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.
Wow W Greece 💯🙌🏻
Germany banned the NSDAP in 1923 and it didn’t work out.
Maybe don’t pussy out this time. It’s not like the ban wasn’t effective, it’s that they lifted the ban.
Pretending to know history ass looking MF out here advocating for the continued existence of the Nazi party based on some half knowledge he picked up from a trivia box.
I’m not advocating for not trying. Just saying that “it worked once” is not a good argument. I think the only ideology of a party that was banned in Germany that actually doesn’t matter in today’s political landscape is communism. But there still are nazis even though the NSDAP was banned twice, there still are social democrats even though they were banned for 20 years, etc.
There’s also that more recently, Germany failed to ban the NPD twice and that was this century.
I think the AfD should be banned, but the people voting for them also need to become less stupid, and a ban alone will not do that.
I mean, it political bans usually work. Troskyism died in Stalin’s Russia, and pretty much every late Cold War junta was successful at suppressing their local communist movement, even if large. Germany itself has successfully banned far-right parties in the past.
Sure, the martyr effect exists, but it’s hella overrated, basically just because people are starting with the conclusion that you can’t ban things (which may or may not have merit) and working backwards. I’m not actually aware of any case where a banned movement has succeeded alongside non-incumbent legal movements, and even in autocracies revolutions and coups usually fail.
You raise fair points, but I want to circle back to intent. Because what you’re advocating in your last sentence is hurt by your original comment.
The whole point of “it’s happened once before” is to show that something is actually possible. It’s not theoretically possible, there’s a real world example to show it.
Bringing up counterexamples does not change that.
You can show one counterexample. Ten. A hundred. A thousand examples of when something didn’t work. They don’t negate the one time it did.
And to go even further, you should frame all those counterexamples as simply learning lessons. Examples on how not to do it. Because the framing here matters. If you want someone to be smart and try to find a solution, you frame history that way.
If you’re trying to discourage others from trying, you do it the way you initially did.
IMHO, if you’re discouraged by reality, that’s not my problem. I don’t like it when people just scream “ban” but don’t actually have a plan beyond that to get 30% of the voters to not vote for the next party that uses the nazi talking points.
You say that all the counterexamples don’t negate the one time it worked, but there is no successful example of banning a nazi party in Germany. They keep coming back. Learning some lessons is exactly what is needed here, because so far the NSDAP has been banned twice, the DVFP has been banned once, the SRP has been banned once, the FAP has been banned once, the NL has been banned once, attempts to ban the NPD failed twice before they lost funding in the third attempt, and now here we are and another nazi party is polling close to 30%.
but don’t actually have a plan beyond that to get 30% of the voters to not vote for the next party that uses the nazi talking points.
Last time Germany banned a successful far-right party they tried this, but the new party was also quickly banned. They’re miles ahead of you on this, which makes sense given that the laws were written by people just liberated from the OG Nazis.
Which “successful far-right party” are you referring to that was banned? The only right-wing party banned by Federal Germany is the SRP, and that one was fairly small. All the other attempts ended in a different resolution (i.e. not a party ban).
The NSDAP was banned by the Allied Control Council. Denazification was the Allied Control Council too.
None of this got rid of nazis. The AfD is only the current iteration. For my entire life, there’s always been some right wing extremist party that was big enough to be regularly mentioned on the news. Sometimes they randomly disappear and then another one rises. I even remember cases where one tried to become less extremist and then disappeared as a result of that (e.g. REP).
I’m all for banning them but it’s been 80 years that WWII ended and we still don’t have a real solution that actually works.
You’re missing my point, though. You pay lip service to wanting something to be done about this, but all your words only spout doom and gloom in a defeatist attitude. Your words actively betray your supposed intentions.
If you actually wanted progress in this matter, you would benefit from changing your messaging. Otherwise, you just look like every other troll that’s actually pro-nazi.
So which is it?
AFD should be banned… Threat to democracy tf
deleted by creator
Learn?
The Americans are doing the opposite - they’re complaining that AFD has been labeled an extremist organization.
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/02/marco-rubio-germany-afd-00324283
America’s mistake was not putting down the movement when we had the chance. Germany has the chance to quash the AFD, and work on the issues of the nation. That’s the lesson to be learned.
deleted by creator
As in learn from America when they should have locked Trump up or prevent him running again, rather than declare him a threat but ultimately do nothing and then then fall to fascism.
AfD are Nazis in all but name. How is it they remain unprosecuted in a nation where swastikas and the Hitler salute are outlawed?
They’re not just nazis, they’re nazis sponsored and funded by putin.
This is documented, but racists would rather support their literal enemy than dare accept changing their worldview in any way.
Foreign anti-interference laws address your first point. If they arent effective, thats easily resolved in parliment.
Don’t conflate foreign interest with genuine opposition, I would be very surprised if there wasnt any. This is the Democratic system working. The hubris of the left is suicidal.
Foreign anti-interference laws address your first point. If they arent effective, thats easily resolved in parliment.
They’re not, they need to be reviewed and improved.
Especially since it’s hard to legislate out foreign influence as they are, by definition, foreign.
It’s not that there is no genuine opposition, it’s that the amount of effort needed to tip the scales is surprisingly small.
Understand these tools were developed to control totalitarian societies, influencing democracies is trivial in comparison.
deleted by creator
Great, I agree.
But how do you know?
Whats the difference between normal, violent racism of your worthless trash, and right wing hate inspired by Russian trolls to divide the west?
Plausible deniability but they do get in trouble pretty routinely. The last big one iirc was the poster with the two kids saluting each other to form a roofline with a kitchy caption about housing.
https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/afd-accused-nazi-symbolism-election-germany-hm8dv7nql
Holy shit the times is bad on mobile. Image link for those that want it
Sorry it’s reddit. But it’s actually viewable
“In trouble” in this case is bad press. OP was commenting on prosecution given other stuff that’s illegal in Germany. Or did I miss someone getting arrested for the poster?
People get really jumpy about going against public political choice in a democracy, which is fair, but I think there’s been error in the other direction.
One of the main contributors is probably that the last time they tried banned an extremist party on the right (the NPD) it didn’t work because they didn’t present enough evidence according to the courts, that made everyone involved hesitant this time (or at least that is the excuse they used). Or rather, it failed twice, once because they had agents within the party and the other time for lack of evidence. Obviously obtaining that evidence without running into the first problem again is tricky.
Small correction: the NPD was not banned because they were largely irrelevant. They had little to no influence on politics, which is why the court argued that a ban would be inappropriate.
“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.
Germany supports Israel but they’re also critical of it. They have active arrest warrants for Netanyahu if he ever steps foot in their jurisdiction.
For Germany the ideal outcome would be peaceful continuation of both Israel and Palestine. If protecting one means harming the other, they will take no action. Israel is an important military stronghold against eastern powers and will continue to hold special privileges.
They have active arrest warrants for Netanyahu if he ever steps foot in their jurisdiction.
We do? Last I checked, the arrest warrant only came from the ICC, which Germany technically has to follow, but we haven’t issued our own arrest warrant, haven’t positioned ourselves clearly in support of the ICC’s warrant, and our politicians appear to be working on legal ways to not have to arrest Netanyahu if he actually comes to visit as planned by Friedrich Merz. All parties currently part of the government, with the only possible exception being The Left, seem to be way too much in favor of Israel.
You’re correct that the warrant is the ICC jurisdiction and not any other courts in Germany. As of May of last year Steffen Hebestreit representing the Olaf Scholz administration said they would.
Scholz’s spokesman, Steffen Hebestreit, was asked on Wednesday if the German government would execute an ICC arrest order against Prime Minister Netanyahu for alleged war crimes during Swords of Iron.
Hebestreit said, “Of course. Yes, we abide by the law.”
And that comes after he had been a vocal advocate of Israel up to that point.
deleted by creator
Also ironic is that banning political parties is not compatible with the free democratic order.
deleted by creator
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.
The Bundesverfassungsschutz has released a 1000 page report detailing their investigation and assessment. I find it unsurprising that the AfDs advertising material for an election hides their anti democratic aspects.
Look I am all for marking extremist, but it really matters on what grounds. And it matters how it is done.
Why is the report Not public? Does Not make any sense.
Why has the report not undergone internal audits as it would be standard procedure? Seems odd at least.
Its really all about „Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence“ - and no it does not matter if you personally think „it is obvious“.
Based on what I have read, hence based on what is known about the content of the report, there is no good evidence (but I could be wrong). Also no legal implications follow from this report, and based on what is known about Nancy Faeser involvment I can not deny a certain „Geschmäckle“ which is undermining the original purpose.
If you wanna do these things, they need to be done with undeniable evidence and transparency.
The report was intended for publication at a later date specifically because it had not passed the full review process yet. That’s why it’s not public. A news magazine with a reputation for investigative reporting (think German NYT but a bit more conservative leaning) has gotten their hands on at least part of the report and chose to write about it.
That is why the report is not public (yet), because it is still undergoing the internal audits you are asking for.
Yes it matters how it’s done. And they are trying to do it right. How the report got to the magazine and the motives of potential leakers are pure speculation at this point.
From what I have read (hence from what is known) it’s a 1000 page document compiled by an organisation that has had it in the past trouble when it came to persecuting right wing extremism (they covered up their involvement with a right wing terror group and a former head of the BfV was kicked out for passing information about the early stages of this investigation into the AfD to the AfD, to name just two recent examples).
If such a report makes it through such an organisation I expect it to hold more than just hear say and speculation.
no legal implications follow from this report,
That is not entirely correct. If the BfV internally accepts the report as factual it can use a wider array of tools to observe and investigate the AfD. It’s content could (again, after the review process has been completed) be published and used as evidence for administrative and legal proceedings of whatever nature. (eg a prospective teacher was prohibited from joining the Bavarian education system because of her left wing extremist political views. If the AfD is classified as a right wing extremist organisation the same could happen to AfD members).
Well, that is Not how it happenend. Nancy Faser announced it publicly. If you are waiting for the review, you dont do that…
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.
What about the parties policies is anti-democratic?
“The ethnicity-and ancestry-based conception of the people that predominates within the party is not compatible with the free democratic order,”
That’s not their policies, that’s what a biased spy agency said lol. It also makes zero sense as a reason to be “not compatible with the free democratic order”.
Putting someone in prison violates their freedom.
Putting someone in prison because they murdered someone is still the right thing to do.
Not at all the same thing.
Clearly I don’t agree.
The point is that in our social system we violate the rights of some when they violate the rights of others.
Or rather, your rights nd priveleges are restricted when you start using them to harm others.
The AfD have not violated anyones rights. They have a massive following who vote for them, which is growing larger and larger by the day. Banning them from elections is anti-democratic when they haven’t done anything to harm anyones rights, nor do any of their policies actually harm anyones “rights”.
What policies of theirs do you believe would violate the rights of others?
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?
That is naive and reduces the entire argument to black and white.
The world is not black and white. Its not even shades of gray. It can not be simplified like that, even less the way you attempt to.
The entire argument is black and white. Democracy is black and white.
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.
since you asked: ", am I a racist or a saint? "
you seem to acknowledge the functionality of undermining the working class by inviting people who have even less to work for even less. And yet you chose to be vocally against immigration (since that would help with a symptom)- while you could also be pointing out the failures of the regulatory body that allows for the many to be opressed by a parasitic few or even pointing out that the parasitic few are to be taken out of the equation. Kicking down is weak.
If you want systemic change to the economic system there’s definitely an order of operations here to follow, wouldn’t you agree?
If I want to redesign a roller coaster my first step shouldn’t be to start removing the tracks while passengers are on it.
Yeah, thats dumb.
Destroy the poor, and maybe the fallout will fix the repercussions. Is that the plan then.
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.
Pray they find a valid legal reason to ban them soon now that they can mass spy on them :)
They won’t ban them. Half the German police are members
They will be banned soon
“But previous attempts at banning them have failed because such an official report was missing.”
Man, this is peak modern society, and the absurdity makes me laugh. I don’t mean that in a derisive way, more in a "wow, making democracy work is haaard ". Hopefully this will lead to something positive though, even if I’m anxious that banning a party like the AfD may lead to some things worsening.
entire AfD ‘extremist’
No shit, sherlock, it doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
But having it said in an official capacity is still important.
Absolutely.
To be fair: it’s really hard to notice of you are completely bound in your right eye, which the BfV traditionally tends to be.
Is’bound in your right eye’ a typo?
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.
True, but then again we have lived through that already and know that dangerous parties can be elected democratically. That is exactly the reason why we have this mechanism in place.
An anti democratic party has no right to be elected democratically.
Exactly. Democracy is famously the only system which allows to be dismantled through its own tools. That is why the German system is called “Wehrhafte Demokratie” (defensive democracy) to not end up like the Weimar Republic.
The biggest criticism of democracy is that it might become something else.
Usually when it tolerates the intolerant. That’s why we’re fucked in the US. I hope Germany came stop it before it’s too late, I speak some, and was gonna try and emigrate if the need arises.
I understood the post you are replying to as saying “what will AfD voters do when their party is banned?”.
In the case of the Nazis, we don’t know because their party was never banned. We don’t know what would have happened if the Nazi party had been banned.
I would be interested to know if we have historical cases of far-right parties that could have won the elections but were banned before they had the chance.
I fear, that many if not most people do not understand why AFD is an undemocratic party or why this would even matter for them.
I think that problem is closely related to the issue that people think it can not get much worse for them when in reality there is a long, long way down from even the poorest and least represented people in our German society to the poorest people in the worst societies that actually existed in history or even the worst society imaginable with modern technology combined with the rulers from those worst socities in history.
deleted by creator
An anti democratic party has no right to be elected democratically.
True. But who decides what is an anti-democratic party? And by what guidelines?
“Why is the AfD classified as extremist?”
First section in the linked article.
That’s a way of defining it - but is that a legal standard?
The applicable law is Article 21 GG:
-
Political parties shall participate in the formation of the political will of the people. They may be freely established. Their internal organisation must conform to democratic principles. They must publicly account for their assets and for the sources and use of their funds.
-
Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behaviour of their adherents, seek to undermine or abolish the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be unconstitutional.
-
Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behaviour of their adherents, are oriented towards an undermining or abolition of the free democratic basic order or an endangerment of the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be excluded from state financing. If such exclusion is determined, any favourable fiscal treatment of these parties and of payments made to those parties shall cease.
-
The Federal Constitutional Court shall rule on the question of unconstitutionality within the meaning of paragraph (2) of this Article and on exclusion from state financing within the meaning of paragraph (3).
-
Details shall be regulated by federal laws.
Key point here is “seek to undermine or abolish the free and democratic basic order”, quoth the BVerfG:
The free democratic basic order can be defined as an order which excludes any form of tyranny or arbitrariness and represents a governmental system under a rule of law, based upon self-determination of the people as expressed by the will of the existing majority and upon freedom and equality. The fundamental principles of this order include at least: respect for the human rights given concrete form in the Basic Law, in particular for the right of a person to life and free development; popular sovereignty; separation of powers; responsibility of government; lawfulness of administration; independence of the judiciary; the multi-party principle; and equality of opportunities for all political parties.
It’s their own definition so push come to shove they’re going to add to it. Overall though the lines aren’t new and haven’t shifted, that’s a quote from a judgement from 1952.
Paragraph 3 is new, that has been introduced after banning the NPD (now “Die Heimat”) failed not because they would not be opposed to the free and democratic order, but because they were judged to be too impotent to do anything about it. Previously banned parties include the NSDAP, not under this law but by the allies, then the SRP as it was a successor of the NSDAP, and then the KPD not for being communist but for being run by the KGB and laying siege to parliament. Bans of the FAP and NL failed because the BVerfG said they’re not parties so they were banned as associations, instead. Last case is the NPD, the first attempt failed because the state had so many moles inside that the court saw itself unable to distinguish between state and party actions, the second as already said because they’re yes, hateful assclowns, but also pathetic. They’ve been excluded from state funds for six years, the case will have to be judged anew in 2030.
Ah, that’s very interesting. Thanks!
-
What does it mean if a democracy bans a party that the voters want to elect?
To be fair, 80% of voters did not vote for AfD - and if 80% of voters want to ban a party? Well, that is democracy. Although it’s a dangerous tool to use.
The US is way more fucked, as more people actually voted for Trump than not.
Yeah but that’s an example of tyranny by the majority. Just because a majority of people want something doesn’t make it right. In theory I like the idea od banning the AFD, but I’m scared of the potential backlash it could cause and what the consequences could be. In the modern day when people are so segregated in their own bubbles, I feel like this could make them more extremist (“Look, I was right, they’re just trying to silence the truth")
deleted by creator
The paradox of tolerance isn’t a helpful answer here. Banning the party won’t make the bigots within it become unbigotted, which is the real goal.
In a similar way a straitjacket won’t make the patient less suicidal but it will prevent them from cutting their own wrists. It is not meant as a long-term solution.
We had that situation in 1930s Germany and it was decided to address issues instead of banning Hitler’s Party even when they could.
They are not banned by the way… Just classified as far right…
This is an important step in the long and arduous process to disallow a party, though.
No need to play one off against the other. Yes, there are many things that need to change systemically. Yes, the AfD is a real danger and needs to be banned. Simple as that.
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.
It does not have to ban it. Simply inspecting its foreign funding is enough.
Ruling out foreign interference like astroturfing, genuine Opposition doesn’t come from no where, it comes from suffering in most cases. Failure of elected governments to reflect on their own failure breeds it.
And what will Germany do about it? NOTHING!
It’s been led than a day chill.
I’m not super hopeful either, but this is already more than I expected, so we’ll see where things go
They can mass spy on them now and get a valid legal reason to ban them with proof
“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.
deleted by creator
Did you read the comment? They are saying (and i agree) that the fascists at home only exist because we didnt treat the fascists abroad with the scrutiny that they deserve. When our political partners (Israel, US, Australia, etc) constantly commit warcrimes and go unpunished, then domestic sentiment will align with that.
Those eagerly cultivating at home a Fascist way of thinking (from the Racism of “unwaveringly support for the self-proclaimed representatives of a race whilst they mass murder children” to the Authoritarianism and total contempt for the Rule Of Law of “expelling foreigners without Trial for attending demonstrations”), will never get rid of the Fascists because it is they themselves who are feeding Fascism.
Either the German authorities and politicians are dumb as doorknobs and they’re unable to understand that endorsing Fascist Thinking creates Fascists, or all their “dealing with the fascists at home” is either performative or just infighting between the different pro-Fascism powers in Germany to decide who ends up at the top of the Fascist hierarchy.
It’s a pickle. The unwavering support is for Israel and its existence, not for the fascist regime or the genocide. Germany sent multiple sternly worded letters regarding the latter.
Do centralized social media while you’re at it.
Yet the neolibs are not good for the working class. We all got a long road ahead of us. Is everybody ready for conscription and ww3.
This is what we need to do with The Heritage Foundation and MAGA in the US. The extremes are usually bad whether they’re left or right.
The US has an extreme left? the US has a left!?
Saying “the extreme left is also bad”, in the context of the US having a massive Republican/rightwing extremist problem that’s regressing the country and plaguing the entire world, is like the captain of the Titanic going “But sand dunes are also not great!”
No, it’s not whether left or right. The right are the ones trying to put people in camps.
Most of the “left” is also pretty openly supporting Israel’s genocide. No, it’s not just the extreme right that’s bad.
[citation needed]
Well, look at the vast majority of our democrat politicians…
American Democrats =/= political left
I understand, but I think that was the point the first guy was trying to make.
thank you
And now we steer the discussion back to Israel, so everybody stays home and the right wins like they want.
Fucking morons, letting yourself be played like instruments .
assuming this is a reference to people that didn’t vote cause “biden bad” and let trump win, did I ever suggest that was a good idea? of course if was better to vote for the lesser evil, but it doesn’t change the face that the “left” supported israel’s genocide.
It is a good point that others have made, though, that most “extreme” left doesn’t support that
If you see that extremely moderate (aka Democratic, aka not left) position as the “extreme left”, then people who would ban cars are basically ISIS for you?
That’s a good point, the democratic party in usa is basically center these days, not even left.
My point was that there are bad people on both sides, but in general, I consider "extreme’ anything something to be avoided. For example, extreme “communists” (i.e. “tankies”) could be considered left, and I’d certainly avoid that. Other example is, when supporting Palestine turns into real antisemitism by attacking all jews instead of Israel. Anyways, you made a good point.
You need to meet the actual left, not right-of-centre parties like the US Democrats. Only in the USA does anyone think the Democratic Party is “the left”. The left itself is very much not supportive of Israel’s genocide.
That’s why I had “left” in quotes
Better to guillotine people instead, right?
When you start eluding towards banning democratic parties, you lose all credibility
So say they ban them……then what? You think that the most popular political party in the country isn’t going to just reform again while complying with whatever rule got them banned in the first place? Of course they will, and they’ll have the same support, if not more due to the perceived anti-democratic banning of the AfD.
Next stop authoritarian dictatorship I guess? Just ban all elections so they can’t take power?
Re-forming with a new name is covered by the ban.
The rules they’d have to comply with to circumvent the ban are antithetical to what they are.
You can play the game, but flipping the table cannot be a legal move.
There’s no way to stop a new party forming that gets all the same voters on board while meeting any rules required.
Yeah there is. The law isn’t run on cartoon logic where you can get around a ban by putting on a fake mustache and a hat.
