The fight for free speech

Shut up, they said.

The writer C. J. Hopkins, who is an American but lives in Germany, is being sentenced to pay a fine or face prison for a couple of tweets comparing the Covid lockdown totalitarianism to Nazi Germany. His “crime” is to have posted two tweets showing a swastika, which, as you know, can be considered a crime in Germany, even if it’s an ancient symbol that predates National Socialism by thousands of years.  

(To be honest, German laws can be a bit retarded. At some point they also wanted to prohibit using the letter Z, as it was considered Russian propaganda.) 

Now, what’s bizarre about all this is that Hopkins was actually criticizing Nazi Germany. Far from being a Nazi, he is one of those guys who sees Nazis everywhere, and Nazism as the epitome of evil. But mostly, he was talking about Covid and Covid lockdowns, not Nazi Germany. It was just an old, tired metaphor. 

Now, there have been people who have been arrested in Germany for actually defending Nazism: 93-year old Ursula Havenbeck — wow, a dangerous grandma! — and also Monika Schaefer, a 63-year old Canadian woman who posted a video about the Holocaust. (It seems Germany specializes in arresting old Omas but letting psychopathic young criminals roam free.) If that's not anarcho-tyranny, I don't know what is.

Even if they were “Nazis”, I don’t think they should have been arrested, to be honest. I’m not a great fan of Nazi Germany — or of modern Germany, for that matter — but the so-called Holocaust is a historical event and as such it should be possible to openly discuss it or even deny it, like anything else. No one is arrested for denying that Napoleon invaded Russia. Maybe it’s stupid, but it’s not a crime. So I don’t really see why people should be punished for denying the Holocaust, or the Moon Landings, or 911. 

I mentioned Miles Mathis the other day. His theory is that all the Nazi leaders, including Hitler, were actually Jewish.  It’s an intriguing theory. It could be wrong, but there's no harm in hearing it. I don’t know what would happen if he lived in Germany. Probably he would get the death penalty, even if there’s no death penalty in Germany right now, but perhaps they would make an exception for that. 

On the other hand, we’ve seen many Ukrainian soldiers, especially in the infamous Azov squad, openly displaying swastikas and other Nazi symbols, and Germany was and is supporting them. So, I really don’t know. I think the whole “Nazi” thing, to be honest, is just a distraction. 

C. J. Hopkins real crime is not a stupid swastika — it is discussing the Covid era totalitarianism. That’s why they are punishing him, the Nazi thing is just an excuse to attack him him for bad-think. 

But the question is, why now after two years? Are Covid lockdowns and forced vaccinations coming back?

I wouldn’t think so, after their complete failure, but after a period of silence where war dominated the headlines, the media is now again talking about supposed “variants”. There's even one called “Eris”, which is the Greek goddess of chaos, strife and discord. So, it is possible that this is on the works. “The war failed, let's bring back Covid again”?  

C. J. Hopkins’ alleged fine, all things considered, is not that big: 3500 euros. Or 60 days in a German prison, which might arguably be worse, especially if you end up raped by some big Arab Bubba type.

But there are legal fees which could amount to thousands of euros. I don’t really understand how they already determined his guilt and the fine amount before the trial, but German law, as I said, is complicated and sometimes make no sense. 

Another annoying thing about Germany, but also present in many other European countries, is the TV tax. You’re not just bombarded with propaganda 24/7, you’re also expected to pay for it. You’re literally forced to fund government propaganda, even if you don’t watch it. (And you thought income tax was bad enough.) 

It seems that the more people talk about “free speech”, the less we seem to have it. Until recently it was a rallying cry of the left, now they are more into limiting what they call “hate speech” or “misinformation”, which means they don’t really understand the concept of free speech at all. 

For many years or even decades, the “fight for free speech” concentrated on sexual stuff. There was even a famous Hollywood movie lionizing the figure of pornographer Larry Flint, turning him into some kind of free speech hero. Whatever it is, pornography is not “speech”, and it's not good for you. It's more like a drug, really. There are reasons to limit it.

While, on the other hand, there have been more and more restrictions on what they call “hate speech", which is actually the only kind of speech that needs to be protected. If I say something banal or trite, like, “I like ice cream", there is really no reason to “protect” it, as no one cares. But if I say something that may be deemed offensive or critical to some people, especially if it's a powerful group of people, then I might have problems. So there should be laws to avoid that. That's the only reason for protecting “free speech".

But of course, they know all that. It's just that more and more people are realizing that the system is based on lies, so they want to silence all dissent, one way or another.