"Second Life does not allow Nazi iconography as it broadly offensive."

Well said, and I agree completely.

Well, in some countries, some of which have residents who play SL, it is illegal to display Nazi iconography.

Remember folks, LL isn't just catering to Americans who have never experienced such a horror on our own soil.

But if they pick up a history book about the United States, they can read about such horror on our soil.

Just saying...

1. yes
2. yes
3. yes


Edit to add: I see the Nazi flag as a hate symbol.

Cat

I guess my Question is are the flags of the old Soviet Union being banned as well? or Cambodia? also locations of gov't sponsered genecidial programs against it's own people? why just Nazi? if we are going to purge our History of everything that makes us uncopmfortable?? the Confederate Flag?? for alot of people in teh world the Isreali Flag or for that matter the US flag? doe sthis mean i cannot show a Kiss logo because it uses teh SS?
i am very aware that many find teh Nazi icons offensive...well i find political correctness and revisionsist history much more so!

You know what? Feel free to go put up a nazi flag in your real life lawn if you think it will serve a purpose and generate interesting and lively discussions with your neighbours.

Because all your great cries for freedom of expression in a virtual land which is effectively private property and where SL is entitled to do as it sees fit are no more than groundless whines.

As for SL, it is a game played in countries where the imagery is illegal, as has been mentioned many times. But if you are keen on history not being forgotten, don't worry. As far as I know, SL is not the classroom or university or library that shaped us into what we are today. I think that, fortunately , there are a few other places where history can be kept alive and taught outside of SL.

To answer the first 3 questions:

1) yes
2) no
3) most definitely!

Wendel

do not forget

IBM(nazi collab)
crups(nazi collab)
russian flag(staline)
italian flag (mussolini was allied to hitler)
french flag (nazi collab)
american flag(various bloodbaths allover the world)

^_^ thanks for gravedigging this topic ^_^

My way is sans hate-speach, sorry.

Thanks for playing Necroposting for Dollars, though, Alty McAlterson. We have some lovely parting gifts for you after the show.

Well said, Nolan.

Would all of the above people on these posts take the time to Google "Godwins Law" and not nessicerily subvert it by waving the freedom of speach banner.

Not really sure that Godwin's Law applies here, Lips... mybe you're thinking of something else?


Oh, while I'm here, I'd like to add a counterpoint to the argument the argument that Nazi imagery is illegal in some places: pornographic imagery is illegal for under 21s in some places, it wouldn't surprise me if some places it was outlawed alltogether.

Not that I'm trying to argue any point of course, I haven't decided on my opinion yet.

Godwin's law doesn't have any bearing on this discussion - Topics which discuss naziism directly are distinctly excluded from Godwin's law.

Yeah, but how many burning crosses have you seen?

About 20 of them, somewhere on the main continent a few months ago...

They got deleted, correct? I suppose what I'm saying is Nazi iconography seems to be a bit more pervasive than KKK iconography worldwide - not just SL - both are offensive to me when used inappropriately (hate) but I have no problem with them as learning tools (don't repeat history kind of thing, not as learning how to be a hateful jerk). JMO

Oh, It'd be my guess that David's post was talking about the native Americans.

No idea if they got deleted or not. Probably did, just thought I'd say.

I'll second that.
Prok's was probably one of the best posts on this thread (I am only on page 6). If you have him on your ignore list, you should take him off to read it.

You guessed right. Our history is one filled with hateful genocides (Native american indians and enslaving africans). So is the history of many other countries. So is the history of many religions. I don't see why Nazi icons are singled out.

It was a horrible period of history. Absolutely sickening. But a nazi icon displayed in SL, for whatever reason, isn't repeating that horrible time in history. In fact, it's keeping the memory of that horrible time alive, so that perhaps we won't brush it under the table and then be late on realizing the fact that it is happening again, if it ever does (and I have to say judging by the current world situation, it will, in one country or another).

Because unlike America, for example, which gave up slavery, or or the Catcholic Church which hasn't called for a Crusade in many hundreds of years, the Nazi movement as it exists today still has pretty much exactly the same negative connotations it did during the war - racism, intollerance, etc. They've shifted targets ever so slightly, and now they don't do the few *good* things you could credit the the Nazi party with (Economic reforms, etc), but the bad stuff is pretty similar.

Well, I think you'll find that in some parts of the Untied States, that the Confederate flag still stands for some pretty horrid beliefs as well. Also, in many parts of the world, the Christian cross can cause instant anger and resentment and bad feelings, as can the American flag.

I'm not for tolerating hate speech, haressment, or hate crimes of any sort. In fact, I am wholeheartedly against such. However, an icon is an icon and a symbol is a symbol. I don't see that either break the ToS.

And the confederate flag *is* sometimes seen to be pretty bad too, though rarely as hot-button as the Nazi flag.

's silly anyhow, because they are using one of the battle flags, not the national flag... Idjits.

Hmmm...this is a very difficult question. Talking about history, encyclopaedias, symbols and icons is all very well, but there are people playing here for whom the history is family history and the symbols and icons are pretty damn real to you if they were symbolic of the death of your extended family.

I am very uncertain about the rights and wrongs of the issue, and reluctant to advocate censorship. But for Eggy to say "No, for the love of god, it was 60 years ago, I'm not jewish and my country wasnt even involved in WW2. Neither me nor my parents were even ALIVE back then, and even my grandmother was just a little kiddy." shows a lack of empathy at the very least for the European players for whom it is NOT simply history, who ARE jewish and whose countries were very much in WW2.

It was pointed out to me that some of the players who adopt Nazi uniforms and play out WW2 fantasies have purposefully adopted names from divisions who routinely wiped out villages and killed all the inhabitants, man, woman and child. They enjoyed and celebrated their mass killings. Maybe these people are ignorant of the history of the names they have adopted, and maybe they are very much aware. Either way, this is more than just a symbol, and more than just "history", most especially if you lost relatives in the holocaust, particularly if they were murdered by someone whose name has been adopted in game.

I would say that intention is all. If the intention of a player were to recreate for educational purposes, that would be one thing. If it were to glorify Nazi views or actions, that would be entirely reprehensible.

The question is, does adopting the name of a murdering Nazi deliberately, consistute an act of hate in itself?

I am aware of the toleration in SL for all sorts of behaviour which in RL would consistute reasons to call in the men in white coats...I am wondering though whether a truly civilised society doesn't have to stand up and be counted at some point, and draw the line in the dirt which represents the limits of their tolerance for freedom to express oneself.
Cali

Very well said Cali. The intention is certainly a key point, but I think there is something even more key. That is the "actions" of those using nazi symbols and icons. If they want to play "wipe out an innocent village" with thier friends, and all are consensual to it, and it's on thier land, then I think it's thier business. It may be very distasteful to most of us, but they aren't actively harrassing or using hate speech against anyone. There are alot of games out there that allow you to play German soldiers as well as many other factions considered to be on the wrong, or insane side of a conflict.

Thus, if a person built a concentration camp on his/her land, complete with symbols and icons, and he invited folks to hang out there and "play", it's one thing.

Now if he was to hang signs that preached intolerance or hatred, or if he expressed such views and vile thoughts to those that didn't want to hear it, he should be suspended, if not banned.

In my opinion, it takes more than just historical 'acting" or icons and symbols to make a hate crime or to preach intolerance or bigotry.

I guess I'm saying that the line is fairly clearcut to me. Hang a nazi flag, oh well..it's your business, and more than likely just going to bounce back in your face and make you very unattractive and unwanted by most of society. But call someone hateful names and try to repress, injure or harm them in an active way and it becomes my business.

To answer your questions respectfully:

1) Pro-Nazi iconography is an insult to humanity.

2) Information reviewing the horrendous effect Naziism had on the world is a valuable reminder so that we don't go there again.

3) The concept of Freedom of Speech is often abused. It is known that "freedom of speech" does not include the right to walk into a crowded theatre and yell "FIRE!". To claim that "censorship of any kind is wrong" is to blatantly ignore the human concience and our individual responsibility to society and ethics.

"Freedom" can only exist within the realm of sensible restrictions and safeguards. For example, it is not a restriction of our "freedom" to make murder illegal. Censoring that act actually grants freedom to the individual-- freedom from constant dread of bodily harm. Without that censorship, any believed "freedom" would be imaginary. A parent restricting their child from playing in the street does not remove that child's "freedom"; without that restriction the child would not experience the true freedom of growing to become an adult.

This holds true in areas beyond physical abuse. Mental abuse can be as harmful or even moreso than physical abuse. Freedom of speech can only truly exist where there also exists the right to state one's reasonable opinion without being abused for doing so.

In the case of the Nazi regime-- they removed that freedom. People were incarcerated, starved, tortured and executed for their nationality and personal beliefs. People were slaughtered because they were a Jew, a gypsy or choice of religion. Hitler's Third Reich was inexcusable and monstrous beyond excuse.

Whether you personally lived back then or not, whether you were personally affected or not-- the chronicle of that inhumane form of government should strike you to your very core... and it should do so for as long as there exists the threat that anything similar should ever happen again.

By banning... "censoring" if you will... concepts that are obviously hate-oriented and that have an undisputable history of actions contrary to the good of humanity-- we INCREASE our freedoms, not remove them. We increase our freedom from tyranny, our freedom of personal belief, our freedom of birth. It is only when we blindly and foolishly allow such things to continue to rear their ugliness that we endanger true freedom.