Germany could ban far-Right politicians from running for office
-
This is a paradox well described by Popper. The gist is: You can not be tolerant towards the intolerant.
I never considered it all that much of a paradox. If anything, it's a linguistic contradiction. Isn't it a question of whether we should tolerate someone in/directly causing/wishing harm onto others. It also doesn't matter whether they understand it themselves.
There is a lot of aspects that are considered "political", that is arguably just "harm onto A that benefits B". I think it is right to call it out. Universal health care, education, affordable housing, etc. Take of the capitalistic monocle, and certain "rights" and "wrongs" are painfully obvious.
-
It's like banning marijuana and then expecting people to just not do it.
While restricting other pain medication.
-
Why would it suppress left politicians? It's not like any of them have multiple extremism convictions, that's usually rightwing politicians.
Being against genocide in Gaza is "extremist" in Germany.
-
Its amazing how things work, the defendors of the democracy are asking to ban a political party. Do this exercise with me, imagine a country where the majority of people want a "far-right" party to rule them. It can be for a lot of reasons, security, education, social paradox, conservative economic reasons, emigration... whatever, you choose, what would you do? Deny the will of an entire country or let them freely choose what they want? Im not judging im just curious, i know my answer but i want to ear yours
Protecting minorities from the terror of the majority and protecting democracy for future generations that cannot vote yet are essential parts of democracy.
To answer your question:
Deny the will of the majority of the people
yes, because what you describe is not democracy, it's mob rule
-
The big issue with any form of attempted suppression will not suddenly sway their voters. It would be much smarter to not give people a reason to fall for populists.
But that would be too easy, I guess.
Nope, if the AfD gets banned, the entire structure and funding crumbles. It will take decades to build up this kind of Nazi momentum.
-
Wake us up when it's "have".
-
Protecting minorities from the terror of the majority and protecting democracy for future generations that cannot vote yet are essential parts of democracy.
To answer your question:
Deny the will of the majority of the people
yes, because what you describe is not democracy, it's mob rule
yes, because what you describe is not democracy, it’s mob rule
First part i agree with you but this one makes no sense to me, you are telling me that its only democracy when people align with your views, if they dont think the way you do "is not democracy". I dont agree with this one tbh.
-
This is a paradox well described by Popper. The gist is: You can not be tolerant towards the intolerant.
You can not be tolerant towards the intolerant.
Yep, The paradox of Tolerance. Its way more deep that we think it is
-
Nope, if the AfD gets banned, the entire structure and funding crumbles. It will take decades to build up this kind of Nazi momentum.
First of all, no, that's wrong. The AfD got to where they are in 12 years, and that was from 0 - do you really think it would take them another 10 years to get to the point where they are now?
Second of all, it STILL would not convince the people that the AfD is wrong and they would just fall for the next right-wing populist party. So even if it would work, it would only be a temporary solution to a major issue.
-
First of all, no, that's wrong. The AfD got to where they are in 12 years, and that was from 0 - do you really think it would take them another 10 years to get to the point where they are now?
Second of all, it STILL would not convince the people that the AfD is wrong and they would just fall for the next right-wing populist party. So even if it would work, it would only be a temporary solution to a major issue.
-
A similar system has been there to prevent Nazism rise. Sadly, AfD and other right wing parties found a loophole a decade ago.
Yeah, sadly there is only one way to defeat Nazis and it's not easy or liked by most.
-
I would allow that company to sell poison.
But I would not allow them to market it as health food.
If a party campaigns on far right ideals, and get elected, then fair enough, that's democracy. Sometimes you have to admit that your views are not wanted.
However, if a far right party campaigns on truth and love and free kittens for everyone, then instead is shown to be liars and haters and give out free guns, then I would have an issue.
"I would have an issue" that IS what's happening. The Republican parties' modus operandi IS constantly lying, much much more than the Democrat party. So you have an issue with them correct?
-
First of all, no, that's wrong. The AfD got to where they are in 12 years, and that was from 0 - do you really think it would take them another 10 years to get to the point where they are now?
Second of all, it STILL would not convince the people that the AfD is wrong and they would just fall for the next right-wing populist party. So even if it would work, it would only be a temporary solution to a major issue.
First of all, no. They won't exist and can't establish anything similar if the party gets forbidden. They won't be able to do shit.
Second of all, there is no next right wing populist party like that.
That's the whole reason to ban a party.
-
Far-Right politicians in Germany could be banned from running for office under plans by the incoming government, echoing a decision in France to block Marine Le Pen from a presidential bid.
-
yes, because what you describe is not democracy, it’s mob rule
First part i agree with you but this one makes no sense to me, you are telling me that its only democracy when people align with your views, if they dont think the way you do "is not democracy". I dont agree with this one tbh.
when people align with your views
Where do you even get that from? Far-right "values" are just outside of the democratic spectrum. Far-right ideologies are invariably rooted in hurting minorities, usually defined on the basis of outward characteristics like phenotype.
One theory holds that democracy requires three fundamental principles: upward control (sovereignty residing at the lowest levels of authority), political equality, and social norms by which individuals and institutions only consider acceptable acts that reflect the first two principles of upward control and political equality.[26] Legal equality, political freedom and rule of law[27] are often identified by commentators as foundational characteristics for a well-functioning democracy.[19]
-
First of all, no. They won't exist and can't establish anything similar if the party gets forbidden. They won't be able to do shit.
Second of all, there is no next right wing populist party like that.
That's the whole reason to ban a party.
Tbf, if you remember, the Afd started out as a party critical to European integration and the Euro in particular. They were right of Merkel's CDU and they were dumb but they were not fascist. But very, very quickly, they were infiltrated in various ways by people and funds who were previously entangled with the NPD (now "Heimat").
And there definitely are a bunch of other right-wing parties that ex-Afd people could hop onto: Werteunion, Bündnis Deutschland, yada.
-
A similar system has been there to prevent Nazism rise. Sadly, AfD and other right wing parties found a loophole a decade ago.
If you're talking about the option of banning the entire party: The "loophole" that Afd is exploiting is that this action needs political support and gonservatives are unwilling to give political support for banning a(nother) right-wing party. Is that really a loophole?
-
Yeah but clearly the original comment is ironic since it addresses CDU as corrupt. You know, one of the two main parties that would be main drivers behind the suggested extremists banning?
The comment is very unlikely to be sarcastic. CDU is known to have deep ties into every single incumbent industry in Germany and Merz himself is a former chemical lobbyist and was a chair of the German BoD of BlackRock.
-
The big issue with any form of attempted suppression will not suddenly sway their voters. It would be much smarter to not give people a reason to fall for populists.
But that would be too easy, I guess.
But that would be too easy, I guess.
It's absolutely not easy at all. Afd acts like a cult, getting people de-radicalized will take a lot of effort. And some politics that emphasizes societal solidarity and education about democracy, culture, etc.; instead we have gonservatives gutting funding for all of these topics.
-
The comment is very unlikely to be sarcastic. CDU is known to have deep ties into every single incumbent industry in Germany and Merz himself is a former chemical lobbyist and was a chair of the German BoD of BlackRock.
Yeah but that's what i'm saying, given that this same CDU is one of the two parties behind the coalition talks for banning far-right politicians. Only a sarcastic comment would suggest them to do a similar vote against bribery which would get rid of a lot of CDU politicians themselves.
Why would they do that if they are corrupt, vote against their own interests?So, then why suggest this at all? Clearly to steer the discussion away from the original topic - banning far- right politicians.
