For every Babi Yar advanced by the anti-Nazis, the anti-Communists can produce a Katyn Forest. Clearly, the only sensible solution, if society is to be kept safe from all forms of ideological extremism, is to stop talking about politics altogether!
Except, of course, the Censorious Left has no intention of allowing itself to be silenced. That much was made clear by the 1,300 academic staff and students of the University of Auckland who signed the Open Letter condemning their own Vice-Chancellorâs defence of free speech on campus. As the anonymous author/s of the letter put it:
âIf these posters [pasted-up by the âradical nationalistâ group calling itself Action Zealandia] constitute âfree speechâ, the same can be said of the actions of individuals who remove those that they encounter.â
Clearly, the person/s who wrote those words is no historian. No one having the slightest acquaintance with modern history would have exposed themselves so completely to the obvious rejoinder that their definition of free speech, if accepted, must render its extinction inevitable. Was it not the very Nazis the Censorious Left purports to condemn who bequeathed the world what is surely the most compelling depiction of intolerance, intellectual aggression and censorship ever recorded on film?
The Säuberung (cleansing by fire) was the work of the German Student Union which, on 10 May 1933, under the watchful eye of the Reichminister for Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, consigned 25,000 books to the flames in a ritual exorcism of âun-German thoughtâ. Into the bonfire illuminating the square in front of the Berlin Opera House, hundreds of radical nationalist students hurled the works of Jewish, Socialist and Communist authors. As the burning books cast their grotesque shadows over the crowd, horrified foreign journalists recalled the words of the nineteenth century German poet, Heinrich Heine: âWhere they burn books, they will too in the end burn people.â
Not that the Censorious Left possesses the slightest grounds for objecting to this infamous historical spectacle. After all, those German students were simply behaving in the way recommended by the author/s of the Open Letter to Vice-Chancellor McCutcheon 86 years later. What else was the Säuberungbut the ritual obliteration of material considered by the staff and students of Germanyâs universities to be offensive and harmful to the wellbeing of the German volk? In confronting this âhate speechâ, they were guilty of nothing more than exercising â exuberantly and dramatically â their right of free speech!
Perhaps if the Censorious Left knew a little bit more about the tactics of the historical movement they so loudly condemn they would be less inclined to imitate it. Those so outraged by the presence in Auckland of right-wing provocateurs Cheryl Southern and Stefan Molyneux that they were willing to frighten the owners of prospective venues for their public lecture into refusing them access, were clearly ignorant of the fate of the classic anti-war film, All Quiet on the Western Front.
At the filmâs Berlin premiere in December 1930, Nazi stormtroopers harangued and jostled the audience as they entered the cinema, released stink-bombs in the auditorium and called-in real bomb threats. Goebbels pledged to do the same in cinemas all over Germany if the film â which the Nazis declared anti-German and offensive to all Great War veterans â was not withdrawn immediately. Terrified cinema-owners, fearful that people and property would be harmed, mostly succumbed to the âthugâs vetoâ. All Quiet on the Western Front was not scheduled again for general release in Germany until after World War II.
This is how Nazis exercise their freedom of speech.
Perhaps the Censorious Left should heed the advice given by the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche:
âHe who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.â
You just want to go to war with everyone don’t you.
As I was saying what do we need to do to save the cancerous-left from itself? In Greek mythology they would be the hero who roles the bolder up the hill and when they get to the top the bolder rolls down and they start over an infinite number of times.
So fascism in economics is when the government is forced to sustain private capital. Y’know private capital left to themselves is falling apart correct? At least in 2008 it did. The government is called in when beneficiaries need bashing, victims of student visa scams need to be hurried out of the country, people need to get laid off, and unions need to be marginalized. That’s what happened in 1929 and that’s what happened 40 years ago when the strong men could emerge and have an audience ect.
The fascists solution is to bring in the government to support private capitalists enterprises. It is sometimes referred to as the dreaded Private-Public-Partnership which is the merging of the government and capital into fascism. I know it, Iv always known it. That is why I am a free-speech absolutest. So the government is coming in and doing for private capital what it can not do for itself. The government is rearranging foreign trade so domestic capitalists have an easier time selling abroad and blocking imports from selling to our own say by blocking oil and gas exploration or foreign investors and deregulates. That’s a clever way of saying the regulations that are costly to capitalists are removed and the regulations the help capitalists are enhanced. That’s what fascist economics is all about. It’s all about saving capitalism.
So we can believe in our family, friends and neighbours. But we can not believe in ideology, a political party or an iconic figure. Being independent of these strong men is a double edged sword. Having an independent-foreign-policy would mean that we New Zealanders build and manufacture our own military equipment and uniforms and so on so we are not relent on the economic fortunes from abroad. Not for the defence of private capital but for the defence of the people. That is truly anti-fascist.
We should not forget that the New Zealand state and its Prime Minister are at the forefront of the drive to “protect” us from knowledge of the things that threaten our safety and well-being.
Every synagogue in Germany has access to Brenton Tarrant’s video of the Al Noor massacre and while not every member of a congregation would choose to view it, it has been studied so that Jewish people can know how best to thwart such attacks in future.
Ms Ardern will not allow such a privilege to her own people. She insists that knowledge of how to deal with fascist violence should remain the prerogative of those who have demonstrated total disinterest in combating fascism – her security agencies and police force.
So if we were to submit the demands of her Chief Censor we would be literally opening the door to further atrocities.
Fortunately most New Zealanders have the sense to rely on their own intelligence, do their own research and provide for their own security.
Despite its best efforts, the “censorious left” of the Labour Party will not make us defenceless in the face of fascism.
I have researched and to a limited extent studied the little knob headed ANZAC white subpremacist Christchuch killer …. and the one thing I have not had to do was watch his self thrilling live streamed snuff video.
There is no magic or mystery to the mechanics and actions of his attack, against unarmed defenseless civilians with large caliber, large magazine, semi auto Military styled weapons…. aim then fire is what he did, over and over …. I know that and I did not need to watch his sick video.
Defenses against such attacks starts with removing such mass murder weapons from those who have no justification for their possession…. collectors or gun lovers does not cut the mustard.
Second would be …..Stop spreading over-hyped fears and sterotypes …. like the ones Andrew does lower in this very comments thread … … other examples of Andrew talk would be “Jihadi Brides”, ” Mass waves of refugee boat people” , ” enforced sharia law ” …. or even ” Iwi / Kiwi” …. etc etc.
On sight defenses against heavily armed people approaching religious places of worship…… would rely on entrance designs, surveillance , preparation drills … and all this balanced against the resources and efforts that should or even need to be expended .. against this particular threat probability.
I do agree that the Government and others went into censorship over-reach in some areas though … for instance by blocking access to a site which hosts some anti-war and other videos of mine …
Stefan Molyneux is a idiotic Genocide denier who gives a once sided twist to history … No doubt he would have given us a Don Brash / john Key version of our own history…. perhaps Don Brash is his dad đ
White supremacist racists find comfort in his white washing …. after all, the old false history Stefan retells …. did make us look great.
Anyway, I’d rather see him ridiculed and debunked than banned … But I would not let him use council halls or theaters either … He’s a flashed up version of our own local provocateur …. Kyle Chapman of the New Zealand National Front.
Examples of Stefans bullshitting …..
https://youtu.be/Xd_nVCWPgiA
https://youtu.be/yxqo_NeVd44
Did don brash and his loony mates from hobson pledge tell stifffarm that we are one people or is this groups vile and spew only for Nzders
My argument has always been the same and I have had a few exchange with pro censorship advocates. If you limit free speech how can you know what someone is thinking, let alone have the opportunity to change their mind? Furthermore telling someone they can’t have a certain view is a great way of ensuring they hold it closer and treat it as ever more inviolable.
A âconflation festâ of a post! Perhaps in retrospect the writer is wondering whether the âFree Speech Coalitionâ should have been granted a wide berthâŚ
Many institutionally employed NZ Academics brains were seemingly turned to mush years ago by the effects of neo liberalism being applied to Tertiary Education. The end of civilisation is not going to happen at Auckland Uni.
Re Molyneux and Southernâno problem with them talking in NZ, however ghastly I might regard them. They ironically got caught out by neo liberal edicts and resulting Supercity technicalities over Council venue hiring. But they proved to be a pair of âNanciesâ really by not hiring a truck and portable sound system and speaking regardless. No bottle. Plus they seem to like to monetise every burp those two.
At the end of the day I donât like Nazis, or granting them a ratepayers platform, one little bit. A hundred free speech appeals like Chrisâ wonât sway me on that; particularly when NZs own security agencies paid little heed to NZ white power proponents.
The German live stream showed if anything the prescience of our Prime Minister with the âChristchurch Callâ.
As you might have gleaned from the posting, Tiger, I don’t much care for Nazis myself. That’s why I get so angry when I see people who consider themselves “left-wing” imitating their tactics.
As Orwell so brilliantly concluded his novella “Animal Farm”:
âThe creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.â
“The Säuberung (cleansing by fire) was the work of the German Student Union which, on 10 May 1933, under the watchful eye of the Reichminister for Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, consigned 25,000 books to the flames in a ritual exorcism of âun-German thoughtâ. Into the bonfire illuminating the square in front of the Berlin Opera House, hundreds of radical nationalist students hurled the works of Jewish, Socialist and Communist authors.”
I’ve long known about this episode. I must have been still at primary school, when information about the genocide of the Jews (as it was then known) and events in pre-war Germany became more freely available here.
Coming from a book-loving household, I was baffled that anyone would do such a thing. I don’t know that – at my relatively young age – I quite grasped the significance of it being students who’d done it.
Later on, when I was of student age, I was horrified and disbelieving that students – of all people – would burn books.
Nowadays, in the current environment of the woke left and the cancel culture, I’m still horrified, but much less disbelieving. I can now see how the German students of the 1930s were indoctrinated (or intimidated) into carrying out such a barbarous act.
Comments are closed.