Paradox of protest?

[Pure]

Reminds me of the case of the movie, "Not a Love Story", which was an attack on pornographic films and how they were made.

Because of the film making scenes used to make the point, it was declared pornographic.

Case in Germany Puts An Old Taboo to the Test

By Craig Whitlock

Washington Post Foreign Service

Wednesday, October 11, 2006; Page A13

BERLIN -- Juergen Kamm, the owner of a small German mail-order business, makes a modest living fighting neo-Nazis. His firm sells sloganeering T-shirts, music albums and books as part of a campaign to rid the country of extremists. "Smash Fascism!" one hot-selling button urges.

Last week, however, a court in the city of Stuttgart ruled that under German law Kamm might as well be a Nazi himself. His crime? Selling items bearing swastikas, the Nazi symbol that has been forbidden here since the end of World War II.


Never mind that Kamm's company, Nix Gut, loosely translated as "No Good," displayed the swastika only inside a crossed-out circle or as part of other designs intended to impugn Nazis and their ilk. A panel of judges agreed with state prosecutors in Stuttgart that any reproduction of the symbol, no matter the context, risked making it socially acceptable again in Germany.

"The danger of familiarization is ever present," said presiding Judge Wolfgang Kuellmer. "In particular, this mass-market business risked undermining its taboo status."

The decision, issued Friday, has been greeted with a chorus of boos. Critics ripped the authorities in Stuttgart for picking on Kamm at a time when neo-Nazis have staged a resurgence in Germany.

Last month, a political party affiliated with neo-Nazi groups won 7.3 percent of the vote in the northern state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, making it the third state in Germany where such parties have seats in the legislature. In May, the federal government reported that the number of violent attacks committed by neo-Nazis, skinheads and other right-wing extremists increased by 24 percent last year.

In Berlin, leading politicians have promised to pass a new law if the Nix Gut decision is upheld on appeal. If the ruling isn't overturned, "then something is wrong with the law," Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries said last week.

The case has also spurred a minor wave of civil disobedience in protest. The Greens, a party that embraces nonviolence, draped a banner over its headquarters in Berlin showing a swastika with a slash through it -- mimicking one of Nix Gut's products -- and dared the local prosecutor to file charges. He declined.

Claudia Roth, the Greens party leader, went a step further and turned herself in to prosecutors in Stuttgart, confessing that she had worn anti-Nazi buttons containing the swastika in the southern German city. Prosecutors there recently agreed to press charges, Roth said, after her immunity as a federal lawmaker was waived.

"This is an incredible mistake," Roth said in an interview, referring to the Nix Gut case. "We have problems in Germany with the extreme right and anti-Semitism. It's a terrible signal, not only to young people, but also to older people who fought against the Nazis. Are we criminalizing them?"

Since the end of the Third Reich, it has been illegal in Germany to display the swastika, give Hitler salutes or embrace other symbols of the Nazi era. The maximum penalty in most cases is three years in prison.

There are numerous exceptions, which grant special license to artists, educators and filmmakers. Past court opinions, including a Supreme Court ruling from the 1970s, carved out exemptions for public display of the swastika as long as the intent was to protest what it stood for.

During the soccer World Cup this past summer, for instance, match organizers hung banners in stadiums with crossed-out swastikas and urged fans to boycott neo-Nazi groups. The banners aroused no controversy and no one was prosecuted.

Such precedents have given little solace so far to Kamm, the 32-year-old owner of Nix Gut. He has been fined the equivalent of about $4,500. Worse for him, the judges ordered the seizure of 16,000 pieces of swastika-bearing merchandise as well as thousands of mail-order catalogues.

"Not only can our customers clearly and without a doubt tell that our material is anti-Nazi, but any other person -- any normal citizen -- could immediately tell as well," Kamm said in a telephone interview. "If the swastika's being put into a trash can, everyone can see we are saying swastikas and Nazi ideology are for the garbage."

For now, Kamm's 15-employee firm continues to sell its product line, swastikas included, while the case is on appeal. "We feel so strongly that we have the law on our side," he said.

Special correspondent Shannon Smiley contributed to this report.

 

[cantdog]

Asinine law. Changes nothing.

Like AOL cleaning up its in house usenet so you couldn't write "breast" and "cunt" and so on. The people in the cancer support group had to talk about "gazonga cancer" and "ta-ta self examination."

 

[Liar]

Huh. I mentioned this case earlier, but was convinced it would be immediately dismissed once in court. So guy's getting slammed on a badly thought through technicality. Well hooray for paragraph masturbation.

 

[CharleyH]

Reminds me of the case of the movie, "Not a Love Story", which was an attack on pornographic films and how they were made.

Because of the film making scenes used to make the point, it was declared pornographic.

Case in Germany Puts An Old Taboo to the Test

By Craig Whitlock

Washington Post Foreign Service

Wednesday, October 11, 2006; Page A13

BERLIN -- Juergen Kamm, the owner of a small German mail-order business, makes a modest living fighting neo-Nazis. His firm sells sloganeering T-shirts, music albums and books as part of a campaign to rid the country of extremists. "Smash Fascism!" one hot-selling button urges.

Last week, however, a court in the city of Stuttgart ruled that under German law Kamm might as well be a Nazi himself. His crime? Selling items bearing swastikas, the Nazi symbol that has been forbidden here since the end of World War II.


Never mind that Kamm's company, Nix Gut, loosely translated as "No Good," displayed the swastika only inside a crossed-out circle or as part of other designs intended to impugn Nazis and their ilk. A panel of judges agreed with state prosecutors in Stuttgart that any reproduction of the symbol, no matter the context, risked making it socially acceptable again in Germany.

"The danger of familiarization is ever present," said presiding Judge Wolfgang Kuellmer. "In particular, this mass-market business risked undermining its taboo status."

The decision, issued Friday, has been greeted with a chorus of boos. Critics ripped the authorities in Stuttgart for picking on Kamm at a time when neo-Nazis have staged a resurgence in Germany.

Last month, a political party affiliated with neo-Nazi groups won 7.3 percent of the vote in the northern state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, making it the third state in Germany where such parties have seats in the legislature. In May, the federal government reported that the number of violent attacks committed by neo-Nazis, skinheads and other right-wing extremists increased by 24 percent last year.

In Berlin, leading politicians have promised to pass a new law if the Nix Gut decision is upheld on appeal. If the ruling isn't overturned, "then something is wrong with the law," Justice Minister Brigitte Zypries said last week.

The case has also spurred a minor wave of civil disobedience in protest. The Greens, a party that embraces nonviolence, draped a banner over its headquarters in Berlin showing a swastika with a slash through it -- mimicking one of Nix Gut's products -- and dared the local prosecutor to file charges. He declined.

Claudia Roth, the Greens party leader, went a step further and turned herself in to prosecutors in Stuttgart, confessing that she had worn anti-Nazi buttons containing the swastika in the southern German city. Prosecutors there recently agreed to press charges, Roth said, after her immunity as a federal lawmaker was waived.

"This is an incredible mistake," Roth said in an interview, referring to the Nix Gut case. "We have problems in Germany with the extreme right and anti-Semitism. It's a terrible signal, not only to young people, but also to older people who fought against the Nazis. Are we criminalizing them?"

Since the end of the Third Reich, it has been illegal in Germany to display the swastika, give Hitler salutes or embrace other symbols of the Nazi era. The maximum penalty in most cases is three years in prison.

There are numerous exceptions, which grant special license to artists, educators and filmmakers. Past court opinions, including a Supreme Court ruling from the 1970s, carved out exemptions for public display of the swastika as long as the intent was to protest what it stood for.

During the soccer World Cup this past summer, for instance, match organizers hung banners in stadiums with crossed-out swastikas and urged fans to boycott neo-Nazi groups. The banners aroused no controversy and no one was prosecuted.

Such precedents have given little solace so far to Kamm, the 32-year-old owner of Nix Gut. He has been fined the equivalent of about $4,500. Worse for him, the judges ordered the seizure of 16,000 pieces of swastika-bearing merchandise as well as thousands of mail-order catalogues.

"Not only can our customers clearly and without a doubt tell that our material is anti-Nazi, but any other person -- any normal citizen -- could immediately tell as well," Kamm said in a telephone interview. "If the swastika's being put into a trash can, everyone can see we are saying swastikas and Nazi ideology are for the garbage."

For now, Kamm's 15-employee firm continues to sell its product line, swastikas included, while the case is on appeal. "We feel so strongly that we have the law on our side," he said.

Special correspondent Shannon Smiley contributed to this report.

"Not a Love Story" (Klein. 1981) was actually interesting. Shall we discuss it? As for the 'swastika'? It meant something long before the 1930's Germany in my recollection. In my recollection before that time? It actually meant something good. My how we are symbol bound beings even when we say we are not. Just a thought.

 

[gauchecritic]

My how we are symbol bound beings even when we say we are not.

If we didn't have symbols how would we ever cross the road?

(or did you mean 'symbolically bound' which would have been supremely witty even by my standards)

(crossing the road is serious too, needing symbols for estimation of speeds and telling ourselves the 'story' of crossing the road before we attempt it. This is a very intricate subject and I've been drinking so I'll stop

 

[Pure]

hi charley,

it's been eons since i've seen the film, but i do remember it as a feminist attempt to expose porn film making as hardly 'sexy' and as 'objectifying.' the actors also aren't in the throes of passion, since the director has to say, "take it again! pussy more toward the camera. cock further in your mouth."

the males, as you know, have to be 'fluffed', which indicates that the body mind knows that what's happening is not sexy.

BUT I suppose any drama or movie has this problem, e.g. in its love scenes "take it again from the top; grab her breast this time, but a little less tongue down her throat." Similarly the 'angry' scenes are not really angry. And most films objectify the hell out of women.

the paradox, however, is how is the feminist film maker going to demonstrate her point? simply tell people that porn film making is nasty? or show the making?--- there's the further wrinkle that some porn films do indeed involve making a film (film within a film).

i once went to a lecture on child porn, given by the FBI. the agent brought some examples from the FBIs giant stash. so everyone in the audience got to see it and say, "how awful."

i find it amusing: this is the old 'use' versus 'mention' problem. you tell a child not to say (use) --'fuck' to his teachers. so of course you must *mention* the word. a few children have pointed out that when mom says, "don't say 'fuck' " she is (in their view) using the term. actually she is mentioning it, but the impression is rather similar.

i suppose their is some Freudian or Derridean point here, but it's too early in the morning for that.

 

[oggbashan]

... As for the 'swastika'? It meant something long before the 1930's Germany in my recollection. In my recollection before that time? It actually meant something good. My how we are symbol bound beings even when we say we are not. Just a thought.

The swastika was an Eastern good-luck symbol. Rudyard Kipling used it on the covers of some of his books up until the 1930s when it became too associated with the Nazi Party.

Some say that the Nazi Party used a reversed version of the swastika, but forms with the legs going in either direction were used long before the 20th century.

The Nazi Party adopted many forms of Germanic 'culture' to their own purposes. German student songs were used by them as Nazi Party songs sometimes without changing the words. Brass Band (oom-pah) music, traditionally Bavarian, still has overtones of far-right politics in Germany, unlike Brass Bands in the UK which are sometimes associated with trades unions, miners, and Socialism/ Old Labour.

Og

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Letter of the law versus common sense.

You really have to wonder about prosecuters and judges who see such obviously going to be high profile cases as a good idea. People who believe that bringing down someone widely beloved for doing a noble thing because a strict interpretation of the letter of the law forbids it are sure to risk much of their personal reputation for anal bullshit. One wonders if they have a personal axe to grind or if they are a member of the opposing group in this case.

My belief is that they are the petty bullies. Those who are not strong or rich enough to ruin lives or crush heads and so content themselves with making everybody's lives just that little bit worse because the position of power, the infliction of narrow-minded steadfastness to regulations before sense, gives them a chubby.