Talk:Strafgesetzbuch section 86a

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Germany Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Human rights Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics Start‑class

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Law Start‑class

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GDR

I'm pretty sure it was applied to GDR-Symbols as well. I'll try to dig up some links.--ospalh (talk) 10:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not really... I think running around with a swastika would yield jail while flying GDR flags would be considered lunatic or nostalgia. There was some issue with the blue shirts of the FDJ (that organization had been banned in the West), I do not remember much, but I think only Bavaria took offence... I do not remember whether they got pwned with 86/86a or with some other law, but really, swastika is taboo, GDR not as much --88.75.232.1 (talk) 17:22, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial German flags

Are any of the Imperial flags banned in Germany? I have noticed they have been co-opted a lot by neonazis, in fact even Weimar flags have been used once or twiceBenvenuto (talk) 06:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those with a swastika on it are banned of course, the old Reichskriegsflagge is not technically banned but try explaining that to officer Hans.. Some states also consider flying it in public a minor offence against "public order" (Ordnungswidrigkeit). This is from hearsay, I do not even own one. --88.75.232.1 (talk) 17:22, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that German law prohibits use of the flag if it is the focal point of a display and/or will disrupt public order. See page 44 of http://www.verfassungsschutz.de/de/publikationen/pb_rechtsextremismus/broschuere_1203_re_symbole_und_zeichen/broschuere_1203_re_symbole_und_zeichen.pdf Stloup1977 (talk) 17:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name

Why does this article use "§" instead of "section"? 76.66.194.220 (talk) 06:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was page moved. Skomorokh 11:27, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strafgesetzbuch § 86a → Strafgesetzbuch section 86a — Replaces § which is not a letter even in German, with the word it stands for, "section", as "§" is not typable normally, it would also make this section accessible by typing it into the search box. 76.66.194.220 (talk) 06:10, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

voice your agreement with or opposition to the proposal here, with a an opinion to support your position

Discussion

voice other opinions here

I would (weakly) support a move but, for consistency with other articles, I would put the word "Section" first. I would name the article Section 86a of the German Criminal Code. "German" needs to be specified because there are several countries with a Strafgesetzbuch (there doesn't seem to be an article on the German Strafgesetzbuch. The translation at the German Ministry of Justice web site calls it the "German Criminal Code". The reason for using the '§' may be that the German word for this sign is Paragraph, which is somewhat confusing because the English paragraph is called an Absatz; the terms "§ 86a" and "Paragraph 86a" are used in German almost like proper names. --Boson (talk) 12:05, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, § is a widely used symbol that means "section" (whereas ¶ of course means "paragraph"), and I'm not sure what you mean by "not typable normally"—I just typed it now. However, the article should be named whatever it is widely known as. — The Man in Question (in question) 23:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

article move

If there is cause for moving the article, it's not the § (which is a perfectly common Latin-1 character), but the fact that most people will not recognize the topic from the current title. A sensible move would be to a title like Prohibition of symbols of unconstitutional organisations in Germany or similar, but I couldn't think of anything reasonably short that accurately identifies the topic.

User:Skomorokh is of course free to be WP:BOLD and move any article to any title he likes, but it is unclear how the move is in any way a reflection of the "outcome" of the "discussion" above. I recommend reverting the move pending a better suggestion. --dab (𒁳) 13:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exception to historical documents

What is the exception to documents that contain the symbol(s) produced before Germany's surrender for historical preservation? --Flightsoffancy (talk) 14:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the law concerns dissemination, not preservation. --dab (𒁳) 21:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comical Hypocrisy

Outside of Germany, this law appears to be some sort of hypocritical joke, as fully half or more of the symbols banned by this law were used on a large scale by the German government itself, to represent itself. Surely the German people must realize this, and have become ambivalent about it in a type of doublethink. Reference also: Freedom_of_speech_by_country#Germany and Censorship_in_Germany.

Indeed, in Germany, the current 'democratic' regime's outlawing symbols of unconstitutionally approved parties, would appear to be no more democratic or tolerant of other political parties or ideologies, than previous fascist government, which itself did exactly the same, outlawing and criminalizing the display of symbols of competing parties, once it had gained power.

Says who? --31.17.188.18 (talk) 16:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Satire or Parody

Recently I was suprised to see that the Iron Sky movie will be released in Germany, since it depicts swatstikas and other symbols related to nazism. The articles section about anti-facist movements tells me that in very specific cases the use of a swatstika in relation to nazism is condoned. The movie Iron Sky is however a comedy parodying a lot of recent day politicians and defines an alternative history in it's setting. Therefore one could argue the symbols are not used to depict an actual facist movement but a fictional one. If this statement were to be declined one could argue the movie does not encourage, promote or discourage the support of 'unconstitutional organisations'. So now I wonder how the Law would accomodates for Satire or Parody.83.128.29.38 (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2012 (UTC) PS: I should mention I am unaware how (or even if) the move is adapted for the German public.[reply]

you should not ignore the whole section. § 86 a references to §86 praragraph 3, which say:

(3) Subsection (1) shall not be applicable if the means of propaganda or the act serves to further civil enlightenment, to avert unconstitutional aims, to promote art or science, research or teaching, reporting about current historical events or similar purposes. […]

so both sections (86 and 86ab) does not applicable at art - what Iron Sky is. So there would be no neccessity for any specific censoring-process in this case.--87.123.4.88 (talk) 17:36, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How did the GDR deal with it?

How did the GDR deal with the display of the Swastika and other fascist symbols? 71.173.26.51 (talk) 17:18, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Symbology of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant also forbidden under section 86a?

Not long after the horrific beheading murders of Western journalists by the so-called "ISIL" or "ISIS" group, I had heard on American cable TV news shows that the flag of that terrorist "army" had become as illegal to display in Germany as any of the Third Reich's flags still are there, outside of a strictly historical or educational context...is this true? If so, it's quite an "expected" development, from the near-Einsatzgruppe like behavior of their fighters. The PIPE (talk) 00:38, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Algiz rune?

Is the algiz rune banned? It is not listed among the example symbols on this page. It was used by the National Socialist women’s organization and the SS Lebensborn project so it might be. I found this but it isn't clear regarding if it's actually banned or only discouraged. // Liftarn (talk) 12:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

in Israel

The swastika taboo exist in countries where Neo-Nazism is felt. This is why the law in Israel had a smaller fear of these symbols (The Sun Cross and other symbols are not much known.), which used in many black jokes.

84.95.230.168 (talk) 00:34, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]