anti-fascist archives: 3 new additions

Paul Kneisel tallpaul at
Tue Nov 16 18:48:04 MST 1999


1) Heinrich Himmler "Combatting the Gypsy Nuisance," 8 Dec 1938
2) Hans Schemm (Deutsche Volksgesundheit), "Alien Albumin -- Stop the
   thief: the role of Jews in medicine ..... how much longer will the
   Jewish spirit be allowed to muzzle German reforms?" Jan 1935
3) Ernst Hiemer (Racial Hygiene Education), The Poisonous Mushroom [A Nazi
   Children's Primer]

People interested in the Roma question in S.E. Europe today should find
Himmler's article valuable in understanding the roots of the anti-Roma

The English psychoanalyst and folklorist Ernest Jones called the "The
Malleus Maleficarum" or "Witches Hammer" the most psychopathological book
ever published. One might say the same of the intensely anti-Semitic Der
Stuermer, the newspaper published by Julius Streicher. Streicher was
convicted at Nuremberg and executed, a decision in international law of
some importance to the "free speech for fascists" debate. For aside from
his virulent anti-Semitic publication, he played virtually no role in other
Nazi actions; he was too perverse and one of the Nazi Party's own internal
courts declared him unfit to hold public or party office. The principle
established at Nuremberg by the court that sentenced Streicher to death was
that publication alone can, in special circumstances, constitute a crime
against humanity. Streicher's particular earlier interests also led him to
play a role in the pseudo-scientific "Volksgesundheit" (Folkish Health)
movement, with which Schemm and Hiemer were also associated.

Both the Schemm and Hiemer publications are interesting illustrations of
"false facts," a doctrine of particular importance when we consider the
issue of "free speech for fascists." People who use this slogan are often
under the mistaken impression that all manner of publications are similarly

A number of legal decisions have shown this is not so. In the Canadian case
of Holocaust Revisionist E. Zuendel, reflecting English common law, Judge
Ron Thomas stated in his opinion: "The Court of Appeal, in its judgment,
said that the spreading of falsehoods knowingly is the antithesis of
seeking truth through the free exchange of ideas. It has no social or moral
value which would merit constitutional protection, nor does it aid the
working of a parliamentary democracy or further self-fulfilment."

An almost identical view exists in the U.S. Constitutional system. In Gertz
v. Robert Welch Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974) the court held that "Under the
First Amendment there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious
an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of
judges and juries but [418 U.S. 323, 340] on the competition of other
ideas. But there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact.
Neither the intentional lie nor the careless error materially advances
society's interest in 'uninhibited, robust, and wide-open' debate on public
issues. ... the erroneous statement of fact is not worthy of constitutional
protection ...."

from The Internet Anti-Fascist
Tuesday, 16 Nov 1999
Vol. 3, Number 94 (#358)

More information about the Marxism mailing list