I see that Jean-Marie Le Pen is being widely chastised, and rightly so, for saying utterly stupid and revolting things. Like it matters that Nazi activities were, possibly a tiny bit less inhuman in France, in quantity or quality, than say in Germany itself or some other country. And his reason for speaking thus is deserving of ridicule, too, for it is obvious that is not his purpose. A man of such speaking talents can easily defend the principle of free speech without stooping to propose such outlandlish ideas. That defense is for weasels.

However, I do not believe talk like that should rise to the level of court appearances. (I do not believe that kind of speech, in and of itself, rises to incitement.) That's weaselly, too, and just goes to show that you have no faith in your people to rise above that sort of talk and shun both the speech and the person if it truly is that risible. Actually, I would submit, without providing evidence at this time, that there is some inherent defect in the societial structure, either lost or never present, which the people actually realize must be reddressed by law to prevent it from evolving to incitement.

Here's hoping Daniel Bernard was one of the first to criticise Le Pen.