In this case, it’s specifically about outlawing Holocaust denial, so I can’t imagine it being abused, but at the same time, I can’t imagine it doing much to stop fascism.
Well, it combats the most obvious ones, but I don’t think it’s the main goal of such a law to work wonders against fascism (after all they could’ve also banned the original logo (the fasces), however that one is rarely used (except in some really bad places). It’s more of a clear statement and moral boost to democracy, probably. Given it’s so highly specific about symbolism that defined western history in a negative way the dangers of it being abused as some kind of excuse to ban even more are really, really low. Given the rise of extremism all over the place a law like this can do wonder for the sense of safety and participation of endangered social groups (in this case most obviously jews, but also LGBT and anyone else hated by western fascists). I mean, that’s pretty much how it ended up here.
I’d also like to point out that the argument you’re using can also be somewhat of a slippery slope. Some people went way too far down that road and ended up somewhere where they feel suppressed because they can’t use the N-word or other slurs anymore due to anti-discrimination laws, and start screaming about their “freedom of speech”. What I want to say with this is that we absolutely should not stop to use our democratic institutions so society can regulate itself. We managed to wander towards a cliff due to a false understanding of freedom, liberty and tolerance as absolutes, while it’s actually a social contract. Without those rules (or with bad rules set up one-sided, i.e. corruption and lobbyism) extremism will take hold.
Well, it combats the most obvious ones, but I don’t think it’s the main goal of such a law to work wonders against fascism (after all they could’ve also banned the original logo (the fasces), however that one is rarely used (except in some really bad places). It’s more of a clear statement and moral boost to democracy, probably. Given it’s so highly specific about symbolism that defined western history in a negative way the dangers of it being abused as some kind of excuse to ban even more are really, really low. Given the rise of extremism all over the place a law like this can do wonder for the sense of safety and participation of endangered social groups (in this case most obviously jews, but also LGBT and anyone else hated by western fascists). I mean, that’s pretty much how it ended up here.
I’d also like to point out that the argument you’re using can also be somewhat of a slippery slope. Some people went way too far down that road and ended up somewhere where they feel suppressed because they can’t use the N-word or other slurs anymore due to anti-discrimination laws, and start screaming about their “freedom of speech”. What I want to say with this is that we absolutely should not stop to use our democratic institutions so society can regulate itself. We managed to wander towards a cliff due to a false understanding of freedom, liberty and tolerance as absolutes, while it’s actually a social contract. Without those rules (or with bad rules set up one-sided, i.e. corruption and lobbyism) extremism will take hold.
I do like your vigilance though.