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.
Tolerance of intolerance is not a path to freedom. Choosing to do nothing will only mean that rights and freedoms will be destroyed. Call this the lesser of two evils if you must.
If you let intolerance fester, it will grow and take control, then it will start hurting and squeezing others. It’d be foolish to sacrifice freedom in the name of freedom.
So why do you think I should tolerate this? Why is your intolerance excused?
Are you worried about being jailed for Nazi views? So you should be, and consider yourself lucky. I’d rather have you jailed for a month to hopefully learn your lesson that we don’t take to hatred and violence lightly, than to allow you a platform to gather support so you can hurt and kill millions.
I don’t have Nazi views. I have American views of free speech. You’re the person trying to hurt people.
This law seems to be explicitly in place to avoid people getting hurt. You have not provided any argument at all how it doesn’t.
Nobody is hurt by a gesture. Sticks and stones. You want these people hiding themselves? I imagine it’s better they stay in the open. I’m sure someone is out there making a list.
We can’t use the same tactics that would be used to suppress minorities to go after them because we become them that way.
Thank you for providing an actual argument.
As we have witnessed in many places, these stuff isn’t always outlawed. In places where these views can be expressed more freely, it either escalate to the point where someone is hurt, or they gain enough popularity that it becomes almost impossible to stop. I believe that the best way to deal with the problem is to address it quickly head on when we know this is universally abhorrent.
I don’t really think the whole Nazi thing is even about what Hitler made it about. That said, what it is about is a form of authoritarianism that I’m very against. Despite that, I think they should be able to talk about it all they like. It’s not like they’re winning any votes. We should jail people for being Republican. They’re doing that thing.
There is a difference between authoritarianism and having laws to protect your citizens. Authoritarians have laws to protect the regime, not the citizens.
No one is being jailed for being a Nazi when you say you have issues with immigration policies, nor are people being jailed for being a communist for saying they want socialized healthcare.
You have to draw the line somewhere and say that something is dangerous and illegal, and I think saying you support Nazis and want to do Nazi stuff is a pretty good line.
I know this won’t change your mind, but even as you continue to disagree with this, I hope you can see why this isn’t a definitively wrong thing to do.
I have not once heard of legislation here that genuinely violated people’s rights other than Victoria’s snap lockdown of a group of apartment buildings during COVID, which got the government into a class action lawsuit.
Saying you value free speech, then saying that people who can violate others rights should also have freedom of speech in that regard, seems like you don’t know anything about what free speech is all about.
Tolerate what exactly? Not following the law? Tolerate the law that is in favour of freedom and democracy?
Edit: you font discuss in good faith so just forget it.
I do not tolerate a law that is NOT in favor of freedom.
You’re just a bad faith baiter lol
I’m not. You’re just the kind of person who parrots lines like that without any regards to it’s meaning.
In Australia, and likely in most other countries, rights come with responsibilities. Our freedom of political communication, as outlined in the Victorian Human Rights Charter, doesn’t allow us to infringe on others’ rights to feel safe. Public expressions of neonazism can intimidate and threaten community safety, which limits that freedom. Just as we can’t harass or incite violence, any form of expression that undermines others’ rights to safety is restricted.
I myself also believe freedoms shouldn’t be tarnished by outrageous legislation, but I don’t believe this is an example of that, as it protects other people’s rights more than the ones prosecuted.