I don’t think it is that simple. If we allow these people free speech then we risk setting a precedent for outsiders coming to Germany to support Far-Right rallies. Laws are double-edged.
When I travel to Asian countries I am warned in my Visa application to not participate in any political activity. I take risks anyhow but have been lucky.
what is being argued about here is forbidding protests by non citizens no matter their political stance. it has nothing to do with the tolerance paradox
So we better repress all political activism because it might be far right? The far right would applaud this concept and wouldn’t need outside supporters if you fight for their cause.
EDIT: Also most palestinians living here can’t become a permant resident because they would need certification from their state but Germany doesn’t recognize their state as one.
I didnt assume you want to prevent ALL protest. This would be literally one of the worst dictatorships in existens, few of them actually forbid all and every protest.
Trying to exclude people without papers from democracy while not giving those people a fair chance to get papers is still the closest thing to racial segregation the international court allows
Oh wait, international law art.20 Nr. 1 actually sets protests as a universal human right.
1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
Help a tired brain out. Are you making the stupid argument that pro-Palestine advocacy is incitement to discrimination and hatred and war propaganda for Hamas?
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
"
This in combination with art. 19 gives us the right to protest:
"Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
It does, but with a similar Problem as the US one: it garuantees freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, but only to CITIZENS.
Cause what does a politician care about people who can’t vote for him anyway -.-
Ah, whoops. I block JS and didn’t notice that. Here’s an archive. I did a quick search and didn’t see any articles that mention what kind of visas they have.
Soft Paywall.
Is this protestors who are on tourist, student and temporary visas?
EDIT: They are not citizens. Paywall bypass..
I don’t think it is that simple. If we allow these people free speech then we risk setting a precedent for outsiders coming to Germany to support Far-Right rallies. Laws are double-edged.
When I travel to Asian countries I am warned in my Visa application to not participate in any political activity. I take risks anyhow but have been lucky.
“we should adopt far right laws before the far right has the chance to do so”
Study material: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
what is being argued about here is forbidding protests by non citizens no matter their political stance. it has nothing to do with the tolerance paradox
So we better repress all political activism because it might be far right? The far right would applaud this concept and wouldn’t need outside supporters if you fight for their cause.
EDIT: Also most palestinians living here can’t become a permant resident because they would need certification from their state but Germany doesn’t recognize their state as one.
Protests by non-citizens is what I wrote.
First they came for…
Yeah and thats what i meant.
I didnt assume you want to prevent ALL protest. This would be literally one of the worst dictatorships in existens, few of them actually forbid all and every protest.
Trying to exclude people without papers from democracy while not giving those people a fair chance to get papers is still the closest thing to racial segregation the international court allows
Oh wait, international law art.20 Nr. 1 actually sets protests as a universal human right.
Which international law is that?
Do you mean the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Article 20 says:
1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.
Help a tired brain out. Are you making the stupid argument that pro-Palestine advocacy is incitement to discrimination and hatred and war propaganda for Hamas?
That was article 20. The other commenter said article 20 but didn’t say which international law.
Universal declaration of human rights:
"Article 20
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. "
This in combination with art. 19 gives us the right to protest:
"Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
"
Source: https://www.ohchr.org/en/human-rights/universal-declaration/translations/english
TIL “US constitution guarantees the right to free speech to everyone in the US despite your citizen status” https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/0415/1507664-j1-activism/
Not that the constitution matters to MAGA.
Does Germany have a similar section of their constitution?
It does, but with a similar Problem as the US one: it garuantees freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, but only to CITIZENS. Cause what does a politician care about people who can’t vote for him anyway -.-
https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/art_8.html
Read again: The US one is irrespective of citizenship.
Thanks
Ah, whoops. I block JS and didn’t notice that. Here’s an archive. I did a quick search and didn’t see any articles that mention what kind of visas they have.