Germany’s spy agency BfV has labeled the entirety of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party as an extremist entity.
The BfV domestic intelligence agency, which is in charge of safeguarding Germany’s constitutional order, said the announcement comes after an “intense and comprehensive” examination.
“The ethnicity-and ancestry-based conception of the people that predominates within the party is not compatible with the free democratic order,” the BfV said on Friday.
Hopefully this inspires the other parties to to start the process to see the AfD banned. I know the report might not look like much, because of how obvious the findings are. But previous attempts at banning them have failed because such an official report was missing. So maybe our political system starts getting its shit together.
As we say in Germany: Hope dies last
Greece banned golden dawn as a criminal organisation and while a lot of members splintered into other parties it was overall a success in nearly removing all their influence as a political organisation from Greek politics - so, overall banning the fascist party, at least in one instance, worked.
“The ethnicity-and ancestry-based conception of the people that predominates within the party is not compatible with the free democratic order,” the BfV said on Friday.
Pretty much the entirety of the German political mainstream is right now “unwaveringly supporting” a fascist regime commiting an extreme Genocide in Gaza, and that support has been very openly because of the ethnicity the murderers claim to represent, or in other words, due to “ethnicity-and ancestry-based conceptions”.
Normalize race as an excuse to support no matter what those commiting the most atrocious of actions and all that it takes is to add “if it applies to them, then surely it applies to us” to that normalized racism to get something like the ideology of the AfD.
German politicians have long been plowing and fertilizing the field from which the AfD sprouted with great vigour.
This right now is just hypocrisy: the AfD is but the tip of the iceberg which is the view in Germany that the way people are treated should depend on their race and even the most horrible of deeds are excusable if one’s race is the right one.
I am so sick and tired of people using the Gaza genocide as an excuse for political action or inaction in their own countries without any evidence that their preferred option changes anything about the Gaza genocide. Isn’t it enough that you people got Trump elected in the US by implying that somehow Kamala Harris would do less against it than the literal admirer of dictators?
Agree. Also, Gaza has been an issue for decades and theres other genocides currently happening, i genuinely dont understand the laser focus on Gaza when our own Latino and Native American populations are being genocided by our own actual government. These people freak out over housing and food in Gaza while ignoring the homelessness and starvation crisis here. They donate to (likely completely fake, set up by Israel or other countries) Gaza while walking past homeless people here with absolutely no shame. They wear merch and bracelets and scarves to show support of Gaza and moral superiority, while they ignore the homeless here at a broad level. Homelessness is genocide of the poor and disabled.
Yes, Gaza is an issue and has been for decades. Any genocide or intentional faminine is absolutely wrong. It’s been wrong for a while. I remember talking about Israel with Jewish friends in 2009 and it was considered a pretty obscure geopolitical topic for the US then (most average citizens didnt know or have an opinion).
But right now it’s literally a psyop to trick young and gullible people into being against Kamala so Trump would be elected. Trump is friends with Netanyahu and was his preferred candidate. Like Iran Contra, Netanyahu deliberately sabotaged the hostage deals and ceasefires to elect Trump, and the Gaza saviors (many fake bots from India, Iran, and Russia*) ate the bait. Now that he doesnt need them, they are being rounded up, unless they espouse anti-Jewish, pro-Nazi rhetoric - he needs Nazis so Russia can have an excuse to invade Alaska/the US. The Nazi excuse is the same reason Russia invaded Ukraine. They are trying to justify WW3 with same excuses as WW2, and they need public sentiment to be on their side so they have to set up a narrative.
BRICS is trying to usurp western power and start their own currency that will be gold back, precious metals backed, and oil backed, and perhaps human backed (eg organs, hair, slaves, started w Uyghers).
Russia figured out Gaza is enough to divide the left with infighting, that’s partly why they encouraged the hamas attack in the first place to take attention away from Ukraine.
And we fell for it like morons.
What does it mean if a democracy bans a party that the voters want to elect? Better to ask what failure of the system made that party popular in the first place. We have a similar situation in the US fwiw.
We had the dixiecrats whose entire position was wholly unconstitutional.
We have them still, but we had them before too.
That’s a good parallel - AfD like the Dixiecrats and now the GOP MAGA base have a geographical stronghold (in this case the “new states” of former East Germany)
An alternate future without German reunification is interesting to imagine, ditto one without a Aus Civil War where the south just seceded
Basically.
If we’d let the south secede, we’d have a glorious north, but poor Mexico would have to deal with methed-up rednecks attacking every time college-football season ended.
“The ethnicity-and ancestry-based conception of the people that predominates within the party is not compatible with the free democratic order,”
Great news, but also ironic considering German uncritical support for Israel.
Also ironic is that banning political parties is not compatible with the free democratic order.
A democracy cannot exist when anti-democratic elements can seize power. In other words, violate the social contract and get your sorry fascist ass banned.
And banning opposition parties is anti-democratic. Can you think of any other German government that banned opposing political parties?
No. Banning opposition parties BECAUSE THEY ARE OPPOSITION PARTIES would be undemocratic. Banning opposition parties because they are anti democratic is not.
What you are saying is like “killing someone is murder”, while ignoring the fact that self defence is a thing that happens, is legal and is moral and IS NOT MURDER.
While you can argue that Individuals in the AfD are antidemocratic, I honestly do not see evidence for that on the general party level.
I read their program. Weird? Yes. Antidemocratic? No.
No existing democracy is absolute, and there’s a pretty strong argument it has to be that way.
What if I’m against immigration due to a housing bubble that is destroying the poor and dramatically increasing price to income ratios, am I a racist or a saint?
I think anyone with a brain can see that in many countries mass immigration is being used to depress wages and invert the phillips curve after QE, or to prop up GDP to avoid a technical recession in favor of a per-capita recession, which is for some reason not defined or acknowledged. It also clearly hurts the poor and benefits the rich via asset price inflation and higher rental income.
That would be a real argument, if the immigrants weren’t poor themselves and if they actually were bad for the economy as opposed to good.
The fact that you jumped in here like that in response to a barely-related comment about democracy makes me think racist.
Well I’ve just read Afd supporters posts about immigration. As far as being good or bad for the economy, I guess it depends if you hold assets that get inflated.
A landlord will definitely benefit, and that will definitely grow GDP; which left leaning people used to care about the poor rather than worshipping at the god of GDP. The fear of their own kind calling them a racist may have defeated that.
Suure, you’ve “just read” things.
Paradox of tolerance and whatnot… It’s not ironic. Not only is it compatible, it is essential to its existence.
It’s anti-democratic no matter what paradox you want to try and spin it as.
This is one side who fears losing power trying to eliminate their political opponent who is rapidly gaining followers. It’s authoritarian, it’s anti-democratic, and it’s fascism. It’s LITERALLY WHAT THE NAZIS DID for crying out loud!
Democracy means the will of the people. The government banning the party that has the most supporters is the exact opposite of that.
No it’s not anti-democratic. The parties can’t ban the AFD only initiate the process. Whether the AFD is antidemocratic and a has the ability to undermine democracy is decided by the highest court. Precisely so they can’t just ban the opposition.
Banning political party is anti-democratic. When parties can initiate the process to ban other political parties, that’s anti-democratic.
When the party they’re trying to ban is also the most popular party with the people, that’s especially anti-democratic.
Banning parties isn’t always anti-democratic. The reason why is a bit unituitive so I explained it quite detailed but I believe that’s necessary. Take for example a hypothetical party X. Party X will use legal loopholes to effectively destroy democracy when it gets into power (restrict free speech, manipulate ballots, lock up the opposition, etc.) . Now party X gets the majority. That creates a situation where Party X stays in Power indefinitely. Now at some point the majority of people people change their mind and now they wouldn’t vote for the party anymore so the government isn’t representative of the people anymore. But it doesn’t matter anymore because democracy is dead in the country now. So now the people have to go through the whole establishing democracy process again which costs many lives and many years of living under oppression. That could have been skipped if party X had been banned. Now the problem remains that a majority of people weren’t represented in a election. That’s obviously bad. However keep in mind that the only thing we need to ban to skip all those years of oppression is to ban a single thing that party’s just aren’t allowed to do. And that thing is being antidemocratic. So banning that one single thing allows us to keep all the other nice thing that democracy has to offer.
The massive, gigantic problem with this is you’re making the assumption that party X will use legal loopholes to destroy democracy, and are using that assumption to instead destroy democracy by banning them over things you claim that they will do. You’re saying “we’re going to ban you for being antidemocratic because we think that one day you might be antidemocratic, so we’re gonna go ahead and be antidemocratic first”.
Banning political party is anti-democratic.
Except when it’s a nazi party. Don’t give nazis the time of day.
When the term Nazi has lost all meaning due to the left throwing it around at everything they don’t like, calling a party a “Nazi party” also means nothing and causes most people to just roll their eyes at you, and often actually look into what you’re so angry at. Maybe that’s why the AfD are gaining so many supporters?
Nothing in their policies on their website is even remotely “Nazi” adjacent.
What makes them “Nazis” in your opinion?
