Germar Rudolf, Resistance Is Obligatory (2012; PDF-Datei

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORY
be. 237 It is the small words which have a big effect, here Eylmann’s
word “necessary,” because what is considered necessary will be decided
by the Constitutional High Court – axiomatically to the detriment of
revisionist defendants. This way the whole issue turns into a farce.
How little leeway even Members of Parliament have to distance
themselves from the prevailing views has been sufficiently demonstrated
by the case of Martin Hohmann. In a private lecture he had rejected
both the charge that the Jews are a people of perpetrators, just because
they have been involved over-proportionately in the massacres of the
Soviet revolutionaries. In the same way Hohmann had rejected the
charge that the Germans are a people of perpetrators, just because Germans
have been involved overproportionately in the persecution of Jews
during World War II. Just to bring the term “people of perpetrators” in
connection with the Jews – although it was a repudiating one – was
enough to finish off Hohmann’s parliamentary career and to throw him
out of his political party, the CDU. 238 Now imagine what would happen
to a Member of Parliament, if he demanded publicly that we revisionists
should be allowed to express our opinions freely. How long would he
sit in the parliament?
The only German parties signaling that they would oppose such laws
contravening civil rights are the right-wing radical parties NPD and
DVU. You can figure out for yourself what the chances are that any of
their law initiatives will ever get the support of the parliament’s majority,
since this censorship law has been created exactly with the aim at
preventing such majorities.
Apart from that I may raise doubts whether the NPD, provided it had
the opportunity, would really reinstate freedom or if they would merely
rescind the laws inexpedient to them and replace it with others permitting
them in turn to prosecute groups inconvenient to them. At any rate,
an article in the NPD’s party periodical in spring 2005 made me skeptical,
which discussed the “Ideology of human rights” in a derogatory
way.
Hence parliament cannot be expected to provide any remedy.
237 German news magazine Focus, 38/1994, p. 76.
238 See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Hohmann.
195