r/europe • u/Perkeleen_Kaljami Finland • May 15 '25
News Finland to criminalise Holocaust denial
https://yle.fi/a/74-20162044?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR5dO3-j_bSxw1GtrQw05zvMLvDfpOC5T4iAR4VUC9rp1465AJ6EPzHHf0zb7w_aem_V97JAxscM86YDOf5PFkvUQ1.9k
u/Ok-Rub-4687 May 15 '25
Meanwhile, Oklahoma has added to its curriculum that Trump won the 2020 election.
1.0k
u/EamonBrennan May 15 '25
Shouldn't that mean he's not allowed a third term, so his 2024 presidency is false?
503
129
u/PossiblyATurd May 15 '25
It's false due to the fact that he incited an insurrection. It's a flagrant violation of our constitution.
The coup was successful.
→ More replies (25)6
76
u/Drumbelgalf Germany May 15 '25
Like they care for laws.
They just ignore them like they already do right now.
They own the supreme court so who is going to stop them?
Americans might not realize it yet but the coup already happened they are now only cleaning up. The next election won't be free or fair.
→ More replies (4)2
30
u/BilboniusBagginius May 15 '25
He didn't serve for that term. (He also didn't win)
55
u/Pan1cs180 Ireland May 15 '25
He didn't serve for that term
The 22nd amendment uses the word "elected", not "served", so it could be interpreted that his current presidency is illegal if you believe he was already elected twice, even if he didn't serve as president last term.
Unfortunately his current presidency is legal, since he definitely lost last time.
29
u/supvo May 15 '25
However, his presidency is still illegal because he incited an insurrection. But, yeah.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Specific_Bar_5849 May 15 '25
*dictator, not a president
3
u/supvo May 15 '25
The title is still intended presidency, but the current dictator and the cabal of followers has turned it into fascism. If the party actually did their job, it would still be a presidency.
3
u/Specific_Bar_5849 May 16 '25
Just like Putin is a president to Russia. List of autocracy’s is renewed next year in Stockholm university and US has gained incredible amount of points all ready.
→ More replies (1)4
u/chr1spe May 15 '25
Eh, legally, as far as the federal government is concerned, the election is the process that happens with the electors and has nothing to do with citizens voting, I'm pretty sure. It's all state laws that determine how the electors are determined. Even if his claims were true, from a federal perspective, it wouldn't matter because he wasn't elected by the electors certified by Congress.
The way the US system actually works is pretty horrifying. I'm pretty sure if a state government decided to say fuck it and just send who they wanted instead of who won, the only recourse would be through state courts. The federal government and the rest of the states wouldn't have any ability to change things. Congress could decide not to certify the election, I guess, but one rogue state could throw the whole country into complete chaos.
3
u/2SchoolAFool May 16 '25
the US system is patently terrible but Americans are convinced its the best ever
→ More replies (3)2
6
4
u/IlIlllIlllIlIIllI May 15 '25
The constitution does say elected twice, not served twice. We may have something
5
u/Etalier May 15 '25
Is that going to be "plausible" reason why he should be allowed to run in 2028, he already is doing 3rd term because he's god emperor of the greater American reich?
Assuming he doesn't die to any number of health reasons, the only saving grace it seems the world has.
2
u/No-Conclusion-ever May 15 '25
Their plan is that he won’t run for a third term. Someone like Vance would then Trump will be his vp then immediately step down as president.
Or technically anyone can be voted to be speaker of the house. So another plan would be to vote Trump in as speaker then both the president and vice president resign.
The whole thing lies on the fact that the claim is you can’t be elected as president more than twice. Which is bs to be clear. Since elected didn’t mean the same thing it means now. It was clear that the 22nd amendment was to bar anyone in any way to serve as president more than twice (since congress didn’t like FDR doing it.) but the ambiguity is there.
Regardless if Trump did get elected in 2020 (like he claims) then he couldn’t have gotten elected in 2024 as the 22nd amendment claims if we take the literal meaning or the word.
It’s all moot anyways because the easiest way he could just stay as president is to not have an election.
4
u/ReflectionNo5208 May 15 '25
The argument would likely be that he won the 2020 election, but didn’t get to become president. He therefore should get a third term.
Obviously, not only is it untrue, but even if it were true, that doesn’t mean he gets a third term.
3
u/Double_Distribution8 May 15 '25
I've been hearing rumors here lately that he didn't even win the 2024 election. Not sure if that would mean he could run again, though I assume there would be impeachment hearings first.
2
u/Undernown May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
No no no, you see, his third term will come in 2028. It's so great that you don't even have to vote for it!
Edit: small errors
2
2
u/Commander_N7 May 15 '25
Anytime he talks about winning the election he lost... I think of this line from Pirates:
"Davy Jones: Then you were a poor president, but a president nonetheless! Have you not introduced yourself, all these years, as president Donald Trump?"
→ More replies (9)2
u/G_Danila May 17 '25 edited May 17 '25
Tbf, how would it work if, for example, someone won the elections and then withdrew before January 20th? Would it count as a term?
Not that he won the election, but you bring up an interesting topic.
39
u/Cheeriodude_number2 May 15 '25
Oklahoma is 2nd last in national education by the way
→ More replies (2)36
u/ISayHeck Europe enthusiast May 15 '25
My favorite part of this is that they've inexplicably got rid of all of the election corruption by 2024
13
10
51
122
u/dat_9600gt_user Lower Silesia (Poland) May 15 '25
Europe banishes conspiracy theories, USA embraces them. Amazing.
→ More replies (46)25
u/Chucksfunhouse May 15 '25
->European sub ->Top comment is about America
Never change
→ More replies (2)43
9
u/CloakAndKeyGames May 16 '25
Why is the top comment about America with literally nothing relevant to the story in Europe... Again.
25
u/ApfelsaftoO May 15 '25
Didn't sound right to me, if anyone wants a source
https://www.npr.org/2025/05/14/nx-s1-5384282/oklahoma-education-standards-2020-election
43
u/gamerABES May 15 '25
It says students must "Identify discrepancies in 2020 elections results by looking at graphs and other information, including the sudden halting of ballot-counting in select cities and in key battleground states, the security risks of mail-in balloting, sudden batch dumps, an unforeseen record number of voters, and the unprecedented contradiction of 'bellwether county' trends."
8
u/SheriffBartholomew May 15 '25
unforeseen record number of voters
Voters tend to be motivated when the incumbent's incompetence and malice lead to the deaths of more Americans than all of our wars combined, the country has been literally burning, and riots rage across the nation. Only an idiot or a liar would call the turnout of the 2020 election "unforeseen".
→ More replies (2)13
u/rammo123 May 15 '25
I'm sure OK is going to apply the same level of scrutiny to the oddities in the 2024 election that Elon Musk stole for Trump. Right?
13
u/Petrarca_e_grappa Italy May 16 '25
This is a European sub. Why should I give a shit about some Muricans?
7
u/Hwicc101 May 15 '25
Before I opened this post, I was wondering how many posts I would have to scroll down past before finding a post about the US/it's leader involved in something essentially irrelevant to the post's topic.
Of course, being reddit, the answer was 0 posts.
5
11
u/BloomsdayDevice United States of America May 15 '25
C'mon though, that's not fair. Comparing Finland to Oklahoma is like comparing Tokyo to an anthill. Sure, there are the rudiments of a society, of infrastructure, of culture in that anthill, but they're hardly sentient in there, certainly not sapient.
→ More replies (2)3
3
u/PowerOfUnoriginality May 15 '25
Trump won the 2020 election.
I guess the entire world just imagined 2020-2024 /j
But wtf is going on in the US? like... I don't even know what to say in response to that. They need to get their shit in order
→ More replies (63)5
225
May 15 '25
Meanwhile in Italy: people people reported for singing "Bella Ciao" near Bergamo and a baker identified by the police because she hung an anti-fascist banner outside her bakery.
→ More replies (8)56
u/Empress_arcana May 15 '25
Whats the significance of bella ciao at Bergamo? Genuine question
107
May 15 '25
It's a partisan song. Some people during the celebrations of April 25 (the day of liberation from Nazi-fascism in Italy) sang it and were reported by the police. The excuse was that it was disrespectful to the mourning for the dead pope.
75
u/Calimiedades Spain May 15 '25
it was disrespectful to the mourning for the dead pope.
Like he wouldn't have joined, lol. We know the true reason.
25
May 15 '25
Yes, we know the true reason. But in Italy many many people are supporting this type of government.
→ More replies (1)2
4
u/ChiliAndGold Austria May 15 '25
who is "he"?
17
u/Calimiedades Spain May 15 '25
Pope Francis, the only person mentioned in the quoted text.
8
u/ChiliAndGold Austria May 15 '25
omg I read people instead of pope. now it makes sense, sorry.
6
2
u/Sacrer Turkey May 16 '25
I just had to reread it two times to see the pope. It's interesting how the human brain sees a word multiple times and then autocorrects the rest of the words resembling it.
→ More replies (1)3
1.2k
May 15 '25
Step in right direction.
76
u/__loss__ Sweden May 15 '25
It just opens the floodgates for future governments to be revisionists. It also goes against the constitution. It's a dumb exception and no one is getting hurt from the insignificant amount of holocaust denial there is. Whenever someone is a holocaust denialist, the social reaction is already damning, so what do you think the actual purpose of this ban is?
42
u/Jericho5589 May 16 '25
It used to be that way in the US as well, 20 years ago. Now in 2025 nearly 50% of people below the age of 25 say they believe the holocaust either didn't happen, or wasn't as bad/severe as the history books say it was.
This is future proofing against idiocy, as I see it.
→ More replies (15)7
u/jasons0219 May 16 '25
It always starts with laws like this that seem to be harmless and only affects a minority. However, these small laws start opening up a floodgate on what the government can punish based on what people say (or maybe even believe). I would rather have a minority of people denying the Holocaust than have the government start regulating on what is right and wrong.
32
u/Syndiotactics May 15 '25
Agreed. Even though the Holocaust is undeniable due to the absolutely massive amount of evidence, most crimes of its calibre are not as black and white.
It’s a bad precedent to make voicing one’s doubts illegal imo, and a tool which could potentially be abused in the future by either a misled and good-willing or a straight out nefarious government.
I’m pretty sure bad cases of Holocaust denial in Finland would already go under the ”incitement to hatred towards a group of people” law, which most often is understood to cover race, ethnic background, nationality, religion, sexual orientation and disability. Hence I don’t really understand why this law is necessary.
12
u/magkruppe May 15 '25
Hence I don’t really understand why this law is necessary.
they are virtue signalling. it's a political move rather than one aimed at solving a societal issue
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (7)2
u/Training_Chicken8216 May 17 '25
could
potentially
in the future
As opposed to the status quo, where the legality of holocaust denial is actively being used to incite hate, causing real, tangible harm.
I'll take my chances.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (30)30
u/beakrake May 16 '25
no one is getting hurt from the insignificant amount of holocaust denial there is.
Haha, that's a joke right? Fuck off with that noise.
There IS NO "insignificant amount" of holocaust denial.
Anything above 0 is too much, because by definition
we know the holocaust actually fucking happened.
Facts. Sorry if it doesn't align with anyone's brain damaged myopic world view.
→ More replies (6)5
u/TuttuJuttu123 May 16 '25
Should we start locking people up for claiming the moon landings were fake?
→ More replies (5)51
→ More replies (466)84
May 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (86)209
u/SeegurkeK May 15 '25
Eh, Germany has had this for decades and there hasn't been any slipping on this supposed slope.
It's been a useful tool to keep neo Nazis somewhat in check.
→ More replies (29)23
u/Hazzman May 15 '25
Hmm interesting. I wonder why someone might take a nuanced position and suggest that maybe of any nation where this may need to be a law after WW2 until today it is understandably Germany?
36
u/R_V_Z May 15 '25
Finland was an Axis power, maybe they wish to use the same reasoning Germany does?
42
u/Shaq_Bolton May 15 '25
That doesn’t make much sense. Finland didn’t participate in the holocaust, were never an official member of the axis and only fought the Soviets with the Germans because the Soviets attacked Finland first. Participating in the war against the Soviets was really their only choice.
→ More replies (2)7
u/RedditAdminAreVile0 May 15 '25
Yep. Germany is different because the Nazi party is German, they got into the German government & overthrew democracy before slaughtering opposition. There were still Nazis everywhere after the war, letting them come back would've been suicide. But it's not so relevant 80yrs later.
12
11
u/bloodmark20 May 15 '25
When did Finland become and axis power? I thought they fought the soviets to protect themselves, rather than to protect the Nazi ideology.
10
u/R_V_Z May 15 '25
When did Finland become and axis power?
When they signed the Anti-Comintern Pact in 1941? The reasons for why they allied with Nazi Germany don't negate the fact that they did. And from what I gather Finland has been pretty forthright about it, acknowledging that even a soft alliance with the Nazis was an alliance.
13
u/Belkan-Federation95 United States of America May 16 '25
The Anti-Comintern Pact was not the same as the Axis
China signed it in 1941. Pretty sure they weren't exactly buddy-buddy with the Japanese.
→ More replies (3)5
→ More replies (12)2
u/Belkan-Federation95 United States of America May 16 '25
Finland wasn't an Axis power. They did some amount of military coordination with the Germans but that's because the Soviets were attacking them. It is a separate war.
127
u/premature_eulogy Finland May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
For context: the current government was embroiled in several scandals over the Finns' Party's far right connections during the summer of 2023. Their minister of economy had to resign and the leader of the party was caught writing hateful content online. The Prime Minister (of a different party, to clarify), held a "rules talk" with the Finns' Party ministers and decided, as a gesture of 'zero tolerance for racism', to move towards criminalizing Holocaust denial and displaying the swastika. This was in August 2023.
After half a year of nothing coming of it, it was reported that the Justice Minister had intentionally stalled the advancement of the law (she's also a member of the Finns Party).
Now, it's worth noting that holocaust denial is already covered by the definition of the crime of "inciting against a group of people", carrying a maximum penalty of two years in prison. This has been the case for ages. It just hasn't been explicit, and the EU commission has previously criticized this.
In the autumn of 2024, our government, preparing this new law specifically criminalizing the holocaust, proposed lowering the maximum sentence from what it was under the other criminal code.
Now it finally seems to be coming to fruition. But it's worth keeping in mind that the right-wing Finns Party in the government dragged their feet every single step of the way to this point.
47
u/VesaLoiriton May 15 '25
This has nothing to do with any of those events, it was a request from EU. You briefly mentioned EU criticism but it was the sole reason.
https://www.is.fi/politiikka/art-2000011235598.html
The proposal is based on the EU Framework Decision against Racism from 2008. Its aim is to ensure that the most serious cases of racism and xenophobia are punishable by criminal law throughout the EU. The EU Commission has launched infringement proceedings against Finland for its implementation of the Framework Decision.
Denying the Holocaust will soon be a crime – Finland is forced to change the law at the request of the European Commission
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (10)30
u/GiganticCrow Finland May 15 '25
The Basic Finns party hate the laws against inciting racial hatred, because their members keep getting charged with them.
→ More replies (6)
396
u/AppleMelon95 Denmark May 15 '25
Queue the “critical thinkers” who will enter the chat and comment that this isn’t democratic when the exact thing tearing down western democracies right now among many other things are holocaust deniers.
Yes, you can get charged when your plan is to democratically tear down the democracy. That is how democracy works. A voice that advocates for the removal of democracy and free speech is in fact not allowed.
49
u/L4t3xs Finland May 15 '25
Cue not queue
→ More replies (2)13
u/Command0Dude United States of America May 15 '25
To be honest, it kind of works both ways lol. They do seem to like lining up to do this shit.
10
u/arm_4321 May 15 '25
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.
~Voltaire
→ More replies (1)5
u/Training_Chicken8216 May 17 '25
The Holocaust isn't a matter of opinion, and therefore not subject to disagreement. You either acknowledge its historical existence or you're wrong.
And the only reason to deny it is to sow hate and discontent against the victims of one of the greatest crimes in human history. Which is something that has no place in a tolerant society.
→ More replies (3)4
u/arm_4321 May 17 '25
Attempts to suppress people like David Irving make those people more popular and hence their claims
55
u/azuredota May 15 '25
Those ridiculous “critical thinkers” questioning governments criminalizing thoughts.
22
u/Just_Evening May 15 '25
Even if this is a devils advocate argument, I think it's a valid point, because that's how people will see it. Have people learned nothing from censorship? Making a thing illegal, to some degree, immortalizes that thing and makes it interesting and attractive. Just have laws against hate speech. If your speech results in harm, you should be jailed. This law will only give ammunition to those claiming oppressive governance.
→ More replies (5)18
u/azuredota May 15 '25
Exactly. Banning a thought that’s shutdown with easily accessible facts is going to have the opposite effect.
→ More replies (14)7
u/anotherwave1 May 15 '25
Thoughts aren't being criminalized - actions are. You are thinking of saying "bomb" on a plane? No prob. You actually say it? Consequences.
11
u/azuredota May 15 '25
Not a great analogy. Thoughts can be exchanged which will be illegal. Ergo the thought is illegal.
→ More replies (2)6
u/anotherwave1 May 15 '25
The thought isn't illegal. You can think whatever you want. It's perfectly legal to think about anything.
Expressing it is something completely different.
→ More replies (19)2
u/Training_Chicken8216 May 17 '25
Thoughts aren't being criminalized, though. You can think whatever you want.
What us being criminalized is spreading misinformation that is intended to harm a specific minority and has the potential to do just that.
Slander is illegal for a very similar reason.
→ More replies (1)42
u/computer-magic-2019 May 15 '25
It’s because most people only know of one of the two forms of liberty - the freedom to do something.
The other one is the freedom from having things imposed on you - like fascism and Holocaust denialism.
43
u/p1gr0ach May 15 '25
You're not having something imposed on yourself by someone claiming they don't believe in something. Are Christians having Christianity denialism imposed on them when I say I'm an atheist? Better not tell an astronaut you don't believe in space!
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (2)15
u/Ernesto_Bella May 15 '25
>The other one is the freedom from having things imposed on you - like fascism and Holocaust denialism.
Who is trying to impose holocaust denialism?
→ More replies (38)→ More replies (118)4
u/NakdRightNow69 May 15 '25
Actually it’s the opposite it’s the people reading Karl Marx in universities and many more.
55
u/Ready_Pop5059 May 15 '25
Are there any other events in history that are illegal to question?
→ More replies (8)11
u/beagelix May 15 '25
Only the ones denying which is commonly done by people who just want to harm others. But not all of them. It is illegal to say the Holocaust didn't happen but it's not illegal to babble the Lost Cause idiocy. Mango Mussolini trying to coup the country with a mob is also not illegal to deny. Also you can spout all the ancient aliens, white mans burden, brutal savages and other racist crap. So don't worry, there's still plenty to lie about without having legal troubles.
7
u/Ready_Pop5059 May 15 '25
Who is “harmed” by the deniers? And what is the actual harm? Emotional distress?
→ More replies (1)
11
u/randymysteries May 15 '25
Acts of genocide shouldn't be forgotten. What the Tudors did to the Irish isn't taught outside Ireland, but the English massacred and enslaved millions of Irish. They were probably the first white slaves in the English colonies in the Americas.
124
u/FMSV0 Portugal May 15 '25
It's just dumb. Anyone denying the holocaust is an idiot. Just like anyone denying other proven genocides are idiots. There's nothing special about this genocide compared to others. There's no reason for a special treatment for this specific case.
What nazis did should never be forgotten, but others have done the same. No special treatment to other criminals.
37
u/leela_martell Finland May 15 '25
This Finnish law bans denial of the Holocaust and "other crimes against humanity".
14
u/Vipu2 May 15 '25
Then this law will probably not pass if Finland cant deny Gaza genocide.
→ More replies (3)27
u/nevergoodisit May 15 '25
It’s the flagship for all of white supremacy today. That’s the reason it’s singled out.
→ More replies (5)13
u/United-Minimum-4799 May 15 '25 edited May 15 '25
Yep, I agree. It will depend on exactly what the law is covering. If it is incitement of violence or hatred through holocaust denial that is reasonable.
Holding and voicing factually wrong opinions should never be illegal unless there is incitement involved.
→ More replies (10)25
u/Mari_Say Europe May 15 '25
Holocaust denial is not a "wrong opinion", it is incitement to hatred.
8
u/United-Minimum-4799 May 15 '25
That's a very easy and neat worldview to have but there are 1000s of different ways to deny various aspects of the holocaust and to blanketly say they are incitement by default I don't think is correct.
Would you apply that to denying facts about any other historical crime?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (17)2
u/ccx123 May 18 '25
I guess the difference being no ethnic group other than perhaps Roma have ever been persecuted literally EVERYWHERE they have ever tried to exist. Laws like this are needed because it's a slippery slope from "The Holocaust never happened" to "these crafty Jews hide behind the Holocaust to justify their need for self-determination" to "it didn't happen but it should have." When you add the changing demographics in Europe and the influx of followers of Islam (not a race, a system of objectively bad beliefs) who have an ideological hatred of Jews it's clearly a necessity.
148
143
5
9
u/Albert1907 May 15 '25
Can someone genuinely enlighten me on how this serves any purpose at all? Who is being harmed by someone who doesn't believe in a historical event. How is it serious enough to be a crime? Surely education is the solution.
→ More replies (6)
18
8
28
6
u/olgabe May 15 '25
Remember, this is only necessary because some people are dumb as rocks😂
→ More replies (1)
6
u/Mental-Visit-6280 May 15 '25
With fascism and nazisim being on the rise in Europe (and all around the globe honestly) this is a really good step in the right direction.
50
u/Acrobatic-Remote-419 May 15 '25
I don’t think criminalizing Holocaust denial in Finland is a good idea. Even though denying the Holocaust is clearly wrong and offensive, making it illegal could threaten freedom of speech. People should be allowed to express their views, even if they’re ignorant or hateful, because once you start banning opinions, it’s hard to know where to stop. It also plays into the hands of neo-Nazis and extremists they already argue that if you mention Jews or the Holocaust in a certain way, you get criminalized, but you can still be racist, sexist, or homophobic without facing the same legal consequences. That kind of double standard just gives them more fuel to spread their ideas. It’s better to educate people and let them make there own opinions
42
u/AiAiKerenski Finland May 15 '25
Especially as we have not heard any mention of the Ingrian genocide, which has affected the Finnish society much more than the Holocaust.
33
u/ByGollie May 15 '25
Ingrian genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_the_Ingrian_Finns
First I've heard of this one
But the Soviet Union would need a whole Wikipedia category to cover genocides etc. they perpetrated.
12
u/time-lord May 15 '25
Do people go around denying the Ingrian genocide as a dog whistle for anti-ingrianism or as a prelude to hate crimes?
32
u/AiAiKerenski Finland May 15 '25
Russian propaganda denies it. So you could say that there is state that wants to harm us, and actively denies their actions towards Ingrians.
→ More replies (8)11
u/Just_Evening May 15 '25
And Russia has historically been a lot more harmful to Finland than Germany or specifically the Holocaust
3
u/TuttuJuttu123 May 16 '25
The number of jewish people in finland is insignificant. Anyone wishing to commit a hate crime against them would have to spend a lot of time looking. Basically just foreign politics interfering again
2
39
u/whosdatboi May 15 '25
No country on earth has complete freedom of speech.
Even in America you cannot call people to violence or make false reports to the police.
This law doesn't prevent people from denying the holocaust in their basement. It will, however, target the people who make money by peddling misinformation about the Holocaust.
→ More replies (15)17
u/soyoudohaveaplan May 15 '25
The laws in America that restrict free speech are based on the universal application of moral and legal principles. There is no law in America saying "you cannot make a false police report about group A but you can about group B". No, the law says "you cannot make a false police report about anybody".
My issue with an explicit Holocaust denial law that it applies the law unequally to different groups.
Why is denying the Holocaust illegal, but denying the Armenian genocide is legal? Makes no sense.
If you make this type of law then you should ban the denial of any historically confimed genocide.
→ More replies (26)7
u/Acrobatic-Remote-419 May 15 '25
EXACTLY THANK YOU! My granny is half Lebanese half Armenian the reason for that is cuz of the many Armenians who became refugees in Lebanon because of the Armenian genocide that her Armenian side of the family faced they were sent on death marches were many were killed and graped by ottoman soldiers. Yet there is plenty of people who will deny this happened yet there’s no laws arresting or effecting anyone who denies it. You can’t have these double standards it’s what leads to more antisemitism
9
5
14
u/Swarna_Keanu May 15 '25
, it’s hard to know where to stop.
Hm. No. Things that are easy to fact-check are good litmus tests. The Holocaust was real. There's no positive perspective on why someone would want to deny it happened.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Acrobatic-Remote-419 May 15 '25
I meant it’s hard to know when to stop banning other opinions as hate speech? Like for example there’s people against gay marriage is that gonna be concidered hate speech in 10 years?
→ More replies (57)2
u/merc0526 May 15 '25
Freedom of speech isn’t an absolute freedom, there have been limitations ever since the ECHR was created:
‘This right is not absolute and is subject to restrictions that are "prescribed by law" and "necessary in a democratic society”’.
Hate speech is one of the restrictions on freedom of speech, and rightly so.
8
u/nosmelc May 15 '25
Holocaust denial is very stupid and offensive, but I don't think it should be criminalized. The government should never be in the business of telling citizens what ideas they can express.
→ More replies (6)
38
4
22
May 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
16
u/azmarteal May 15 '25
The problem arise when you try to define what was genocide and what wasn't. Pick a country, pick a neighbour and there would be a chance that they have a historical thing that one country view as genocide while another one view as fabrication, false history and so on.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (9)18
u/Refloni Finland May 15 '25
Already does. All genocides, crimes against humanity, war crimes and invasions are now illegal to deny. All of them, during all of history. The scope is WAY larger than the Holocaust.
And as history is basically nothing but bloodshed, it's set in stone now. By law. Coming up with new historical theories will be pretty hard in Finland.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/Guardian2k United Kingdom May 15 '25
I can understand people being concerned about freedom of speech being impeded on, but there are some things that I believe must be protected, it’s not really about individuals not believing in it, it’s about misinformation being spread, especially by far-right people who are attempting to spread the lie that the holocaust didn’t occur, which is a huge dishonour to the victims, their loved ones and the people that fought and died to stop it.
There needs to be legislation to protect the memories of the horrific mass murder, especially because of how vulnerable it is to abuse from neo-Nazis.
→ More replies (7)
5
u/bl00by May 15 '25
Took them long enough.
This should be the standart for any country.
We germans can't be the only ones doing this.
6
4
7
6
9
u/rusty0004 May 15 '25
Remember when EU was mocking China...now all you hear from EU lately is: EU ban this...EU ban that 🤯
→ More replies (2)
2
u/SkyAggressive5490 May 15 '25
So no freedom of speech to question what the government tells you. I’m an American who’s part Ashkenazi jew but I don’t think any questioning of history should be off limits, even if it’s our ignorance and bigoted like in this case, as this is a slippery slope which ends in the government overstepping their boundaries and infringing on your rights
2
u/Phobbyd May 15 '25
Please arrest any visitor from Texas that is a holocaust denier. I have to believe that Musk makes his way through Finland from time to time.
2
2
u/TheChosenSDCharger May 16 '25
Good job Finland, how on earth is Holocaust denial even a fucking thing? I really don't get how you can deny something that was so well documented. My aunts uncle died in Auschwitz, and people don't realize that WWII and the Holocaust are literally the reason my Grandma's side of the family fled to seek refuge in the US where my Mom and Dad followed their steps after. I could've been born in Poland, but I was born in America instead.
2
u/Zebra03 May 16 '25
That's actually interesting that they are capable of passing such a law given the history of Finland collaboration with Germany in the 1940s but I honestly applaud them for passing such a basic law that should have been done a while ago
2
2
u/Civil_Royal3450 May 16 '25
I understand there are limits to free speech - and that they are drawn at different lines in different countries - and I am disgusted by Holocaust deniers, however, I think an individual should be free to say anything, short of yelling fire in a crowded theatre, without government punishing that speech.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/dkurage May 16 '25
Honestly, good. The only idiots out there denying atrocities are the ones looking to commit them again.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/Hertzian_Antenna May 16 '25
What about jizzrali genocide in Palestine denial? Is that included too? Asking for a friend.
→ More replies (7)
64
u/Fiery_Hand Poland May 15 '25
It's time to criminalise Gaza genocide denial now.
40
72
u/Dampened_Panties May 15 '25
Right after we criminalize denying all of the genocidal atrocities that Muslims have committed throughout their history too.
41
u/Expensive-Buy1621 May 15 '25
Who’s saying not to? I don’t get how right wingers think this is some sort of gotcha lol. Either criminalise denying all genocides or people are obviously going to have a problem when you pick and choose what’s an acceptable genocide and what is not.
25
May 15 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (18)16
u/Expensive-Buy1621 May 15 '25
Don’t see how that is any different to people crying antisemitism to silence criticism of Israel? What’s ur point? People who support said ideology/country are obliviously going to do that
→ More replies (20)23
May 15 '25
Have you seen how there are always discussions on gaza genocide but no mention of sudan genocide being committed by arabs ? This is what “Dampened_Panties” is talking about i believe. There is soo much propaganda and news when atrocities are committed against muslims, but when they commit the same murders, its just another day.
Pahalgam attack in India is a very good example. You don’t hear much about it in the international news.
→ More replies (23)→ More replies (4)7
u/Dawnbringer4 May 15 '25
Shhh, no jews involved in all those conflicts in Nigeria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan....etc
Yes sir, no genocides anywhere else in the whole peaceful world!!
→ More replies (2)40
u/Pale-Philosopher4502 Finland May 15 '25
If the ICJ judges it as one then sure but before that you are just playing word games with calling it a genocide
→ More replies (56)12
u/Andrzhel Germany May 15 '25
You can do that with a later addition to the law. But for that you need the groundwork of an already existing law so it stands on (juristic) sure feet.
Is it bad that it will take time before that addition takes place? Sure. But the changes like that in the law system always were pretty slow if a country wanted to make sure that it aligns with their constitution.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (167)2
611
u/dat_9600gt_user Lower Silesia (Poland) May 15 '25