The results in the Brandenburg election that were declared last night brought a dramatic end to three nerve-wracking political races in East German regional elections that have dominated the politics of Europe’s leading economy for most of this year.
In terms of the AfD being a threat to democracy, I have not followed their statements closely but also regard banning political parties garnering 30%+ of the vote in various states as undemocratic (I am not straw manning here since that has been discussed in Germany).
I also suspect that the AfD would be much less of a threat to democracy than Macron has been to France considering he nominated a Prime Minister from a party that received than 5% of the votes in the most recent election.
"(2) Parties which, according to their objectives or the conduct of their supporters, aim to impair or eliminate the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany are unconstitutional."
The only institution that can ban a party is the constitutional court - for this to happen, 2/3 of both the parliament and the federal council need to request a ban.
The core of the issue is the fact, that the court chose to not ban the NPD. The reasoning was that for a ban to be ruled, the party needs to have the structure and power to pose a significant thread to the constitution.
This puts the democratic system in a dilemma. In terms of political reasoning, the bigger a party is, the harder it is to ban. In terms of constitutional reasoning, it needs to reach a significant amount of power.
When is the tipping point to ban such a party? That is the core of the discussion. If we consider the AfD to fulfill the requirements to ban it, in terms of constitutional reasoning we need to push for a ban, for political reasons, most are afraid to.
A very interesting read, I don't really pay much attention to political parties that aren't in my own country, after reading this I think maybe I should.
And they ignore the extremely un-democratic power grab by Ursula von der Leyen - even the media, normally very pro EU is sounding the alarm over this. This means her, not governments, are driving EUs foreign policy
AfD has taken several actions that are undermining democracy in Germany:
1. The AfD has used aggressive and inflammatory rhetoric, particularly regarding immigration and minority groups[1]. Some examples include:
- Calling for the use of firearms against refugees at the border
- Referring to the National Holocaust Memorial as a "Monument of Shame"
- Party leader Björn Höcke repeatedly using Nazi rhetoric and being found guilty in court for using banned Nazi slogans[3]
2. The party has criticized and threatened the judiciary. After being convicted for using Nazi slogans, Höcke accused the judiciary of pandering to political opponents and threatened them on social media[3].
- The AfD has positioned itself as a victim of the establishment, claiming their democratic rights are being suppressed when faced with criticism or exclusion from debates[2].
3. The party has capitalized on fears related to immigration, particularly following the 2015 refugee crisis[2].
- They have used terror attacks committed by asylum seekers to gain support and blame the government[2].
Unfortunately, the link to the AFD spot doesn't play, so the reference to its "radical rhetoric" later in the essay is not supported. I'm not an AFD supporter, but can you specify what this radical rhetoric is? Is it that they are opposed to more immigration? If so, I'd hardly call that radical as the SPD takes the same stance , at least rhetorically.
The AfD position on mass immigration is similar to that of the CDU/CSU in the 1980s. Hardly anything worthy of the empty spook term, ‘far-right.’ AfD should form a coalition with Wagenknecht’s party. Left and Right Populists against the corrupt political class and their consensus.
Adam, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the ideological differences (if any!) between the AfD and BSW. I've been trying to figure out why one is considered left and the other right when they largely seem to promote the same anti-immigrant and culture war policies. What am I missing?
Such fascinating information, Sir. I am definitely enlightened by your offerings. And The ART! It seems, however, that while humans simultaneously and delusionally consider themselves masters of the universe, they are, as a species, totally incapable of learning from history of any kind. Rinse. Repeat.
It is interesting to see an increase in voter turnout powering AfD electoral success as somehow "a threat to democracy." The aristocratic urge to sneer at the demos is never very far from the surface, is it?
In terms of the AfD being a threat to democracy, I have not followed their statements closely but also regard banning political parties garnering 30%+ of the vote in various states as undemocratic (I am not straw manning here since that has been discussed in Germany).
I also suspect that the AfD would be much less of a threat to democracy than Macron has been to France considering he nominated a Prime Minister from a party that received than 5% of the votes in the most recent election.
Let me explain, why that discussion is a thing.
The German constitution states the following:
"(2) Parties which, according to their objectives or the conduct of their supporters, aim to impair or eliminate the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany are unconstitutional."
The only institution that can ban a party is the constitutional court - for this to happen, 2/3 of both the parliament and the federal council need to request a ban.
The core of the issue is the fact, that the court chose to not ban the NPD. The reasoning was that for a ban to be ruled, the party needs to have the structure and power to pose a significant thread to the constitution.
This puts the democratic system in a dilemma. In terms of political reasoning, the bigger a party is, the harder it is to ban. In terms of constitutional reasoning, it needs to reach a significant amount of power.
When is the tipping point to ban such a party? That is the core of the discussion. If we consider the AfD to fulfill the requirements to ban it, in terms of constitutional reasoning we need to push for a ban, for political reasons, most are afraid to.
A very interesting read, I don't really pay much attention to political parties that aren't in my own country, after reading this I think maybe I should.
We keep hearing that the AgD is a "threat to democracy" but nobody tells us why that might be.
And they ignore the extremely un-democratic power grab by Ursula von der Leyen - even the media, normally very pro EU is sounding the alarm over this. This means her, not governments, are driving EUs foreign policy
AfD has taken several actions that are undermining democracy in Germany:
1. The AfD has used aggressive and inflammatory rhetoric, particularly regarding immigration and minority groups[1]. Some examples include:
- Calling for the use of firearms against refugees at the border
- Referring to the National Holocaust Memorial as a "Monument of Shame"
- Party leader Björn Höcke repeatedly using Nazi rhetoric and being found guilty in court for using banned Nazi slogans[3]
2. The party has criticized and threatened the judiciary. After being convicted for using Nazi slogans, Höcke accused the judiciary of pandering to political opponents and threatened them on social media[3].
- The AfD has positioned itself as a victim of the establishment, claiming their democratic rights are being suppressed when faced with criticism or exclusion from debates[2].
3. The party has capitalized on fears related to immigration, particularly following the 2015 refugee crisis[2].
- They have used terror attacks committed by asylum seekers to gain support and blame the government[2].
Citations:
[1] https://www.dw.com/en/germany-afd-a-growing-threat-to-democracy-says-minister/a-67839373
[2] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/projekte/artikel/politik/afd-5-reasons-for-the-far-right-rising-in-germany-e403522/
[3] https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-far-right-afd-we-have-a-clear-mandate-to-govern/a-70105904
In other words, pretty weak tea stuff. AfD's real sin is opposing Americna hegemony.
maybe you are not a big supporter of democracy in the first place :)
The examples you provided had little to do with "democracy" (or anti-democracy) and much to do with PMC accepted wisdom.
Unless, for instance, immigration restrictions are inherently anti-democratic.
Unfortunately, the link to the AFD spot doesn't play, so the reference to its "radical rhetoric" later in the essay is not supported. I'm not an AFD supporter, but can you specify what this radical rhetoric is? Is it that they are opposed to more immigration? If so, I'd hardly call that radical as the SPD takes the same stance , at least rhetorically.
The AfD position on mass immigration is similar to that of the CDU/CSU in the 1980s. Hardly anything worthy of the empty spook term, ‘far-right.’ AfD should form a coalition with Wagenknecht’s party. Left and Right Populists against the corrupt political class and their consensus.
At the moment she has ruled that out but I can see it changing
Adam, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the ideological differences (if any!) between the AfD and BSW. I've been trying to figure out why one is considered left and the other right when they largely seem to promote the same anti-immigrant and culture war policies. What am I missing?
Such fascinating information, Sir. I am definitely enlightened by your offerings. And The ART! It seems, however, that while humans simultaneously and delusionally consider themselves masters of the universe, they are, as a species, totally incapable of learning from history of any kind. Rinse. Repeat.
It is interesting to see an increase in voter turnout powering AfD electoral success as somehow "a threat to democracy." The aristocratic urge to sneer at the demos is never very far from the surface, is it?