[HN Gopher] Germany is debating whether to ban AfD as the party ...
___________________________________________________________________
Germany is debating whether to ban AfD as the party surges to 21%
in the polls
Author : mutant_glofish
Score : 14 points
Date : 2023-08-13 21:39 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.telegraph.co.uk)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.telegraph.co.uk)
| porkbeer wrote:
| How is banning political parties as they become popular
| 'protecting democracy'? I don't agree with most of their
| politics, but am more afraid of draconian control of the
| political process 'for our own good', than some biased actors who
| should already be constrained by the rule of law.
| gumballindie wrote:
| Oh I see, you are not familiar with how the EU works?
|
| Well, the EU, and Germany, have been threatening and punishing
| any member state that voted the "wrong way". Take Italy for
| instance, the head of the EU comission, publicly announced that
| the EU has ample ways of punishing Italy should the new prime
| minister "misbehave" - essentially meddling in the country's
| internal affairs and attempting to influence elections, in
| favour of alined politicians.
|
| What you are witnessing in Germany is just regular EU affairs,
| as Germany is the main country of origin for such practices.
|
| I don't like AfD but bannig them won't help much and such
| policies are damaging the continent. It will blow up at some
| point as the pressure is pretty high in all member states.
| Zardoz84 wrote:
| that are fucking Nazis! they should have been banned a long
| time ago.
| purerandomness wrote:
| Protecting a system sometimes means to restrict access of
| malicious actors who want to destroy this same system.
|
| It's similar to the paradox of tolerance.
|
| When you want to live by some rules, you have to defend these
| rules. Otherwise, malicious actors will use up all available
| resources, game the system by every available loophole, and
| then rewrite the rules of law.
| brauhaus wrote:
| AfD is garbage, but banning it might be counter-productive.
|
| A democracy should have institutions that would ensure it's
| survival even if the biggest idiots take over - because one day
| they will.
| version_five wrote:
| There was a panic ~2016 about populist leaders ignoring
| democratic norms and imposing their own rules in spite of
| constitutions and other controls. And there had been some limited
| forays into that - Orban for example.
|
| It feels to me now that the retaliation was way worse than the
| initial concern, ie the populist strongmen largely stayed within
| norms but we've since had authoritarian pushes from their
| political opponents, like this one, that are completely
| undemocratic but "justified" because they belive they're on the
| side of good. It won't end well.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Very democratic to ban political parties as they rise in the
| polls. You have to ban AfD, because they seem like the types that
| would try to ban opposition parties; paradox of tolerance and all
| that.
| mytailorisrich wrote:
| It's also an ostrich policy. Instead of asking why 20% support
| them just decree that they are wrong.
| ALittleLight wrote:
| Counterpoint: The Germans previously elected the Nazis. I'm
| sure we'd all prefer a bit of anti-democracy here at the polls
| than kilotons of democracy delivered by air in a few years.
| version_five wrote:
| That's what constitutions are for.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Agree. The structural solution is a weaker, better checked
| and balanced Berlin. The classic form of that solution is
| enhanced federalism and devolution of power. But the EU
| offers another path: closer political integration.
| gameman144 wrote:
| I guess the question would be whether banning opposition is
| the best way to quell opposition.
|
| One of the core tenets of democracy is that the people get a
| choice in their government. If the current government is able
| to rip that choice away if it's unpalatable, then that's
| anti-democratic in and of itself.
| Manuel_D wrote:
| The Germans did not elect the Nazis into power. They lost in
| the 1932 elections by no small margin. Hindenburg got 53% of
| the vote, Hitler less than 37%. The Nazis would later cement
| their power after the Reichstag fire decree, banning most
| attempts at opposition.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1932_German_presidential_ele.
| ..
| throw9away6 wrote:
| Boy history loves to rhyme doesn't it...
| Dig1t wrote:
| Seems to me that this article does not actually debate or discuss
| any points made by this party, the goal is just to describe them
| as "Hitler-esque" (their words) and paint them as evil. Obviously
| a lot of people in this party feel a certain way and demonizing
| them is not going to make them just disappear.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-08-13 23:01 UTC)