German poltical criminal law
deutsch English français



The way from the freedom of opinion to a indoctrinating dictatorship isn´t a long way. The street to the indoctrinating dictatorship is fully developed and comfortably to drive, and it seduces to breeze in order to reach the aim fast.

But there will be a rude awaking at the end of this street one day...



THE POLITICAL CRIMINAL LAW will be the persecution and criminalization of a man, because he is advancing a political or religious world - view in puplic which is unwelcome for the authorities.

POLITICAL CRIMINAL ACTS are offenses which are defined (more or less) clearly by the law to be normal criminal acts, but those offenses oppose the principles of a legal state, because the disrespected laws oppose higher - ranking human rights, for example the freedom pf speech.
Laws protecting the life and health of people, the property of third persons, the injury of the personal honor of private men don´t belong to the poltical criminal law. But there will be a few exceptions.
Can / may you legitimate the usage of violence by the rejection of the persecution of political criminal acts? We know about the case of the tyrannicide, for example the men of the planned attempt on Adolf Hitler´s life at June 20th, 1944 are being honered till today. But almost of the other cases cannot be decided in such a clear way - there will be more wiggle room than enough, plain statements cannot be answered.
The German Basic Law allows to the German people the right of resistance against powers which want to destroy the free democratic basic order. But what shall we do, if before all peaceful and legal appliances for relief have failed? Shall we accept the injust then? The Basic Laws doesn´t say that the resistance has to be carry out without violence, but also in other respects the statements of the Basic Law are rather vague... Violence can only be allowed in compound of the commensuability of an urgent emergency / self defense, whereby always the moderatest form of violence as possible has to be choosen...
But what will be violence at all? The killing or injuring of people, animals, the damage of real values - you are right, that are the classic kinds of violence. But the most dangerous kind of the every - day - violence can be noticed in a more subtle form: The distortion of men to realize their right of freedom of speech, the imposition of political / religious convictions to defenceless kids, etc. .

Kids and teenagers are a beloved victim of destructive political and religious ideologies , because they are easily capable of being influenced.
Translation of the text: "The mortal sin separates men from God. Everybody who dies with a mortal sin, will go to the hell, because he had lost the life of mercy." without sin, menial sin, mortal sin...

I also want to describe the violence in its broader sense to be each kind of disrespect to the rights and moral obligations resulting from the general human rights: To abstain from birth control, compulsory labor of each kind, the destruction of the environment and nature etc..
Further we know the passive resistance which will be made by peaceful remedies, but strictly speaking it will be a paradox.
Forms of the passive resistance are: Refusal to work, strike, at least badly working, boycotts of voting, secession from the church, the famous work - to - rule.
The kind of violence which doesn´t offend men but things, like about the sabotage (wordly: "to destroy with a wooden shoe") is taking an average value. This kind of violence has to be preferred in a case of doubts to the violence against men, because it doesn´t create new martyrs, but will be effective nevertheless.
But who shall decide in which case which kind of violence can be justified? This matter will be decided by the authorities which shall become the victim of the violence. It will be obviously, that only the kind of violence will be legitime which suits in the plans of the authorities.


International supervisory committees should come into action, because the national resorts fail, even have to fail, because they are prejudiced last but not least because of historical experiences. Nearly one state can master this problems with interne remedies.


Also the STATE CRIME is belonging to the political criminal law. Well, it will be a difference whether you are committing a criminal act in the capacity of being a private citizen or an authorized agent of the state.
So, if you are being a soldier, you will be killing people during a war. The doctors in the cencentration - camps selected imprisoned people for the gas - chambers. Stately secret services are being responsible for kidnappings and attentats - not only against cruel fuehrers. So the Israelite secret service planned even an attentat against Adenauer (the first federal chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany), in order to mention only one exampel. Scientist developped by order of the state even nuclear weapons which could destroy the whole of mankind.
Further than also the espionage by order of the state is counting to the state crime. But this example shall be sufficient.
But the privotal question will be who can / must held responsible for this kind of crimes. The state as itself cannot be attackable, because the state covers the whole of the population. Of course, you cannot put a whole people to jail. Therefore we had to reduce the punishments to the realy responsible persons. But who will they be? The governement, which has been elected by the people or supported by the people in another way? In this case the guilty would reflect again to the whole of the people.
Well, the members of the authorities can always demand for a superordinate emergency in order to legitimate their wrong - doings. Also the single decision makers of the state are not really free to make up their decisions. There will not even exist in the worst dictatorship an only fuehrer who is controlling erverything, you can find such a situation only in the religions. There will be no fuehrer who can stay in power in the long run against the wishes of his people, further than there will also be a lot of internal poltical infightings of the authorities.

The STATE TERRORISM will be a further increase of the state criminality. The best example of the 20th century will be the drop of nuclear weapons to Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of the Second World War without any urgency and which continues to threaten the whole of mankind by an almost danger of a nuclear war.



You can only less offend the state crime with the conventional remedies of the crime laws, if you don´t want to neglect the principles of a legal state. This matter can surely be very unsatisfied for the victims of the state crime, which are seeking revenge. But I want to tell them: You didn´t became the victims of private men but you were victims of the system!



I want to notice some remarques In order to make the theme clear to prevent misunderstandings: What will be the difference between "(collective) guilt", "(collrective) responsibility" and "(collective) liability"?
A group of people is being composed of a lot of members, and nearly always some of them commit moral or juristidical mistakes of any kind. If they justify their actions by the ideology resprensented by the whole of the group, you can speak about a "collective guilt". But we cannot notice such a situation practically, because even the old NSDAP (the old nazi - party of Hitler) was not an absolute homogeneous group.
Now we have to deal with the theme "responsibility". The wwhole of the group ist responsible for the ideology which is represented. If there are single persons of the group which are injuring moral / right by their behavior in reference to the certain ideology, so the whole of the group will be responsible to call them to account and to clean the group internally. If they cannot stand their "collective responsibility", they will have to face consequences, although there will not be a "collective guilt". In a case of emergeny a single person of the group has to go away, if there will be no other possibilties to embrace his individual "responsibilty". It will be okay that also an only passive memberchip at a criminal community will be punished.
And now let us deal with "collective liability". The "collective liability" exists indepandant from the "collective guilt" and "collective responsibility". You can compare it in the best way with an insurance. So each car - driver has to pay for the damages caused by other car - drivers carelessly, self - evidently even they have nothing to do with the accidents.


...and now to concrete themes and matters of the political criminal law in Germany of today:


Abolish the § 166 StGB (StGB = German criminal code)!, the so called blasphemy - paragraph


Abolish § 130 StGB Volksverhetzung (unwelcome agitation)!


Abolish the § 86a StGB! The prohibition to use signs of unconstitutional organizations


It will be also interesting in this compound:
Demand of equal treatment of the churches and religious communities with subsiquent organizations of the NSDAP (German Nazi Party during the Third Reich)

Start site