Germany halts Tom Cruise's Hitler film

[Winner]

You say Europe would never return to fascism, but that doesn't make it true. If you asked a rank and file Party member of Soviet Russia in 1920 whether Russia would soon, for all intents and purposes, return to a monarchical and feudal society, he probably would have said no, and quite vehemently. But realistically, Soviet Russia was not a true communist state where everyone was actually equal, it was a brutal authoritarian state where the people were kept in virtual serfdom by the ruling elite. Just because a people say that they will never return to a terrible past doesn't mean that they never will - even under the guise of distancing themselves even further from that past.

Fascism is about control, the control of the State. There is a reason fascism is so much more of a danger in Europe than in the US, and that is because we have totally different ideas of what the State should be. In the US, we believe it is the People that are sovereign and should be in charge. In Europe, you believe that it is the State that should be in charge and tell the people what to do. Oh sure, you have democratic elections and you say the government is controlled by the People - but whenever the People want something the government doesn't approve of, the response is "Bad! Bad citizens! We know what is best, and you can't have this!" The People should be telling the State where to jump, and how high, not the other way around. Accepting the State's supremacy over the People is the first step on the road to totalitarianism and fascism.

You totally didn't get my point. I said that propagation of fascism is not restricted because the government wants it, but because people want it. It's self-imposed restriction, not a governmental order.

As for the rest - you also have a wrong impression of Europe. I guess people in many European countries would find certain US rules very restrictive, even authoritarian. There are indeed countries with statist mindset (France for instance), but if you think that Europeans are inherently more open to governmental control, you can't be more wrong.

We ban smoking in public places like libraries or government buildings. We don't ban smoking in private homes.

You can shout "Sieg Heil" and listen to Nazi music at home all day long, so long as you don't propagate it in public, so it's actually very similar to ban on smoking - in principle.

I understand that American and Europe are very different.

No, they're not. We're different in certain aspects, but not nearly as much as you think.

I'm not particularly interested in forcing Europe to become more like the US. What I'm interested in is seeing Europe free and strong, as a valuable ally to the US on the global stage. But as things are, I see only three paths for Europe to take: take over by Islamic extremism, virtual collapse, or fascism. I very much hope I'm wrong, but the things you say lead me to believe I'm right.

All three are very unlikely.

 

[REDY]

Back to topic, I think its matter of Germany if they will allow or not allow filming in their country, it doesnt matter because what. I dont know much about scientology so I cant say if this is smart or foolish decision, but I saw Cruise and hes not good actor so I agree with German government

 

[ori]

Just for those who believe Germany is somehow infringing on the rights of innocent weirdos like Cruise to make a living

While the German government still will not allow filming inside the Ministry of Defense, a government agency has now revealed it will help the producers of the said film by paying them a stipend of 5 million € ($ 7 million)...

N-TV.de Since it does not help Scientology's anti-Germany campaign this has not yet been noticed outside of Germany, so only a German link can be found as of yet...

 

[nivi]

While the German government still will not allow filming inside the Ministry of Defense, a government agency has now revealed it will help the producers of the said film by paying them a stipend of 5 million € ($ 7 million)...

Ummmmmm, why?

 

[Leifmk]

Ummmmmm, why?

I'm guessing it's a completely different government agency operating under different rules. Probably something to do with encouraging historical productions since that's all cultural and everything.

 

[ori]

I'm guessing it's a completely different government agency operating under different rules. Probably something to do with encouraging historical productions since that's all cultural and everything.

You are almost right The DFFF which encourages productions of films inside Germany does go for cultural, historical etc. plots. But at the same time it is prohibited to spend more then 4 million € on any single film, unless the (political) advisory board allows them to. Thus this whole thing is a dispute between the Secretary of Defense (who does not want Tom Cruise to play Graf Stauffenberg - single most important "hero" of today's German Army) and the Secretary of State for Cultural Affairs (who wants to combat the impression that "all of Germany is against Tom Cruise playing Graf Stauffenberg")

 

[h4ppy]

Its fun to watch the Euros whine about "Emporor Bush" when they don't have several important political rights, themselves...

 

[ori]

Its fun to watch the Euros whine about "Emporor Bush" when they don't have several important political rights, themselves...

And what would those rights be

 

[Communisto]

yay for the german government.

 

[h4ppy]

And what would those rights be

Well, freedom of speech for one. Also freedom of religion, since it is apparently impossible to be a Scientologist in Germany. (don't get me wrong, I want them to loose tax exempt status here in the states, but I am against just banning them outright) And, of course, the right to join certain political parties. (which would fall under whichever right it is that allows gatherings of people)

 

[ori]

Well, freedom of speech for one. Also freedom of religion, since it is apparently impossible to be a Scientologist in Germany. (don't get me wrong, I want them to loose tax exempt status here in the states, but I am against just banning them outright) And, of course, the right to join certain political parties. (which would fall under whichever right it is that allows gatherings of people)

Freedom of Speech: There is little restriction on this in Germany, the only restrictions being on gloryfying the Nazi regime.
Freedom of religion: There is no (read: no) restriction on the freedom of religion in Germany. Some relgious institutions fare better when it comes to tax breaks or a "religious tax" the government collects for them, but no one hinders anyone to worship whom- or whatever. This includes Scientology. Hell they just opened a big new HQ in Berlin to recruit new believers and no one stopped them I do agree though that there is positive discrimination on this count: Catholics, Protestants, Jehovas Witnesses, Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims fare better when it comes to gevernment money spend for their Institutions then other non-recognized sects. Basically: it is not impossible to be a Scientology follower in Germany, you just don't receive the benefits other churches do get...
Right to join parties: There is no infringement on joining legal parties. Parties can only be outlawed when they a) fight for abolishing the Democratic constitution AND b) do so actively (i.e. just saying they want to have a Absolute Monarchy won't do) AND c) do so militantly (i.e. going out in the streets and just demand the abolishment of Democracy won't do, you have to do much more to undermine the Democratic society).
In Germany's post-war history only one neo-nazi party was outlawed (in the 60's), an attempt to outlaw the communist party of germany in the 70's failed because the Supreme Court would not do so and just recently an attempt to outlaw the direct successor of the one party outlawed also collapsed... So you should definetly refine your picture on German's illiberal society

 

[GoodSarmatian]

You forgot the KPD (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands).
It's banned since 1956.

 

[h4ppy]

Freedom of Speech: There is little restriction on this in Germany, the only restrictions being on gloryfying the Nazi regime.

Sounds like not having freedom of speech to me. I mean, no offense or anything, but this is a lot of ifs ands and buts.

Freedom of religion: There is no (read: no) restriction on the freedom of religion in Germany. Some relgious institutions fare better when it comes to tax breaks or a "religious tax" the government collects for them, but no one hinders anyone to worship whom- or whatever. This includes Scientology. Hell they just opened a big new HQ in Berlin to recruit new believers and no one stopped them I do agree though that there is positive discrimination on this count: Catholics, Protestants, Jehovas Witnesses, Jews and to a lesser extent Muslims fare better when it comes to gevernment money spend for their Institutions then other non-recognized sects. Basically: it is not impossible to be a Scientology follower in Germany, you just don't receive the benefits other churches do get...

And yet they can't film there because of Tom Cruise's religious beliefs.

Right to join parties: There is no infringement on joining legal parties. Parties can only be outlawed when they a) fight for abolishing the Democratic constitution AND b) do so actively (i.e. just saying they want to have a Absolute Monarchy won't do) AND c) do so militantly (i.e. going out in the streets and just demand the abolishment of Democracy won't do, you have to do much more to undermine the Democratic society).

I suppose, none the less, the banning of symbols and other such things would definantly not fly in America.

In Germany's post-war history only one neo-nazi party was outlawed (in the 60's), an attempt to outlaw the communist party of germany in the 70's failed because the Supreme Court would not do so and just recently an attempt to outlaw the direct successor of the one party outlawed also collapsed... So you should definetly refine your picture on German's illiberal society

The fact that it even got that far is a joke in this day and age. I can understand it happening in the Cold War though, the US commies were shut down since they relayed info to the Russians.

edit: He also forgot another small radical party, but I didn't mention it since it really did have a militant wing.

 

[Whomp]

My whole contention on this is where someone's moviemaking ability has anything to do with whether a country should care about that person's personal philosophy? Is he sending some type subliminal Scientology messages in his movies?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Well I saw John Travolta's Battlefield Earth movie. If there wasn't some sort of subliminal message in that ("This film is the best comedy I have ever seen, no wait, it's supposed to be SERIOUS?"), I'd be very surprised.

Frank Zappa's "Church of Applientology" based song from the album "Joe's Garage", brilliant.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Well I saw John Travolta's Battlefield Earth movie. If there wasn't some sort of subliminal message in that ("This film is the best comedy I have ever seen, no wait, it's supposed to be SERIOUS?"), I'd be very surprised.

Frank Zappa's "Church of Applientology" based song from the album "Joe's Garage", brilliant.

Battlefield Earth is based on a novel by some mediocre SF-author who also founded a religion.
Now guess who...

 

[ParadigmShifter]

You don't say!?? Must have been divine inspiration that caused me to pick that particular example.

L. Ron Hoover's church of applientology. Remember to get a German appliance (those are much better you see, you have to sing to it in German though), that looks like a cross between a magical pig and a vacuum cleaner.

 

[ori]

You forgot the KPD (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands).
It's banned since 1956.

Yes I forgot it, the two parties were the KPD and the SRP (56 and 52)

Sounds like not having freedom of speech to me. I mean, no offense or anything, but this is a lot of ifs ands and buts.

I'll go for that later

And yet they can't film there because of Tom Cruise's religious beliefs.

Yes they can film anywhere in Germany, apart from the military bases, now I accept that this is a discrimination which should not occur, and in fact the same government is giving them loads of money to filme elsewhere... And to say it is impossible to be a Scientologist there is not true.

I suppose, none the less, the banning of symbols and other such things would definantly not fly in America.

Apart from a few (not all) symbols associated with the NSDAP and its regime there are no bans on symbols in Germany. This has some historical relevance, but today you won't find many if any prosecution for flying a Nazi flag or the like...

The fact that it even got that far is a joke in this day and age. I can understand it happening in the Cold War though, the US commies were shut down since they relayed info to the Russians.

Both cases are dificult for today's standard - but don't tell me the US of the first half of the 50's was a heaven for people with communist ideas... Since then no party was outlawed - there have been two attempts though.

edit: He also forgot another small radical party, but I didn't mention it since it really did have a militant wing.

I meant the SRP (a nazi party that tried to reestablish the nazi government just a few years after the end of WW2... The KPD I just forgot, but that too was more then 50 years ago and today would probably not stand...


So now for the wiki stuff:

Freedom of expression is granted by Article 5 of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany:[16]

1. Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.
2. These rights shall find their limits in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to personal honor.
3. Art and scholarship, research, and teaching shall be free. The freedom of teaching shall not release any person from allegiance to the constitution.

so this establishes the freedom of speech as an unalterable right of every person - there is another article of the constitution that establishes the right to free assembly and the freedom of the press and the freedom of forming and joining unions all of those should have been included here...

The most important and sometimes controversial regulations limiting freedom of speech and freedom of the press can be found in the Criminal code:

• Insult is punishable under Section 185. Satire and similar forms of art enjoy more freedom but have to respect human dignity (Article 1 of the Basic law).

• Malicious Gossip and Defamation (Section 186 and 187). Utterances about facts (opposed to personal judgement) are allowed if they are true and can be proven. Yet journalists are free to investigate without evidence because they are justified by Safeguarding Legitimate Interests (Section 193).

Now I am pretty sure there is no country in this world that does not have some form of legal code pertaining to damages by insulting someone - the US in fact has libel and defamation laws that vary from state to state and are dificult to summarize yet they all in principle accept that there can be a punishable offens like this.

• Hate speech may be punishable if against segments of the population and in a manner that is capable of disturbing the public peace (Section 130 [Agitation of the People]), including racist agitation and antisemitism.

this indeed infringes the right to free speech, and is actually enforced (somewhat), yet the important part is "...is capale of disturbing the public peace" - this is dificult to prove, unless someone actually manages to ignite public unrest, but then "hate speech" would probably not be his highest concern.

• Holocaust denial is punishable according to Section 130 subsection 3.
• Dissemination of Means of Propaganda of Unconstitutional Organizations (Section 86).
• Use of Symbols of Unconstitutional Organizations (Section 86a) as the Swastika.

Those are remnants of the Denazification and do infringe the Freedom of Speech, I agree. Use of outlawed Symbols is only punishable if used for the purpose of spreading Propaganda for those organisations...

• Disparagement of
  • the Federal President (Section 90).
  • the State and its Symbols (Section 90a).

• Insult to Organs and Representatives of Foreign States (Section 103).

Nice, didn't even know those - actually they forgot one under Disparagment - "of other constitutional institutions" (parliament, government, supreme court....)
You are right those should be abolished, I don't know of a case were this has been prosecuted in the last 20 years though... I especially like the foreign heads of state part - has any american president ever visited Germany without being publicly insulted in public assemblies? GWB certainly has never Not one of those people has been held accountable, they should fire german state attorneys for not doing their jobs

• Rewarding and Approving Crimes (Section 140).
• Casting False Suspicion (Section 164).

Well those apply to criminal cases, and punish people who either pay a criminal for his act (which definetly is an offense anywhere in the world, or publically approve a criminal act in a way that it leads to public unrest - I don't think that is much of a problem nowadays, but should probably gotten rid of. The Casting of false Suspicion only applies if you cast a false suspicion against someone and because of this criminal proceedings get under way or are prolonged. In effect you are being punished if because of your false accusations someone has been put on trial and/or kept in custody - I agree whole heartedly with this, and am pretty sure something of this kind can be found in any Western penal code.

• Insulting of Faiths, Religious Societies and Organizations Dedicated to a Philosophy of Life (Section 166)
• Dissemination of Pornographic Writings (Section 184).

Actually we had one case in Germany last year where people wanted Madonna to be prosecuted for the first one, because she insulted Christians with some parts of her Tourshow - in the end it turned out that unless Christians had taken to the streets and burned something down, this would have been unpersecutable. So this is a very old part of code that probably will be abolished soon...
The second one was indeed harsh decades ago and has been repeatedly changed - it now only pertains to child pornography and that is outlawed elsewhere too I think.

In conclusion:
Freedom of speech is being infringed upon in reality when it comes to some Propaganda laws pertaining to outlawed parties and there are some weird though not actually applied laws on libel for statesmen. All else either is not a Freedom of Speech thing or widely accepted practice anywhere...
Now back ontopic: The German Secretary of Defense is wrong in his reasoning for denying the filming at military bases, yet this is unfortunately his decision and while he could probably be forced to allow it by the courts, this would probably take a couple of years and that is not the time those producers have to spare. That another part of the cabinet hands out bundles of cash should alleviate Tom Cruise's pains though.

 

[h4ppy]

This has some historical relevance, but today you won't find many if any prosecution for flying a Nazi flag or the like...

Maybe, but the way I hear about it most is in your crappy videogame censoring. (oh how nerdy of me)

I meant the SRP (a nazi party that tried to reestablish the nazi government just a few years after the end of WW2... The KPD I just forgot, but that too was more then 50 years ago and today would probably not stand...

No there was at least two other parties banned much later than that, but they were both small and had militant wings according to wikipedia.

 

[ori]

Maybe, but the way I hear about it most is in your crappy videogame censoring. (oh how nerdy of me)

No there was at least two other parties banned much later than that, but they were both small and had militant wings according to wikipedia.

Videogame censoring? There is some stuff going on for extremely violent stuff and there is this discussion going on on this site and others about why some Nazi themes are not included and most people point to German laws - I do not know about this. On the other hand: I read about those court cases about accidental nudity in games sold in the US where companies actually censor themselves and are sued if someone if someone finds a way around this selfcensoring - so the difference is: Germany and most of Europe has a problem with violence and the US has one with sex - both censor games though... There is indeed some stuff going on regarding violence: but the censorship is no hard one: You can sell those games, but only to adults and not advertise them, which effectively takes away a big chunk of the markets.

What has been going on in the media for the last 2 years was about politicians fantasizing about laws that would have effectively banned any chess game - this was campaign talk, I hear politicians around the world are saying things on campaigns that never materialize

On the other two parties: I don't know of any, but if you'd give me the link I'll gladly educate myself (seriously: in order to ban a party the German Supreme Court has to do so and there were only 4 cases before that court, so I suspect they are talking about a different thing - but I would like to see what they are talking about...)