I am American, but I believe the American view of "we must allow everything so that important things aren't censored" is wrong. I believe it is possible to avoid the slippery slope and just ban certain things. For example, Nazi images are banned in Germany. In a sense, banning anti-vaccine propaganda is an even more important issue.
Video games with "too much" blood or gore are also banned in Germany, limiting artistic expression.
The "censorship in Germany is fine because it's just nazi stuff" argument doesn't hold water. They are currently progressing down the slippery slope.
Already you're saying it should be nazi stuff + vaccine propaganda. Next year it will be a third thing that is an important pet issue for you or an interest group.
Civilized adults don't tell other adults what they are allowed to read.
I don't buy this all-or-nothing argument. People in the US have tried to ban books, heavy metal music, video games etc. And the idea that we've ONLY survived those attempts because we allow people to fly/wear swastikas is ridiculous on its face.
It's not about swastikas, it's about a hard and fast rule that speech is permitted because speech itself is not directly harmful to anyone or anything.
Humans, of course, respond to speech and frequently do violence, but the speech itself is not the violence (there is an extra step involved).
This "no banning speech" general rule is why it has been largely ineffective when people have tried to ban books, movies, music, or games. It's not the swastikas; those are simply a side effect of the same root cause.
