Guilty!
CJ Hopkins
So, the Berlin Appellate Court overturned my acquittal today. I am now, officially, at least according to the New Normal German authorities, a “hate-speech” criminal.
I’m officially a “hate-speech” criminal because I compared New Normal Germany to Nazi Germany, and I challenged the official Covid narrative, and I used the cover art of my book to do it.
The New Normal German authorities didn’t like that, and were determined to punish me for doing that, and to make an example of me, in order to discourage other people from doing that. It took them two tries, but they pulled it off.
The judge in my original trial screwed up and acquitted me, but the Berlin Public Prosecutor’s office didn’t give up. They appealed the verdict — yes, they can do that in Germany — and this morning the Appellate Court overturned the verdict and declared me guilty.
I’ll report on all the ugly details of my day in court in a proper column sometime later this week, when I’ve sufficiently recovered from the hangover I am currently about to start working on.
I’ll also be resurrecting my legal defense fund and telling you about that in my next column, because the only recourse my attorney and I have left at this point is to try to get the German Constitutional Court (i.e., Germany’s supreme court) to hear the case.
In the meantime, I wanted to share my Statement to the Appellate Court. Here it is.
* * *
Statement to the Berlin Appellate Court, September 30, 2024
Ladies and Gentlemen, my name is CJ Hopkins. I am an award-winning playwright, author, and political satirist. My work is read by hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. For over thirty years, I have written and spoken out against fascism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, and so on. Anyone can do an Internet search, find my books, reviews of my plays, my essays, and learn who I am and what my political views are in five minutes.
And yet, I am accused by the German authorities of spreading pro-Nazi propaganda. I’m accused of doing this because I posted two Tweets challenging the official Covid narrative and comparing the new, nascent form of totalitarianism it has brought into being — the so-called “New Normal” — to Nazi Germany.
Let me be clear. I did that. In August 2022, as Germany was debating whether to end its Covid mask mandates, I tweeted those two Tweets. I challenged the official Covid narrative. I compared the New Normal to Nazi Germany. I did that with the cover art of one of my books. I did what anyone is allowed to do according to German law. I did what Karl Lauterbach has done. I did what German celebrities like Jessica Berlin have done. I did what major German newspapers and magazines have done.
A few months ago, Stern and Der Spiegel published covers of their magazines featuring swastikas. Der Spiegel’s cover featured exactly the same artistic concept as my book cover and my Tweets. The only difference is, the swastika on Der Spiegel’s cover is behind a German flag, whereas the swastika on my book cover and in my Tweets is behind a medical mask. That’s it. That is the only difference.
Stern and Der Spiegel displayed swastikas on their covers in order to warn the public of the rise of a new form of totalitarianism, and that is precisely what I did. I compared the New Normal — i.e., the new nascent form of totalitarianism that came into being in 2020 — to Nazi Germany. Stern and Der Spiegel compared the AfD to Nazi Germany. That is the only difference.
I’m not a fan of the AfD. I’m not a fan of Stern and Der Spiegel. That doesn’t matter. Stern and Der Spiegel have the right to do what they did, and so do I. That right is guaranteed to us in the German constitution. We all have the right, if we see a new form of totalitarianism taking shape, to oppose it, and to compare it to historical forms of totalitarianism, including Nazi Germany.
I don’t follow German electoral politics very closely, so I don’t know exactly what the AfD has done that prompted Stern and Der Spiegel to compare them to the Nazis. But I know exactly what the German authorities did during 2020 to 2023.
In 2020, the German authorities declared a national state of emergency, for which they provided no concrete evidence, and suspended constitutional rights. Nazi Germany also did that, in March 1933.
From 2020 to 2022, the German authorities forced people to wear symbols of their conformity to the official ideology and perform humiliating public-loyalty rituals. The Nazis also did that.
The current German authorities banned protests against their arbitrary decrees. With the help of the media, they bombarded the German masses with lies and propaganda designed to terrorize the public into unquestioning obedience.
They segregated society according to who was and wasn’t conforming to official ideology. They censored political dissent. They stripped people of their jobs because they refused to conform to official ideology and follow senseless orders.
The German authorities fomented mass hatred of a “scapegoat” class of people. They demonized and persecuted critics of the government’s decrees. They dispatched police to beat them and arrest them. They have instrumentalized the law to punish political dissidents.
Nazi Germany also did all these things, as have most other totalitarian systems.
I documented all this in my book. I spoke out against it. I published essays about it. I tweeted about it.
My punishment for that has been … well, here I am, on trial in criminal court for the second time. The German authorities had my Tweets censored. They reported me to the Federal Criminal Police Office. They reported me to The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, the German domestic Intelligence agency. My book is banned in Germany.
The German authorities investigated me. They prosecuted me. They put me on trial for tweeting. After I was acquitted, that wasn’t enough, so they have put me on trial again. They defamed me. They have damaged my income and reputation as an author. They have forced me to spend thousands of Euros in legal fees to defend myself against these clearly ridiculous charges. And today, I, and my lawyer, and all the people in the gallery, have been subjected to this official show of force and treated like potential terrorists.
Why, rational people might ask, have I been subjected to this special treatment, while Der Spiegel, Stern, Die Tageszeitung, and many others who have also tweeted swastikas, have not?
This is not a mystery. Everyone knows the answer to this question.
You are not fooling anyone. Everyone understands exactly what this prosecution actually is. Every journalist that has covered my case, everyone in this courtroom, understands what this prosecution actually is. It has nothing to do with punishing people who disseminate pro-Nazi propaganda. It is about punishing political dissent, and intimidating critics into silence. I’m not here because I put a swastika on my book cover. I am here because I put it behind a “Covid” mask. I am here because I dared to criticize the German authorities. I am here because I refused to shut up and follow orders.
At my first trial, I appealed to the judge to stop this game and follow the law. She did that. She needed to publicly insult me, and then put on a “Covid” mask to display her allegiance to the “New Normal,” but she acquitted me. She followed the law. And I thanked her. But I will not appeal to this Court. I’m tired of this game. If this Court wanted to follow the law, I wouldn’t be here today. The Court would have dismissed the Prosecution’s ridiculous arguments in its motion to overturn the verdict. You didn’t do that. So I’m not going to appeal to this Court for justice. Or expect justice.
Go ahead. Do whatever you feel you need to do to me. Fine me. Send me to prison. Bankrupt me. Whatever. I will not pretend that I am guilty of anything to make your punishment stop. I will not lie for you. I will not obey you because you threaten me, because you have the power to hurt me.
You have that power. I get it. Everyone gets it. The German authorities have the power to punish those who criticize them, who expose their hypocrisy, their lies. We all get the message. But that is not how things work in democratic societies. That is how things work in totalitarian systems.
I will not cooperate with that. I refuse to live that way.
As long as the German authorities continue to claim that Germany is a democratic country, which respects the rule of law and democratic principles, I will continue to behave like that is what it is. I will not be bullied. I will insist on my constitutional rights. I will continue to respect democratic principles and fight to preserve them. The German authorities can make a mockery of those rights and the rule of law and democratic principles if they want. I will not. Not for the Berlin Prosecutor. Not for this Court. Not for the German authorities. Not for anyone.
Totalitarianism, authoritarianism, tyranny, never win. Not in the long run. History teaches us that. And it is history that will judge us all in the end.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
We’re all guilty. Pay the fine, do the time. Pour the burning coals of righteousness upon the accusers (as a wise Man once said).
But by no means fight it; that’s a fool’s game (consuming time and resources). Turn the other cheek to the morally inferior. Let them do their worst.
And then live on to fight a more worthy battle another day…
As a German, your comparison is exactly what immediately came to my mind. In my diary, I wrote after the first weeks of ‚Covid‘: „Deutschland unter‘m Coronakreuz“… alluding to „… unter‘m Hakenkreuz“.
This decision doesn‘t go unchallenged. For your convenience, here are excerpts from a statement made by a German judge. She considers the war on dissent precisely a totalitarian move, what, if not that (JCH‘s post) must be protected by freedom of opinion and art?
“Auszüge: „Mit dieser Entscheidung entfernt sich die deutsche Justiz einmal mehr von den Grundsätzen einer freiheitlichen Demokratie, die von dem Austausch widerstreitender Überzeugungen und Meinungen sowie der Kritik an Regierungshandeln lebt.“
„Auf die Urteilsbegründung des Gerichts, derartige Posts seien weder von der Meinungsfreiheit noch von der Kunstfreiheit gedeckt, ist zu erwidern, was, wenn nicht das, ist dann noch Meinungs- bzw. Kunstfreiheit?“
„In Urteilen wie diesen zeigt sich eine sehr bedenkliche Tendenz deutscher Gerichte, Menschen, die autoritäres Regierungshandeln kritisieren und vor einem Aufleben faschistischer Strukturen warnen, wie CJ Hopkins, Professor Rudolph Bauer u.a. eine „Verharmlosung des Nationalsozialismus“ zu unterstellen, um an ihnen ein Exempel zu statuieren und Kritiker mundtot zu machen.“
Do you still have your passport ?
Therein lies the solution.
Correct, if you don’t like a place why insist on staying there ? There is nothing to demonstrate, maybe you are right or maybe the German law is difficult to grasp. If it’s only to have something to write about then it is not worth.
Germany’s in a bit of a weird state these days., It says its democratic, promotes free speech and so on but its actions seem to contradict this. Two recent incidents highlight this. One is the arrest and prosecution of a couple of people for rebroadcasting Russian TV channels via an IPTV service in violation of a blanket ban on any and all Russian media. (What are they so afraid of?) The other is that everyone’s getting the vapors over AfD’s showing in recent elections. We’re not getting any information about what their platform is or why people are supporting them (my guess is a protest vote), just the absolute need to deny them any participation in government regardless of how strong their showing.
Each incident — prosecuting someone over a book cover, prosecuting someone for sending out information to willing subscribers that is officially verboten, denying people a voice even if their politics is not something that’s liked — is like a pebble on a beach. Individually, they’re of small significance. Taken together they make a noticeable, and rather ominous, pile.
I can’t recall the event(s) or article that prompted this 2017 comment, but this news induced a feeling of déjà vu that reminded me of it. The original read “a US judge”, but it’s manifestly applicable to all Western nations that have enthusiastically adopted the “rule of lawfare”:
_________________________________
Occasionally a judge will courageously do the right thing, and issue a ruling that defies some unduly oppressive or manifestly corrupt law imposed by the colluding Executive and Legislative branches of government.
Appeals courts exist, in part, to rectify any such inappropriate and unseemly outbreaks of justice in the lower authority.
_________________________________
Sometimes being validated is no fun at all. 😡 ⚖️