474
Germany Looks to Stop the Far Right From Assuming Power
(www.nytimes.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
474 points (97.2% liked)
World News
37827 readers
535 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I'll help you with this sentence:
... it defends itself against an undemocratic power.
Right, like the USSR, China, DPRK, and Cuba
Yes. Democracy is when you refuse to allow the people to have a say in their systems of governance.
Time to pull this one out from the archives again..
And it is fixed when you understand that it is a social contract. You breach the contract? Then tolerance no longer applies to you.
Yes. Democracy is when you refuse to allow ~~the people~~ a party that wants to dismantle the democratic state and bringing in nothing than hate to have a say in their systems of governance.
Maybe if you want to prevent such a hypothetical future the democratic solution is to offer something better for people to vote for, instead of using threats of violence by employing the law to enforce your systems.
There is and never will be a perfect system of whatsoever. I'd rather watch them nazi party get forbidden than waiting for a solution that will come in place when it is already too late.
And unless you aren't a nazi, putin follower or trumpist, I don't know why I even have to explain why a German future with a nazi party at its front will be no good for nobody.
The perfect one is the one that has the power to stop fascists from taking over.
LOL, it's so funny how close you are and yet how far you are. When the USSR was dismantled by compradors in power and they invited the USA to come in and liberalize their economy, they suffered millions of death of poverty and their life expectancy dropped 10 years in 10 years, literally as bad as if they had been invaded and literally worse than what COVID did to the USA. So Putin gets elected on the narrative that he will reassert Russia's sovereignty and not allow the USA and Europe to continue imposing austerity, causing mass suffering, and then he does so. Everyone in Russia gets a better life after Putin takes office. And since he's KGB, he knows exactly how the USA is trying to infiltrate Russian politics and ensure a puppet government is in place. And yet, you can't see how Putin is doing exactly what you're saying Germany should do: prevent undemocratic forces from taking power by using his authority to do so.
Maybe one day you'll get it. The USA is the fascist core and Europe is the birthplace of the USA as well as the USA's luxury market and historical globe spanning power base. Every other country outside of them is doing absolutely everything they can to prevent the USA from taking away their ability to operate as a sovereign state, and in a lot of places that looks like authoritarianism. But in the end, it's literally anti-fascism.
Don't believe me? Look at the voting record in the UN for resolutions condemning the glorification of Nazis. The USA votes against it every single time.
The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It
It is easy to say that when you’re not the one that they are using the law against.
Will you say that when they come for you next?
If they come for me because I'm a fascist, then yes, just take me out behind the shed and put me out of my misery.
What if it’s for some other reason? You have to look at how easily this can be fucking twisted.
If they came for me because I was a communist, socialist, trade unionist, or Jew? I would speak up and fight back.
If they came for me because I was denying people their right to exist, like I said, stick a fork in me, I'm done.
Are you actually referencing the "first they came for the Jews but I wasn't a Jew" thing to argue that we should let nazis go ahead and take the power?
The solution being proposed here to prevent authoritarian systems is... other authoritarian systems. Can you understand why people see this as a problem brewing?
Retaining democracy is not authoritarian.
Removing people's ability to choose the government they desire is not democracy.
Unless they want to remove the ability to chose a government ever again.
What you are saying: It is okay to let facists and dictators take over the world.
What I am saying: It's not.
Simple as that.
Feel free to answer this post, I'm out.
The situation is nowhere near that simple. You just want to pretend it is so you don't have to ask difficult questions that challenge your perspective, like why the current government is wildly unpopular.
Let me jump in here then.
Those two questions are only somewhat related. The question "should we ban an undemocratic party that wants to work against core values of our constitution" has only become really pressing because the current government is so unpopular. The actual reasoning for or against the ban do not relate to the popularity of the government.
Taking the current state of affairs and concluding that voting enemies of the constitution into the government would be the solution is not something the majority has to accept as a valid political point of view.
You may call that antidemocratic but there are good reasons we have these non-negotiable core values in our constitution.
If you want to protest against the current government go ahead and I'll probably support you, there are many good reasons to do that. As long as you are not supporting the movement against our country itself.
Getroffene Hunde bellen.
Fuck off you fifth pillar arsehole
Checks and balances are about preventing a small faction of the government from gaining absolute control of the entire government. It's not about preventing a say, it's about preventing a total takeover that prevents anyone else from having a say in the future.