576

Self-described Nazi becomes first person jailed in Australia for performing outlawed salute (www.nbcnews.com)

submitted 6 days ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

99 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

Jacob Hersant, a self-described Nazi, was sentenced to one month in prison, becoming the first person in Australia jailed for performing an outlawed Nazi salute.

Convicted in Victoria for making the salute outside a courthouse in October, Hersant’s act followed new legislation banning the gesture.

Magistrate Brett Sonnet justified the sentence, citing Hersant’s intent to promote Nazi ideology publicly.

Hersant’s lawyer argued that his actions were nonviolent and claimed they were protected as political expression, stating plans to appeal the ruling on constitutional grounds.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] yamanii@lemmy.world 27 points 5 days ago

It's the tolerance paradox, you can't tolerate these people and have a peaceful democracy. This is the answer.

[-] Jon_Servo@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

Self-described Nazi

Yeah, there's a term for that: Nazi. Just call them that.

[-] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 days ago

I think it's to clarify that it's not coming from the judgement of the newspaper. The Nazi himself is calling himself a Nazi. So, there's no doubt about it.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] in4aPenny@lemmy.world 25 points 5 days ago

Didn't we used to kill Nazi's and celebrate their demise in movies like Indiana Jones?

[-] emmy67@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago

Apparently we didn't kill enough

[-] in4aPenny@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

Would be easier to continue if our state apprati didn't protect them. You'd get shot by police for shooting at Nazi's now.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 70 points 6 days ago

I have a reason to post a Riker after what happened in the U.S. on Tuesday! Oh god, it's better than therapy...

[-] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 57 points 6 days ago

Good.

It was a mistake letting Nazis and others practice their terrorist views in public. Freedom of expression is not and never should be an absolute right.

[-] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 21 points 5 days ago

I understand why people seem to think we should tolerate these views, because "muh free speech," but to them, I say:

[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 19 points 5 days ago

The paradox of tolerance doesn't exist once you understand that tolerance is a social contract.

If one party doesn't adhere to the contract, then the other party also doesn't have to either.

[-] anzo@programming.dev 14 points 5 days ago

I keep forgetting who said it, and I will rephrase terribly but there's this antifa quote that goes something like "A person of color, homosexual, or Jew doesn't really have a choice to stop being who they're. Meanwhile, a fascist can stop spreading their hate towards others. That's all we ask, and we won't be tolerant."

[-] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 6 points 4 days ago

Also, what does it mean to "tolerate" the existence of minorities? What exactly are we "tolerating"? Tolerance in every other context means to accept deviation from a standard or some negative outcome.

Framing anyone's mere existence as a thing to be "tolerated" is to imply they are deviant or negative.

That's where the paradox of tolerance loses me. I don't think we should be tolerant in general. I think we should make value judgements about what is good or bad and act accordingly. Every society does this, and pretending we're above it all and completely neutral is dishonest.

And if the "tolerance" is of differing views, diversity of thought is also good, not a bad thing to be tolerated.

It's simple: we identify behaviour that is bad, like bigotry and hatred, and we say no. We're not rejecting it because it's merely different, and to accept that framing is to accept the cry-bullying of fascists. We reject them because they suck, and we don't owe them shit about it.

[-] Dasus@lemmy.world 29 points 6 days ago

"My support of political ideologies which directly propose genocide is completely non-violent, trust me bro."

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] thatsTheCatch@lemmy.nz 33 points 6 days ago

Imagine being his lawyer and having to come up with an argument to defend him. Yeesh

[-] Vilian@lemmy.ca 11 points 5 days ago

A lawyer one time said that his job when defending someone that couldn't be defended is guaranteeing that the prosecutors do their job property just because the guy is totally guilt

load more comments

this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024

576 points (98.6% liked)

World News

39013 readers

866 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.