Proposed Regulations on Nazi Propaganda
The foundation of American democracy is the absolute belief in free speech. This is an idea that sets America apart from other countries but recently the uprising of white supremacist groups calls into question whether certain symbols should be regulated. In the recent political protest in Charlottesville, Virginia, Alt-Right supporters used Nazi flags, swastikas, and an infamous chant, of “Blood and Soil” which represents the Nazi belief about ethnic identity and was used to justify the the forced expulsion of non German “people”.(insert footnote?). The protest in Charlottesville resulted in the death of anti-supremacist, at the hands of Alt-Right supporter and known white supremacist with ties to the Aryan Brotherhood, a known white supremacist group. The use of Nazi propaganda, such as slogan and symbols, at political get togethers should be regulated because of the inherent danger they pose. Not only that but nazi propaganda goes against the clauses in the first amendment, namely, clear and present danger, true threat, and slander and libel. Additionally other countries have enacted laws that regulate Nazi propaganda and ideology that it is associated with. Lastly, because many white supremacist gangs use Nazi propaganda, as a way to threaten others and in order recognize fellow supremacists.
The Alternative Right, is an extremely conservative political party, whose very ideologies, is that their “white identity” is being threatened by other races. They also believe that these other races are sabotaging the white race and their very civilization. The Alt-Rights fundamental principle is that of “white -ethnonationalism” thats defined by the intentions to have one nation whose citizens must be of one ethnicity. Their recent protests have been littered with aggressive hate speech. Hate speech is defined by (so and so) “attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sex orientation, disabilities, or gender”. The Alt-Right primarily ‘argue’ against those of “non-aryan descent”. To clarify the Alt-Right political party should have the right to express their views, no matter how offensive, but what must be called into question is the legality of the use of Nazi propaganda in political get togethers.
Difficult thought it is to enforce regulations against Nazi symbols, slogans, and the hate speech that is associated with it, it is key in order to continue the tradition of peaceful assembly, and the right to voice opinions. By having regulations put in place it will that keeps nazi propaganda out of assemblies it will take away the inherent danger and threat that is associated with these symbols. Nazi propaganda, is solely a representation of the hatred and bigotry, and when used in political settings, is inappropriate because of its bloody history.
To begin, expressing white neo-nationalist viewpoints should be regulated to ensure that their statements and symbols remain constitutional. The first amendment does maintain that “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble”. There are three exceptions to this amendment, clear and present danger, the true threat clause, and the slander and libel clause. First of all, the swastika itself is a clear representation of danger. It was used to exemplify a state that believed in the superiority of one race, which lead to the death of millions. This symbol is a direct threat to those of non Aryan descent because it represents the justification of the Nazi atrocities and is a symbol of violence. Slogans such as “Blood and Soil” is again an example of clear and present danger because of the slogans use to justify the death of millions and by chanting that it has the inherent threat of revisiting that idea. Secondly, the true threat clause, is when “a speaker expresses a serious intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group”. An example of this was said by so and so, “All non-white immigration must be prohibited, we demand that all non-whites currently residing in America, be required to leave the nation forthwith and return to their land of origin, peacefully or by force”. This is an obvious example of an intention to commit an act of violence to a group of individuals, in order to accomplish their purpose of having a purely white state. Lastly, is the slander and libel clause. Libel is used to express any visual defamation, while slander is used to describe any defamation that is spoken and heard. Defamation is defined as false communication that decreases the regard or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person”. Visual nazi propaganda represents the ideology of the superiority of the white race while also incorporating the concept that other races are inferior. This is includes, as false communication, disparaging and disagreeable opinion, which being expressed can induce hostile feelings of the people it is directed towards. To conclude, the Alt-Right party should be allowed to peacefully gather, but Nazi propaganda be regulated because of the inherent threat that is implied. In this way their right to express their political opinion is not infringed upon but merely regulated in order to express their political views in a non threatening manner.
Furthermore, the law permits gang affiliation to be regulated when certain when certain offenses are being committed. The Alt-Right has many supporters with gang affiliations that use the swastika and other Nazi slogans, in order to express their dangerous ideologies, of white supremacy through force. These symbols should be regulated at political get togethers because of said gang affiliation, that they are correlated with. Federal law states that a gang is an “ongoing group, organization, or association…”. Thirty states identify gangs by having an identifying sign or symbol. This proclamation of gang affiliation, by the use of Nazi symbols, should be controlled, at Alt-Right political rallies because of the history and ongoing use of Nazi symbols, in white supremacist gangs, that are typically associated with violence. Such as the recent case in the U.S that lead to the conviction of 89 members of a white supremacist group.By having the nazi symbols that are used to identify gang members at rallies and protests it adds a direct threat of violence, to those who oppose them and should therefor be outlawed.
Lastly, many countries have enacted laws that prohibit speech directed towards racial, religious, and ethnic groups. The U.S is renowned for its allowance of speech even of the most offensive nature, this is a fundamental right but regulations that other countries have placed should be considered because of the dangers that this type of speech illicit. In 2003 the European Court of Human Rights stated that, “Freedom of expression was not a license to undermine justice and social peace”. The Alt-Right political view point on racial separation is not a popular stance, as seen in the Charlottesville protests, so regulations similar to the one expressed by the European Court of Human Rights should be placed in order to ensure that they express their opinion without “undermining justice and social peace”. Another ruling they made was, against the expression of “inflammatory racism in public”. These rulings do not infringe on personal beliefs while also avoiding violence that generally comes when these ideas are expressed. In the German Criminal Code there is a clause known as the “Volksverhetzung”. This law is a concept in German criminal law that outlaws the “incitement to hatred against segments of the population and refers to calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them, including assaults against the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning, or defaming segments of the population”. To adapt this code into our own handling of racial issues, in order to allow the expression of ideas in such a way that it doesn't cause extreme backlash. Once again, the use of Nazi propaganda is insulting, and by having this code put in place it will help allow the expression of free speech but contain it in such a way that there is no “assaults against human dignity”.
Enforcing these codes would be difficult because of America’s strong sense of individuality and right expression. Similarly to America other countries constitutions protect the freedom of speech as one of the fundamental rights guaranteed against governmental suppression. In contrast, some countries have taken measures that go against that goes against Americas fundamental rights. For example the German Criminal Code, has a ruling against expressing the opinion that the Holocaust did not happen.America should employ regulations similar to these, excepting the regulation to express certain unfavorable opinions, such as the idea that the Holocaust did not occur. To put in place the essence of what these laws were created for, would help moderate the violence associated with these viewpoints.
In conclusion, regulations should be placed on Nazi propaganda and extremely offensive racist speech, in order to help combat violence. The regulations will not go against the first amendment but merely regulates the dangers that is associated with aggressive hate speech and Nazi propaganda. Nazi symbolism should be outlawed at protests because of the inherent threat and associations of genocide that it contains. The use of Nazi symbols goes agains the freedom of speech clauses namely, clear and present danger, true threat, and slander and libel, the associations that the symbol has with gang violence, and on the basis of other countries uses these laws. The Alt-Right should be able to voice their own personal beliefs but regulations should be put in place, that doesn't allow Nazi propaganda, in order to make their rallies and protests safer and non-threatening.