Germany, we've been over this.
No you haven't that's the thing, the amount of Nazis that didn't get put on trial speaks volumes about the real reason for the war. There was a show trial for the Nazis that the allies had no use for and just finger wagging afterwards.
One of the greatest failures of both past and current administrations. The reason a majority of Nazis weren't put on trial was simply: If they had, every single structure would have fallen apart, because they were in every level of administration, etc. There simply - from the perspective of the allies - weren't any people that could replace these structures adequately. So they didn't pursue. Same with the 2008 financial crisis. A single banker got charged. Why? Because they would have had to fully dismantle every established system to really root out the people responsible, because they're so interconnected. Stabilizing the shit ass system was a priority over seeking justice.
It always will be, if the infestation just spreads far and deep enough. Which is becoming a real concern again.
I've seen this claim before and at best its only a half truth. I can't give a full write up unfortunately but a lot of top Nazis and SS members were given cover to settle elsewhere or used to agitate against the Soviet Union. Some were useful, like engineers or other academic Nazis, others were useful because they could be trusted to be anticommunist and still others had useful contacts in parts of the world the US had little to no influence in.
It's not a half truth, it's a full truth. Doesn't mean your statements are untrue or mutually exclusive. There were certainly Nazis being used and recruited directly into other services on the end of the allies, no doubt. US rocket development is a great example on that.
But I am talking about the majority of just the basic German administration, public, medical, engineering and civil servants, and just the people in general. That's hundreds of thousands of jobs and structures that simply couldn't be replaced but also wasn't filled with the brightest and smartest super suited to the things you're talking about. It wasn't just the SS and top brass that were Nazis. It went through and through the entire society. And you really cannot simply throw these kinds of people in jail without having replacements ready. Up to 45 million Germans were part of Nazi organizations and thus affiliated with the ruling party that had been overthrown.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denazification
There were simply too many, so prosecution was deemed impossible at scale. It's a really interesting process, but the allies tried, but it lead to problems
If we are talking about why most of the Nazis weren't put on trial the reason "they were in administration" is only half the truth as a lot of Nazis weren't put on trial because the US had a use for them or because they just didn't care enough. I mean look at how the Soviets approached denazification and how the US did. East Germany was a lot more thorough than west germany.
As an example SS members were allowed entry to Canada who had a very strict "no communists" immigration policy and their SS tattoos actually proved to be an advantage to prove that.
Can we just give you the AFD-Party and their fellows, and you nuremberg-trial them again? I would even chip in for the rope!
Jokes aside. They are a threat to German Democracy and need to be stopped. I just wish our Government would FINALLY initiate the Process of getting them banned. We have laws in place for that! All we need to do now is to start the Process. Then the Federal Constitutional Court can look into it and decide if they get banned. BUT FOR WHAT EVER REASON our Government shies away from that.
Unfortunately, I don't thunk it will go over the same this time. The ideology has crossed borders.
In comparison to the 30s and 40s when far right extremism was famously an exclusively German phenomenon
Saw a right wing outlet do an interview with Sellner, the main speaker at that event yesterday.
Typical right wing nonsense.
"Immigrants who are extremist and do not integrate must leave! But only in the confines of the existing legal framework, or the way we can adjust it!"
The issue is and has always been: how do you send someone back if you do not know where back is? They destroy their papers, lie about who they are and now what? They address this by not addressing it as hr says, those that do that must be expelled from Germany. WHERE TO, MOTHERFUCKER?
And that's where the issue comes up. They are discussing setting up an "example state" somewhere in Africa where they can just deport anyone to. Even cheekily mentioned that those that wish to help immigrants can go and do that in that state.
WHAT STATE YOU FUCKWIT? Where will this be set up without massively violating some States sovereignty?
They don't need to have or display practical solutions, since it is all dog whistles anyway. Their cesspool voter base knows that this means camps and deportation into said camps, no matter where they are.
Love the cunt banging on about how economic migrants are bad and yet somehow they want to help the countries of origin by stopping their brain drain towards Germany, all in a time where our replacement levels and thus support for elderly are impossible without migration.
These racist fucks always sing the same tunes.
You wanna know what I think?
I think they DON'T actually know, what this ultimately means. They only know that they want the undesirables gone. I 100% believe they want them gone with as little fuss and violence as possible.
The problem of impossibility hasnt quite broken through yet tho. But hey, they promised their voter base this already. So they have to pull through.
"What do you mean 'no other country will just take them' ? Welp... guess we have to designate an area in our country then. What do you mean 'not in my backyard'? Mh... that one is understandable, we will have to increase security and prevent people from fleeing our designated area, and i guess we now have to tell our voters that there is no other solution and we have to do it in someone's backyard.
No, no, this isn't starting at all to look like a concentration camp. That's preposterous! Anyway, this shit is starting to become expensive. We can't allow these people to leech off our state like this. We need to make them work in exchange for being allowed on our soil... And just look at them! They are breeding like rats and have created a shithole of criminality in that little exclave we put them in. We were right to seperate them from the normal population!
You guys... The costs just keep ramping up and this system ultimately doesn't seem to work... no other country wants to help... We need to start thinking about a permanent solution to this problem...
Well, at least we kept our promise! We even did it with as little fuss and violence as possible. It's not our fault, that that means a whole lot of fuss and violence anyway!"
This process has occured before, and not just in germany.
Oops I did it again!
hmm, i wonder if they think this solution to their undesirables has some finality about it
sacked for saying the quiet bit out loud
Yep. And not the first, or the last one, either.
They even want to deport German citizens that do not fit in this society in their eyes. Given their perspectives on the world, if you're German and queer you're most likely to be deported as well. Or German and muslim. Or German and .
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The meeting was attended not only by two state and municipal-level AfD politicians but also one active member of the Bundestag, Gerrit Huy, as well as Roland Hartwig, a former MP who has acted as a personal aide to Weidel since September 2022.
Such deportations would target not only asylum seekers but, as Sellner elaborated in a recent article for the New Right journal Sezession, also citizens holding German passports who, he claims, “form aggressive, rapidly growing parallel societies”.
Huy, the AfD Bundestag delegate, is reported to have claimed that she developed her own “re-migration” concept, and appeared to suggest her party no longer opposed the government’s plan to lift a ban on dual citizenship for that reason.
In recent weeks, some politicians, such as the co-leader of Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats (SDP), have called for a debate about whether the constitutional court should consider such a ban for the AfD.
Others, including the SPD’s federal commissioner for the east, Carsten Schneider, have said that such a move could backfire by further radicalising AfD supporters, especially if the constitutional court were to reject a ban.
In 2017, Germany’s top constitutional court ruled that even though the radical-right NPD resembled Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party, it would not be banned because it did not pose a sufficient threat to democracy.
The original article contains 1,123 words, the summary contains 218 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Except it is a threat to democracy to discredit certain groups or taking away rights from them based on their living circumstances. To be able to do this, you'd need to abolish large portions of the constitution. And this, by definition, is anti democratic.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/