I am not interested in the personalization of the argument or grounding it in lived experience of any sort.
Objectively the system which you extoll results in censorship, in this case of criticism of a near-dictator involved in genocide against the Kurdish people.
I believe that enabling a state to censor what people can say is dangerous to democracy. I think this is adequately demonstrated through numerous historical and current examples.
Your statement of "tolerance" is meaningless because you will be unaware of other viewpoints of which you must be tolerant when they are censored.
Ironically as this discussion is deemed offensive to the moderators of HN this entire discussion has been effaced.
I have the feeling you are just cherry picking this to troll on and not interested in talking about the different dogmatics of legal systems. I didn't want to personalize the discussion, just replace "you" and "me" with "any person from your belief system" and "any person from my belief system". It looks to me that you are not interested in thinking about other people's opinion and/or belief system. Now THAT was a personal remark.
Really? So, you can't see the link between the German state's power to choose which speech acts can be punished and the punishing of someone for speech acts?
You cannot see the link between the Turkish bombing and starving of the Kurdish people and the historical assaults by your own country on minority populations?
I am not going to reply any more to you as you have descended to personalized abuse, but I will close with thanking you for illustrating exactly why the policing of free speech can never be allowed: there are too many people like you who are incapable of exercising tolerance and rationality, and once a lever of power and control is in your hands you will pull it.
Thank you, and god bless the USA.