Germany's 'Hard Line vs. Covid Deniers' is Another Nail in the Coffin of Freedom of Speech
As per the Süddeutsche Zeitung, the State May now Retroactively Cut Your Pension, if You Speak Out vs. The Powers That Be
As long-time readers know, I’ve written before on the kiss of death for freedom of speech (and assembly) in Central Europe during the ‘fiery, but mostly peaceful’ engagements commonly known as ‘Summer of Love George Floyd’:
Today, we’ll have to come to grips with the sad and putrefying state of freedom of speech in Germany, courtesy of the Süddeutsche Zeitung. As always, translation and emphases are mine, as are the bottom lines.
Hard Line vs Covid Deniers
By Ronen Steinke, Süddeutsche Zeitung, 4 Dec. 2023 [paywall-free version]
The Federal Administrative Court [orig. Bundesverwaltungsgericht] has ruled that civil servants may be punished if they spread conspiracy myths and criticise pandemic policy as ‘dictatorial’.
For many years now, authorities have been authorised to take disciplinary action and even remove civil servants from their positions for making extremist statements. Now, for the first time, this is also possible in the event of the spread of coronavirus conspiracy ideologies.
The Federal Administrative Court has issued a landmark decision in this regard. It puts Coronavirus deniers on a par with right-wing extremists under certain circumstances. And this means that anyone who displays such views can lose their position in the civil service. Be it as a teacher, as a police officer, or even as a soldier.
The Bundeswehr Soldier Complained of an ‘Emerging Dictatorship’
The Court’s decision (case number 2 WD 11.22) was issued back in June, but initially went unnoticed and has only now been discussed in detail in the current issue of the biweekly Juristenzeitung [Jurists’ Review, a specialist outlet for lawyers]. The case in question concerns a former captain in the German Armed Forces who had already retired but continued to receive pay [remember this aspect].
‘I am ashamed of this state that I served faithfully for over 30 years’, the man posted on Facebook in April 2020, in light of political measures to contain the pandemic, such as bans on gatherings and social distancing. ‘What are we letting them do to us? This is the true face of an emerging dictatorship.’
The Federal Administrative Court—specifically: the 2nd Military Service Senate [orig. Wehrdienstsenat]—has now ruled that such and similar criticism would constitute a breach of the service's duty to be loyal to the constitution. The state may sanction the ex-officer by reducing his pension [see: a veteran speaks out—akin to what I think can be considered a ‘conscientious objection’ and has gotten his retirement benefits cut]
Conspiracy Ideologues are Extremists
Only since 2021 have the Office for the Protection of the Constitution [orig. Verfassungsschutzämter, i.e., Germany’s political internal police forces] classified the conspiracy ideology scene of so-called Querdenker [trans. lateral thinkers] as extremists. Even if the Querdenker do not pursue a political programme of their own, and even if they do not consider a ‘dictatorship’ to be a good thing, these people are nevertheless accused of ‘defaming and delegitimising the state’ [if this ruling stands, what does not fall into this categorisation?]
This argument, which is now used by numerous offices for the protection of the constitution, has now been endorsed by the Federal Administrative Court for the first time. The relevance of its decision is great. ‘The content of the statements can be seamlessly transferred to federal and state civil servants’, comments Bonn law professor Klaus Ferdinand Gärditz in the Juristenzeitung. The Federal Administrative Court makes it clear that criticising the government or existing legal regulations is also fundamentally legitimate for civil servants. ‘Because neither the state nor society has an interest in uncritical civil servants and soldiers.’ [what gives?]
However, a limit is reached when someone ‘not only criticises the state organs, but defames their democratically elected representatives, denies them legitimacy, advocates their dismissal in unconstitutional proceedings or even calls for their violent overthrow.’ [there you go]
The Lower Court had Earlier Acquitted the Officer
The former Bundeswehr captain involved in this case also posted in May 2020: ‘I don't understand why my comrades don't take action against this planned dictatorship?’ He had initially won in court last year by successfully invoking his freedom of expression before the lower court, the Truppendienstgericht Süd. There, the former captain had claimed in part that he had satirically exaggerated on the internet—and incidentally made a legitimate contribution to the debate on the proportionality of measures.
The Federal Administrative Court has now ruled against this. The former officer had labelled the German government's coronavirus policy as both ‘communist’ and ‘fascist’, and he had shared a photomontage of Angela Merkel with a Hitler salute.
In 2020, he posted on Facebook about Microsoft founder Bill Gates and the then Federal Minister of Health Jens Spahn (CDU), a trained banker: ‘The whole world is being screwed by a software freak who wants to take over the world. And we in Germany are letting a banker take away our human rights. Are we all stupid?’ The decision to punish him for this is final.
Bottom Lines
This is how far we’ve come in these past couple of years. A veteran, of all people, who served his country for decades, raises a couple of—esp. with the benefit of hindsight extremely valid—points. As a consequence, his pension benefits are cut because he ‘defamed and delegitimised the state’ by posting memes on social media.
would call this quite correctly, I’d suppose, ‘malign creativity’.Let’s leave aside the notion of whether or not it was ‘a brilliant idea’ to engage in some social media shit-posting (I think it was, esp. that officer’s right to do so) and let’s consider two brief issues here:
Where might the defendant have gotten the idea that the Covid régime would be an emerging ‘dictatorship’?
As regards the notion of responsibility for posting stuff on social media, I suppose the silver lining here might actually be something else. Remember, remember, Karl Lauterbach on the magical vaxx for children:
And please engage in a thought experiment here for a moment:
If that veteran gets his pension cut for shitposting stuff on social media, what should we do with Health Ministers posting factually inaccurate information—i.e., LIES—on social media?
I move to suggest that a retroactive pension cut is the minimum we’d logically get to expect in this case. Since Mr. Lauterbach is also a cabinet level official, we’d also need to up the ante to ensure that kind of ‘defaming and delegitimising of the state’ and its reputation, such as it (still) exists, repeats itself.
Perhaps we should consider holding politicians personally liable, both in terms of criminal (sentencing) and civil law (punitive damages)? Heck, to improve manners, we’d probably better be off discussing tarring and feathering some of the worst offenders, incl. tying them to a post and giving Joe Q Public the possibility of shaming and naming these people, just like in the middle ages.
I’m, of course, joking, am I not?
Malign creativity will continue until morale improves, I suppose.
Oh my God. Shared, and thank you for bringing this to our attention.
The totalitarian state does not punish people for telling lies but for telling anything threatening their narrative (it could true or untrue). As a rule, totalitarian servants are immune from any punishment while acting on behalf of the system. However, if they ever appear to be a threat to the system, they will become non-persons in no time. Remember how Bolsheviks would expunge the “fallen" by retouching photos in which they appeared in with Stalin?