AfD designated a suspected extremist group | DW News
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 тра 2024
- A German court has ruled that the far-right Alternative for Germany party, or AfD, can officially be classified as a suspected extremist group. This means Germany’s domestic intelligence service retains the right to have the party under surveillance.
The Court is convinced that there is a reasonable suspicion that the aim of a large part of the AfD is to devalue the status of German citizens with a migration background and to systematically marginalize this population group. Furthermore, the court sees sufficient evidence of hatred and incitement against foreigners and Muslims within the AfD, citing thousands of statements by AfD party members with derogatory content.
Chapters
00:00 Court rules AfD surveillande legal
02:30 Till Steffen (Greens), Member of the German Bundestag
Subscribe: ua-cam.com/users/deutsche...
For more news go to: www.dw.com/en/
Follow DW on social media:
►Facebook: / deutschewellenews
►Twitter: / dwnews
►Instagram: / dwnews
►Twitch: / dwnews_hangout
Für Videos in deutscher Sprache besuchen Sie: / dwdeutsch
The same has done to AKP in Turkey. Now head of the AKP, Erdogan is president for life it seems. If courts go after a party, their votes increase. They are not acting wisely.
You make a valid point about the potential unintended consequences of banning political parties. In some cases, such as Turkey's AKP, banning a party can lead to increased support for that party and even propel its leaders to higher office. This is because banning a party can be seen as an attack on democracy and freedom of speech, which can rally supporters around the banned party.
Furthermore, banning a party does not necessarily address the underlying issues or grievances that led to its rise in popularity. Instead, it may only serve to drive those sentiments underground, where they can fester and potentially become more radicalized.
In Germany's case, the AfD has been labeled as a suspected extremist group, but it remains legal and continues to participate in elections. This approach allows for ongoing surveillance of the party and its members, while also allowing voters to make their own decisions about whether or not to support the party.
Ultimately, the decision to ban a political party is a complex one that requires careful consideration of all the relevant factors. It is important to balance the need to protect democracy and prevent extremism with the right to freedom of speech and assembly, as well as the potential unintended consequences of banning a party.
@@TheTuubster Hi Mr. Bot
Banning political parties is pretty much impossible in germany. Its only possible in theory but the bverfg (germanys supreme court) always refuses to actually do it. This announcement just means the party will be watched very closely by the Verfassungsschutz
@@tahaismetsevgili1801 The “bot” had a more sensible and well articulated point than you.
Work on your debate skills.
@@secularsekai8910 Well, you should work on your reading skills. You clearly didn't get why I called @TheTuubster a bot, jokingly. I didn't mean to insult him/her/it. Even if this is a real person, his/her writing pattern resambles chatbots a lot.
And so democracy died in Europe.
The court took months to investigate if the AfD tries to undermine or replace the Basic Law, our constitution and highest law of the land. The judges ruled that the AfD is in fact doing it, meaning that the intelligence service is allowed to uphold the same practices that have been in use for *years* .
What about that is undemocratic?
keep crying.
It's important to note that this ruling is not a ban on the AFD, but rather a recognition of the party's extremist tendencies and the potential for harm to democratic institutions and processes. The decision was made by a court, independent of the government, after careful consideration of evidence presented in court.
Furthermore, this ruling does not mean that all members of the AFD will be banned from participating in politics or that they will face criminal charges. Rather, it is a warning to the party and its members that their actions and policies may have consequences for democratic institutions and processes.
It's also worth noting that this ruling is not unique to Germany; other countries have taken similar measures against extremist political parties and individuals who pose a threat to democracy. In fact, many experts argue that such measures are necessary to protect democratic systems from harm.
Finally, it's important to recognize that the AFD has the right to appeal this decision and to continue participating in the political process. The ruling does not preclude the party from running candidates or participating in elections. Rather, it serves as a warning to the party and its members to be mindful of their actions and policies and to respect democratic institutions and processes.
I'll not adress every reply to my comment, tho i will adress one post that i appreciated. *"In fact, many experts argue that such measures are necessary to protect democratic systems from harm."* That might be true from a certain point of view, tho what opinions does the AFD hold? When looked at it seems "milktoast", liberal and left wing even when compared to US politics. The EU is turning into a country that the USA should not associate with as you keep trampeling on freedom and the God given rights that all men have, you are all welcome to run your nations in a manner that you enjoy, but doing such things to the #2 largest opposition party is outright un-democratic. I hope that one day the government comes for you all in the name of "safety" and does unto you as it has done onto your political opponents.
@@oliverstianhugaas7493Interesting. But, to be fair, the "Verfassungsschutz", under various administrations has been watching "subversive" groups. In the 60s and 70s it was mainly left-wing groups - later it became right-wing "nationalist" and racist factions.
There have been many "extreme" decisions in respect of political ideologies in Germany. The "Berufsverbot" for Communists was unbelievable.
On the other hand, all countries have their "Secret Services", BND, etc. We have to live with this, but should maintain a critical outlook on state control.
Hah, that old guy never heard about the Tories spying on Labor with MI5 during Boris' time as boss and probably ever since.
The difference is that the AfD surveillance is made public here. Everyone knows what is being watched and what has been seen. This allows for transparency.
On the other hand, the MI5 did their surveillance in secrecy and what they discovered was and is still kept secret.
Not sure Britain really qualifies as a true democracy
"The only opposition" 😂
the only opposition of democracy😄
Just a tiny sample of how unhinged and detached from reality the members of that party are.
To mass immigration yes, they are.
@@1mnyenaphar727 And why is that? I dont know where people get this sentiment from. The AfD is a lot of things but not undemocratic, theres nothing suggesting that.
The court ruling does not support your argument
How about sourcing their financing? Follow the money, and the chance is that it will lead to Putin. One serious error was the lack of audits of the STASI and its members after the reunification.
Another one of conspiracy theoris leading to "Putin".
Interestingly, not single one of them turned out to be true.. Yet still consistent.
Well said but why is Islam not considered a threat to democracy as well as finding the source of mosques’ funding?
When your wife asks you to bring out the garbage, don't take it personally
.... It most certainly will lead to Putin. Actually Putin was also behind he first world war...
Funding from putin?????😅😅😅😅😅😅...
@@barry6768 Radical forms are. Multiple mosques and congregations have been investigated by the Verfassungsschutz and their funding was one reason for the investigations.
This is unwise. I'm no fan of the AfD, but this is not the way to address any concerns around them or their activities.
In the case of the AfD, there are legitimate concerns about their extremist ideology and potential threat to democracy. The court's ruling is a step towards holding them accountable for their actions and ensuring that they do not undermine the rule of law.
It's important to note that banning a party does not mean suppressing dissent or silencing opposing viewpoints. Rather, it's about protecting democratic values and preventing harm to society. The AfD has been given ample opportunity to distance themselves from extremist elements and promote inclusive policies, but they have failed to do so.
Furthermore, the ruling does not automatically lead to a ban of the party. It simply allows for further investigation and evaluation of their activities. If evidence is found that they pose a significant threat to democracy, then a ban may be considered. However, if they can demonstrate a commitment to democratic values and reject extremism, then there may be no need for such measures.
Ultimately, the goal is not to silence the AfD but to ensure that their activities do not harm society or undermine democracy. By holding them accountable for their actions, we can protect our democratic system and promote a more inclusive and just society for all.
@@TheTuubster The point stands, this is unwise. It only feeds into the narrative that the government won't listen and can't be reasoned with.
What do you suppose will happen to those who resonate with the AfD's message? Do you think they'll fall in line? Unlikely. They'll distrust the government / it's institutions even more and be even less open to future attempts at persuasion.
Investigations come before actions like these are taken, not after. No matter how its framed, a ruling government taking punitive action against an opposition party (on an election year no less) is concerning.
It makes me uncomfortable, and I'm a good deal left of the AfD's position. For someone already aligned with their message, this is likely to push them even further down that path.
I have no love lost for the AfD, but how is this coherent? If the people rule (i.e. the definition of democracy) shouldn't it be up to the people not to vote for objectionable parties? And if the people are not competent to do that, why are they competent to make other decisions?
Not necessarily,
The judicial system has the constitutional duty to uphold the law. If an organisation is working to abolish the current rule of law and replace it, they act against our constitution and should not be allowed to operate any further.
This is sometimes necessary when these organisations try to mask their intent, deceiving the public.
It's crucial to understand that this ruling has nothing to do with a ban of the AfD. It merely allows our domestic intelligence services to monitor their activities and gather intelligence on rather or not they are trying to undermine our democratic system and our constitution.
And that's something the public should be allowed to get insight on, especially with this party.
That’s American democracy… the Germans banned the Communist party cause the courts deemed it extremist and anti democratic… it makes even more sense for them to ban this political party after they banned the Communist party
@@jarnomon1
Mental gymnastics
This is totalitarian persecution of an entity which is a threat to yhe system
@@goyonman9655The Germans have a lot of experience with the dangers of a totalitarian party taking over a democracy. The German constitution was written with the idea in mind that this could never happen again.
@@peterpluim7912
The current german establishment is totalitarian.
The treatment of the AfD, is a great example of their totalitarianism
And that action was not taken by "the Germans"
Aber, es ist doch keineswegs ein "AfD Verbot", oder?
Not very democratic to ban an opposition party now is it? Very strange practice indeed. 🤔
It's the court that banned.. No political party involved?
Firstly, it has not been banned. A court has ruled that the party can be surveiled. Secondly, yes it is democratic. Just like the police have to use violence sometimes to combat violence, democracy needs to act decisively against tendencies threatening it.
An opposition party is a party that is not in government. Hate towards foreigners and neo-nazism cannot regarded as "opposition"
@@ulsia6740 The same things were said by mustache man's party a hundred years ago, after he ousted all his opposition.
Not true that the AfD is the only party under surveillance. Die Linke was 5 years under surveillance from 2007 to 2013.
If you think banning voices is going to lead to the outcome you are looking for (i.e. heading off extremism), expect the exact opposite result.
Going to give you blackpill...bans work. There is a reason china has been single party and communist for 70+ years. Its because prohibiting usurper parties works.
They are not beeing baned. This was about wheter you can call them extremists (with the implications that come with it)
@@JCB576 Did you not watch the video? Banning is the next goal on the agenda.
@@dannyarcher6370 BS
And the exact opposite did happen. 2015 AfD was a fringe party looking to get reps into parliament. Now they are taking %20 of the vote. Other parties are rrefusign to directly deal with the AfD going tinto any coalition. They better learn to use their tools as politcians, talking. If they dont and the AfD gets enough votes to rule they are goign to get shut out of all decision making whatsoever. The CDU, merkels party, is already associated with the mass immigration that is crippling germany so a lot of those voters went to AfD. My own sister did. I can see why.
Maybe if Germany would address the issues afd supporters have they would stop growing in popularity
The thing is. Studies show that the AfD doesnt even deal with the concerns of its voters. Its just fueled by hate
Are there any "right" political parties in Germany? Or it can be only left, center and far right?
Nah, it works like this: Germans are left, far left, and eco-fanatic communists.
Since the 2021 Bundestag elections, five parliamentary groups, two parliamentary groups and nine parties have been represented in the German Bundestag: SPD, Union (CDU and CSU), Alliance 90/The Greens, FDP and AfD. The representatives of the Left Party and the BSW form groups and the representative of the SSW is non-attached.
But there are way more in Germany.
If you recognize the right as "romantic nationalists" and nothing else! so there is no debate!
Otherwise, yes. CDU/CSU is centre-right.
AfD ARE the centrist party.
Exactly
You could probably honestly undercut a lot of their "support" by implementing some common sense reforms of immigration law...
If you made simple reforms, I doubt they'd still retain 17% of voter base.
Right, but in this case you would make big capitalists angry because they are interested in cheap labor price.
That discussion is not allowed and the left demands that the country take in ever larger numbers to help pay for an ever growing pension pot that is running dry. The collective guilt from ww2 is also strongly drilled into the oridnary german from day one so they are also fighting the state sponsored indoctrination.
Banning AfD will nevr go well. Look at their numbers. In less than a decade they went from fringe to main stream numbers. In 2015 the talk was if they can get members into parliament. Now they are taking %20 of the vote.
@@AlexV6 Germany has a minimum wage and no illegal workers. If you use "cheap labor" and "big capitalists" in relation to Germany, that only says something about your own way of thinking and your complete ignorance of German conditions.
No, we cannot and will not make any concessions on immigration laws. We urgently need more people to come to Germany and work here, and if some racists don't like that, then that's their problem. As we are currently seeing in Japan, you can't have an ageing population/low birth rate and be against immigration at the same time.
Cheap labor is not only for the benefit of big capitalists. Rather, it is the cause of more competition and reduction in the price of goods and increase in economic growth. If you don't mix the ""socialistic"" ideas with xenophobia and ultra-nationalism, you'll understand that or we'll be back to the 1940s! And this is the Russophiles hope!!
Democracy means voting for the options that the government, the courts and the powerful chooses for you?
What?!?!?!?!
No, it means that you can vote for every democratic party. And those which don't obey the democratic laws are taken out of the system. This is in contrast to what happened in 1932.
No, but there are rules which have been created to protect democracy, and who but the courts ought to enforce them? German history has shown that democracy is fragile and needs protection.
The German constitution is very flawed, inherently. It is designed to preserve the German state and the "acceptable" views.
"anti democratic" values are prohibited. Who defines that? well government judges. Oh you want to run a Bavarian separatist party? Well human rights shows that humans have a right of secession. Not in Germany. That's "anti democratic" thought. Can't have that! Advocating peaceful secession for example is illegal, a basic human right to forge your own destiny.
Before any German simps chime in, I'm not German. Sadly my country (Canada) constitution is quite garbage and frankly worthless too. I believe in human rights, over the rights of the state. You probably won't convince me of these "dangerous elements" needing to be removed.
Managed democracy hahaha
@@philippg. So can I advocate secession? The German constitution doesn't allow that. Why can't I do that? if 90% of Bavarians vote to go their own way, who is the rest of Germany to get in the way? If I advocated the breakup of Germany in a peaceful and democratic matter, then I would go to jail in Germany. That's psychotic.
Wow, how terrible. Totalitarianism in action.
So you were against the German Communist Party being banned when it was incredibly popular?
What about this process would you consider totalitarian?
After investigation of public AfD speeches and leaks from within the party, it was investigated and given the chance to represent itself in a court of law, which they have. Loosing a trial isn't the same as being repressed or oppressed.
@@dansattah in effect, by eradicating political opposition by abuse of the legal processes and the media is totalitarian. You see the same happening in the US with the constant legal attacks on Trump, the same strategy used to attack the socialist government in Spain and the Corbyn socialist opposition in the UK. It is abuse of power and not a good look for any “democracy”.
Like Zelensky' Ukraine 😂😂.🤡😁😁🤔
@@PeterLamin-pi6rv The reality is that in liberal countries and blocks of countries, the banks and finance decide whom can govern the country. They control the credit rating and bond value, all they need to do is reduce bond value and that’s it, the government falls within days. You only need to look at what happened to the government of Liz Truss in the UK to see that in action, I recall she lasted about 10 days when she tried to impose fiscal policy that the banks disapproved of.
It’s been like this since Reagan and Thatcher deregulated and gave control to the markets.
The point of checks and balances in democracy is to temper the power struggle with rules. These rules enable those who act lawfully to disable those who act in their own interest. If a party or a group of individuals considers their own agenda to be of higher importance than abiding by rules that ensure the benefit of the people, that is a sign of incompetence.
The issue at hand is not about checks and balances but rather the ability for one party or group to have complete control over another. The German court's decision to classify the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) as a suspected extremist group highlights the need for caution when it comes to political parties that promote divisive ideologies.
While some may argue that banning a party is not the solution, it is important to consider the potential consequences of allowing such groups to flourish. The AfD's rhetoric has been linked to an increase in hate crimes and xenophobia in Germany, and their policies have been criticized for being discriminatory and harmful to certain communities.
In a democratic society, it is important to ensure that all citizens are treated equally and with respect, regardless of their background or beliefs. The court's decision to classify the AfD as an extremist group is a step towards protecting the rights and freedoms of all Germans, rather than allowing one party to dominate and undermine democratic values.
So war with rusia not about democracy vs tatalrian any more??
The Rusky Trollsky's are very upset their puppet has been disarmed.
You don't have to be a Russian troll to not be amused regarding the ruling...
It's like putting a bandage on democracy while believing that it will save the torso that's torn in half.
The fact that they are so popular to begin with tells a lot about current state of German population and their non functioning neck tumors and that won't change so easily...
The AfD doesnt support russia. They just dont want to spend billions on ukraine and have the german people suffer from a war that isnt theirs.
Es ist seltsam, diese Sätze nicht auf Russisch oder Koreanisch zu hören
The problem is that 17% people find their interests represented by the afd. We have to find an alternative for afd to address their issues
The real problem is that 83% of Germans apparently do not care about their country.
Und jegliche Verbote werden den Mindstate dieser Leute leider auch nicht ad hoc ändern 🫤
Sahra Russenknecht hat doch genau das getan.
@@hape3862 👍und Merz
@@arnodobler1096 Puh, geh mir bloß weg mit dem!
Why dont you Report on Hamburg?
What happened in Hamburg ?
They did report on Hamburg.
But of course AfD voters are too incompetent to use strg+f.
@bonaku20 they discovered a new and improved bun in hamburger university
How to create an extremist group: Step 1
I'm not going to make a decision
So this is how it begins.
US is Germany 1933
Green party is NSGW of our time. They even want war with Russia (and are waging one currently). So many same points. History is repeating literally.
This is not a new development, but rather a continuation of existing trends in Germany and other Western countries. The AfD has been under surveillance by intelligence agencies for some time now, and there have been calls for the party to be banned outright. This ruling is just one more step in that direction.
It's important to note that this ruling does not necessarily mean that the AfD will be banned, but rather that the domestic intelligence agency has been given the green light to continue monitoring the party and its members. The decision also sets a precedent for future cases involving other right-wing extremist groups in Germany.
It's worth mentioning that the AfD has denied any ties to extremist groups and has accused the government of trying to silence opposition voices. However, the evidence presented in court suggests otherwise.
Overall, this ruling is a significant development in the ongoing struggle against right-wing extremism in Germany and beyond. It's important for democratic societies to take a strong stance against such ideologies and to protect their citizens from harm.
A pack of cats is called an extremist group for bullying dogs
Extreme left is ok I guess in Deutschland.
How about the millions of fundamentalists who loudly agree with Tehran and the Taliban?
Europe is “at war with Russia” yet millions of their sympathizers live here and want to install a caliphate, with notably very little resistance from within or without their communities.
😂 bots be botting.
Mason - Whataboutisms aren't arguments.
There are threats to democracy from multiple directions, that is true. But how does one threat minimize the other? Both need to be removed.
You forget to mention those who agree with the genocide in Gaza.
Millions? wtf
This ruling is do authoritarian and anti-democratic
it's impossible. the word you need to figure out is called oxymoron.
By this ethic putting criminals in prison is kidnapping.
No it's actualy very democratic. Germans (especialy with it's history) decided that they do not want history to repeat itself. And btw the party is not beeing prohibited. It's just about wheter they can be called extremists (with the implications that come with it) and there has been than enough evidence to support it
In the USA you can't vote as a prisoner, or EX prisoner, but you can be elected president!🤯
Not at all
Far left at it once again
what far left pls?
@@arnodobler1096 nope
@@AaronfromEngland1989 what are you talking about?
@@arnodobler1096 The National Socialist German Workers Party is a good example of far left. The International Socialists are also quite extreme. Ask Cambodia.
joke
😮
The Green Party speaker is an embarrassment to democracy.
They were initially formed by lost Communists. What else would you expect?
Anything to get rid of the competition eh? *looks at Greens, CSU, and CDU*
But what did AfD do to deserve this?
They are a discriminatory party that works against important parts of our institution (for example that the honour of humans is not to be touched), principles of a materially constitutional democracy (that law makers and lawyers should be separated), the AfD is discriminatory and the AfD can be linked to a recent upwelling in politically motivated brutality (with calls like "we are going to hunt them")
You should really try to *understand* the video and not just watch it before asking questions.
The court ruling is not a ban on the AFD, but rather a recognition that the party's policies and actions are in violation of Germany's constitution. The decision was made after an appeal by the party to remove the designation of extremism. The court found that the party's goals against democracy and its discrimination of people with foreign roots are reasons for further investigation.
It is important to note that this ruling does not automatically lead to a ban on the AFD, but rather allows for further investigations into the party's activities. The decision was made by an independent court, and the interior minister's statement in support of the ruling should not be taken as an abuse of power.
It is also worth mentioning that the AfD has been under surveillance by Germany's intelligence service since 2021, when it was first labeled as potentially extremist. The party has appealed this decision twice and has now lost both appeals. It is important to ensure that any political parties or organizations are held accountable for their actions and do not violate the rights of others.
@@TheTuubsterseems resonable. But is there public evidence of their illegal activity? As a foreigner i am used to media lies and DW is no exception
Nazism/fascism is illegal in Germany for obvious reasons. The AfD has been promoting a fascist like agenda since it's inception which put it on a collision course with the German constitution.
The USA has a similar issue, one party is targeted by intelligence & law enforcement and has been for at least 12 years.
Mimimi, cry me a river. Wasn't this very party in power for four of those 12 years?
Yeah like Hoover and McCarthy, oops
Yes, the US has a similar party. Like the Afd, the Maga Republicans are far right maniacs
Still gestapo in Germany?
LOL only one party here has a leader that can have a trial in front of a judge he appointed and can stage a coup attempt on live television and still not only walk free, but run again saying he'll make himself dictator on day one.
what exactly is non democratic about the AFD?
Domestic twerrorism, deep connections with Germany's enemies, the fact their members and those associated with them are trying to destroy German democracy.
According to the constitution, everyone who has German citizenship is German. The AfD sees people who have German citizenship but are of foreign origin as second-class citizens and wants to restrict their rights.
They will never answer that question.
The fact they are participating in democratic process and that the state is being undemocratic, speaks volumes.
@@jamesbrittain5659 What exactly is undemocratic about the AfD, and whether there is anything undemocratic at all, will be decided by the courts. We are not that far yet. The German Office for the Protection of the Constitution is currently gathering evidence that may or may not lead to a ban procedure. At the moment, the court has only decided that the observation can continue.
@@hape3862 Checks & balances = guarding democracy.
It is wrong when russia do it lol
Political parties are there to engage the people, to change public opinion and change laws.
Trying to ban a party in the name of democracy is inherently undemocratic.
Not if the party itself is inherently undemocratic and is actively developing and deploying smokescreen tactics to hide their actual agenda.
That's like saying you can't arrest an obvious criminal because they keep insisting they haven't done anything while holding a bloody knife behind their back. Look at what their officials say behind closed doors and you'll understand why considering a ban us starting to gain traction.
The actual procedure has not been initiated yet and likely won't until the next elections.
They would use your logic to shore up votes from people without the time or interest to dive deep into politics.
No, you completely forget or dismiss the paradox of tolerance. In order to maintain a democratic and tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.
@@Hukkinen In a Western society, we are tolerent of many things.
Things such as huge wealth inequality, political parties are free to argue that, that wealth inequality gap is reduced or not.
But you are saying, its wrong for a political party to have as part of its platform, that the Countries national culture is protected?.
If a party calls for overthrowing democracy then it isn't.
@@militant_pacifist What if the people agree with the idea of overthrowing democeacy?.
There may be some people in the AfD who want to 'overthrow democracy', but I don't believe its a widespread idea within the party.
But if people are critical of how German democracy works, aren't they entitled to vote for a party, who they believe shares their opinion.
Isn't it more a threat to democracy, where the other German political parties refuse to work with the AfD.
If I had voted for the AfD, I would probably believe the system was rigged against me, now that is dangerous for a democracy.
AFD is the only party that has the courage and strength to deal with the lslamic movement in Germany. Just leave AFD alone .
Exactly which is why they want to silence them
@@MrMustang13or maybe they’re just a threat to everyone else? Just like religious fanatics.
@@springbok4015 no no, that’s not it.
What's wrong with Islam in Germany?
The AfD is not a solution to the problem you brought up. It is merely exploiting anxiety and frustration in the population.
Very democratic 😂😂😂😂
Putin’s Trojan Horse in Germany?
A bit
Not really, Putin succeeded with the 'Lebedev, Johnson, Brexit Trojan Horse' in 'Clown run England' but Germany is made of sterner, more serious, stuff.
@@German_Patriot1 Russia recognises "LGBT" as extremist group, then Germany recognises Russia minded "AFD" as extremist group.
like spidermans showing middle finger to each other.
@@herrglotzenschnitzengruber1510 Not really...
Yeah, the Alt-Left using Putin tactics to silence the quiet majority.
Hey guys! How about ramping up arms production to go with a ban on a political party? How about that? Do I hear inflation and stagnations?
What happened to freedom in Germany?
Freedom to be awful?
@@TheRealBlueValhallayeah this isnt equilibrium
Germany has strict laws against extremism and hate speech, which are essential for protecting its democratic system and society. The ruling on the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party is a legal decision based on evidence that the party's policies and actions violate these laws. It does not mean that the party or its members are being silenced or persecuted, but rather that they are being held accountable for their words and deeds.
The AfD has been under investigation for several years due to suspicions of extremism and hate speech, and the court's ruling is a result of this ongoing process. The party's leaders have repeatedly made statements that are discriminatory, racist, and anti-democratic, which have caused harm and concern among many Germans.
It is important to note that freedom of speech and assembly are still protected in Germany, but they come with responsibilities and limitations. Inciting hatred or violence, for example, is not allowed and can lead to legal consequences. The AfD's leaders have chosen to ignore these limits and continue to promote harmful and divisive ideologies, which has led to the current situation.
In a democratic society like Germany, it is essential that all political parties respect the rule of law, human rights, and democratic values. If any party or politician fails to do so, they must be held accountable through legal means. The ruling on the AfD is an example of this principle in action.
It's illegal to criticize Israel in Germany...sooo yeah
Laws To Protect Democracy How Many Times Does He Have To Explain This simple Provision.
A democracy does not ban any parties. That's Democracy.
A so called democracy that spies on opposition 😂 just say it - democracy is a dead concept - and the so-called "democrats" are the ones who killed it 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@buildmotosykletist1987 Says who? Besides you...
@@HansTheGeek : History.
@@buildmotosykletist1987History of this particular country tells you that no party should be banned? 👀
Just making sure if we see something we’re still supposed to say something!!
“Been that way for 30 years.” - U.S. Justice Department on the lack of Human Rights in Oklahoma County Jail, 2020
“Makes me feel human again after this place.” - Oklahoma City Art Museum review after life in the local shelters (20+ years in the making), 2024
“It is said that no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones.” - Nelson Mandela 🥂🥂
The degree of civilization of a society can be gauged by the condition of its prisoners. Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoyevsky (1821 - 1881)
US Inc.
@@arnodobler1096 🍸🍸
@@bobbydennis8333 🍻 🍻
Very similar to what Russia does in dealing with opposition parties
nope
@@arnodobler1096 : Yes it is, straight from Putin's playbook.
@@buildmotosykletist1987 AfD? Yes
They regularly travel to Moscow to pick up their orders!
I understand your concern, but it's important to note that Germany is a democratic country with a strong rule of law. The court ruling against the AfD party was based on evidence that they promote extremist and discriminatory policies, which goes against the principles of democracy and human rights. It's not about silencing opposition parties, but rather ensuring that all political parties respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all citizens.
In contrast to Russia, where opposition parties are often suppressed through force or manipulation, Germany has a robust system of checks and balances that protects democratic institutions and individual rights. The AfD party may have some popular support, but they do not have the right to promote hateful or discriminatory policies that harm others.
It's important to recognize that banning a political party is a serious measure that should only be taken when necessary to protect democracy and human rights. In this case, the court ruling against the AfD party was based on evidence of their extremist activities, not just because they are an opposition party. It's about upholding the principles of democracy and ensuring that all political parties play by the same rules.
@@TheTuubster : Then you'd have to agree that the Greens do not have the right to promote hateful or discriminatory policies that harm others.
When will you ban the Greens ?
Meanwhile, in the USA, the republican party is allowed to harbor fascists with impunity.
😂😂😂
The situation in Germany and the United States are different, as the German court has ruled that the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party can be classified as a suspected extremist group, while there is no such mechanism in place in the US. The US Constitution protects all political parties from being banned or censored, even if they hold extreme views.
However, it's important to note that both Germany and the United States have laws and regulations in place to prevent extremist groups from obtaining power and promoting violence. In the US, law enforcement agencies are responsible for monitoring and disrupting domestic terrorism, while in Germany, the intelligence services can continue surveillance of the AfD party and its members.
It's also worth mentioning that the German court's decision to classify the AfD as a suspected extremist group was based on evidence that the party promotes goals against democracy and discriminates against people with foreign roots. This is in contrast to the Republican Party in the US, which has not been found to promote extremist or violent ideologies.
Overall, while there are differences between the political landscapes of Germany and the United States, both countries have mechanisms in place to protect democracy and prevent extremism from gaining power.
👍
What does their status as a democratic party or only-oppostion-party has to do with immunity from crime persecution??
This will end swimmingly
It should yes, because enabling the far-right doesn’t end well
@@springbok4015 that is actually emboldening the far right across Europe I hope you understand. It is same as the misguided German policies on migration .....
@@springbok4015 : You are so far Left you can't see the centre.
"Suspected?"
Actually you are not interested in addressing the issues of afD supporters. By labeling the party an extremist organization you are calling it's supporters extremists as well. You have basically banned an entire group of people from voting because you don't like their political views. It's pathetic. It shows that Germany is not a democracy.
Who votes the afd either doesn't know what they're voting or they are right extremists
It's important to note that the ruling by the German court was based on the party's policies and actions, rather than its supporters. The court found that the AfD's goals and methods were incompatible with democracy and the rule of law, which is a fundamental principle of any democratic society.
It's important to recognize that banning a political party is not a decision taken lightly, and it should only be done when there is clear evidence that the party poses a significant threat to democracy and the rights of citizens. In this case, the court found that the AfD met those criteria based on its actions and policies.
Furthermore, banning a political party does not mean that its supporters are also banned from participating in politics or expressing their views. They can still exercise their right to free speech and assembly, as long as they do so within the bounds of the law and respect the rights of others.
@@TheTuubster 🤦🏾♂️🤣 oh please, I am not interested in your excuses. And I have not respect for the German judiciary. They label everything antisemitism. They charge people for voicing their opinions / doing journalism. They now ban political parties and label them extremists. If a political party is labeled extremist, it's supporters are by extension also extremists. The German courts are probably the worst in all of the EU.
The term "suspected extremist group" can also be applied to the actual government.
I mean one can suspect anyone of anything. The state tries to smear and uses its instruments.
In this case a court. Pretty extreme dont you think ?
There is one little detail you missed here. The court is not part of the government and rules against government interests all the time.
It is not about suspicion, it's about evidence. If there is enough evidence that the party is promoting extremist ideologies or actions, then it is legitimate to classify them as such and take appropriate measures to protect democracy and human rights. The court ruling in this case was based on a thorough examination of the party's policies and activities, and it found that they meet the criteria for an extremist group.
It is important to note that banning a political party is not a decision that is taken lightly or without careful consideration. It is only done when there is clear evidence that the party poses a threat to democracy and human rights. In this case, the court found that the AfD's policies and actions meet that criteria.
It is also important to remember that democracy is not just about allowing any group or individual to express their views, but also about protecting the rights of all citizens and ensuring that they are not harmed by extremist ideologies or actions. The court ruling in this case was a necessary step to protect the rights of all Germans and ensure that democracy is upheld.
@@HansTheGeek Well,the gov is entitled to issue instructions,because in Germany justice isnt independent.
@@Zockopa That's a bold claim without any prove of being correct.
@@HansTheGeek As bold and unproven as
the base for the judgement.
Is adof still alive 😮
He would have been pissed off.
Put simply, fascism is not permitted. The fact that it is not being challenged legally in other national jurisdictions is alarming. However, it should be clear only fascism is impermissible. The far left is not morally equivalent to the far right, and should not be subject to the same restrictions.
Depends on which kind of "far left" you are talking about.
This isnt about "facism bad" its about "anti electoralism bad", if you are far left and willing to accept the constitution and multi party system then you are fine, if not then not.
far left is communism.
I agree that there are significant differences between the far-left and the far-right in terms of their ideologies and methods. However, I would argue that both extremes pose a threat to democracy and human rights, and therefore should be treated with equal scrutiny by the legal system. The fact that one side is not being challenged legally does not mean that the other side should be let off the hook. Rather, it highlights the need for a balanced approach that addresses the dangers of both extremes.
Moreover, I would argue that the far-left has been known to use tactics such as silencing dissenting voices and intimidating those who disagree with them, which can be just as harmful as the actions of the far-right. In order to protect democracy and human rights, it is important to address these issues and ensure that all individuals are able to express their opinions freely without fear of retribution or persecution.
Finally, I would like to point out that banning a political party is not always the most effective solution to addressing extremism. Rather, it can often create further divisions and fuel resentment among those who support the banned party. Instead, it may be more productive to focus on education and awareness-raising efforts that promote tolerance, understanding, and respect for human rights. By fostering a culture of inclusivity and democratic values, we can work towards creating a society that is resistant to extremism and better equipped to address the challenges of the 21st century.
So much for Democracy
Is that in Russia?
@@TheRealBlueValhalla One would think its russia. When you are using the judical system to subvert political parties in a so called democracy.
SECURITY THREAT GROUP
Infuriating
Not at all. We don’t need more fascists.
Not really.
@@springbok4015 : You've got the Alt-Left fascists banning the opposition.
Oaf is not fooling anyone.
they should be banned
Why should the AfD be banned but not Islam? Which is a greater threat to democracy?
Haha. So much for democracy. The inmates are already running the asylum.
It's not appropriate to make light of serious issues such as this. The AfD is a political party that has been labeled as extremist by Germany's domestic intelligence agency, and the court ruling you mentioned is a significant development in the ongoing debate about the role of right-wing populism in German politics.
While it's understandable to have concerns about the potential for government overreach or abuse of power, it's important to approach these issues with a critical and nuanced perspective. The AfD has been accused of promoting anti-democratic and xenophobic ideologies, and the court ruling is a response to these concerns.
It's also worth noting that the decision to classify the AfD as an extremist group was made by Germany's domestic intelligence agency, which operates independently of the government. The agency has been monitoring the party's activities for several years and has gathered evidence of its extremist tendencies.
In any case, it's important to approach these issues with a critical and open-minded perspective, rather than resorting to simplistic or dismissive language.
Germany is weak and frail
That's what they said a century ago.
Germany needs to toughen up, at least the military at a minimum, as Putin and Russia are a developing threat. And to think the cold war was over...?
@@nicolasoltonhahahaha how does that koolaid taste?
Kyiv in 3 days botski! 😂
@@endianAphonesAnd Germany has been in decline ever since???
Запретить партию, которая должна выиграть это свобода и демократия, не путать с диктатурой и Россией )))
This looks and sounds like something Putin would do in Russia. What has happened to democracy in Germany ?
The german government is dominated by two parties SDP and CDU, which have been in power for decades, ofcourse they aint going to give up power lmao
The court ruling does not mean that the AfD is being banned, but rather that it can be classified as a suspected extremist group. This allows for further investigation and surveillance by intelligence services. The decision was made after the party appealed twice to remove the designation of an extremist group.
The verdict highlights the ongoing debate about the role of right-wing parties in Germany, particularly the AfD, which has been accused of promoting anti-democratic and extremist ideologies. The ruling is a significant development in the country's efforts to protect its democracy and prevent internal threats.
It is important to note that this decision does not mean that all members of the AfD are extremists or support extremist ideologies. However, the court has found sufficient evidence to warrant further investigation into the party's activities and policies. The ruling should be seen as a measure to protect democracy and ensure that political parties do not promote harmful or discriminatory agendas.
In Germany, there are strict laws regulating the activities of extremist groups, including surveillance and monitoring by intelligence services. This is in line with other Western countries, where similar measures are taken to protect national security and democratic values. The ruling on the AfD is a normal application of these laws and should not be seen as an abuse of power or a violation of human rights.
It is important for political parties to respect democratic values and principles, particularly in a country like Germany where there are strict laws regulating extremist activities. The ruling on the AfD serves as a reminder that all political parties must adhere to these standards to ensure the continued health of German democracy.
Civil WAAAARRRRR
Alice Weidel is the best! 💪🇩🇪
I think she is a grea person and speaker for a wrong party.
So much for democracy in germany.
It's important to note that this ruling is not a ban on the AFD, but rather a classification of the party as potentially extremist. The domestic intelligence service has been surveying the party since 2021, and this ruling allows them to continue doing so. The verdict is based on the court's finding that the AFD pursues goals against democracy and the rule of law, which is a violation of the constitution.
It's also worth noting that the Constitutional Court has already ruled that the AfD's youth organization, the Young Alternative, can be classified as right-wing extremist. Additionally, three eastern German states have already declared the AFD's regional associations as extremist groups.
The decision to surveil a political party is not taken lightly, and it is done in order to protect democracy and prevent internal threats. It's important to remember that the government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from harm, and this includes protecting them from extremist ideologies that can lead to violence and undermine democratic institutions.
It's also worth noting that the AFD is not the only opposition party in Germany, and there are many other parties that are represented in parliament. The government is accountable to all citizens, regardless of their political beliefs, and it is important for all citizens to be treated fairly and with respect for their rights.
In conclusion, this ruling is a warning to the AFD that its goals against democracy and the rule of law will not be tolerated. It's an abuse of power to use surveillance as a means of suppressing political opposition, but in this case, it is necessary to protect democracy and prevent internal threats. The government has a responsibility to all citizens, regardless of their political beliefs, and it is important for all citizens to be treated fairly and with respect for their rights.
Dear Russian bots, your favorite German party is not banned, they are just being watched very closely.
Now, go away.
democracy is dying in Germany.
Putinbot.exe
I cannot agree with your statement that democracy is dying in Germany. While there may be concerns about extremist groups and the role of intelligence services in a democratic society, Germany has a robust democratic system with a long history of protecting human rights and upholding the rule of law. The recent court ruling regarding the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party is an example of this system at work, as the courts have determined that the party's policies and actions are in violation of democratic principles and must be subject to further scrutiny.
It is important to note that the AfD party has not been banned, but rather its activities and ideologies have been deemed suspect and subject to investigation. This is a common practice in many democratic countries, where intelligence services and law enforcement agencies work to prevent extremist groups from gaining power and undermining democratic institutions.
Furthermore, the German government has taken steps to address concerns about right-wing extremism and protect vulnerable communities. For example, the government has established a special commissioner for the fight against right-wing extremism and has increased funding for programs that support integration and social cohesion.
Overall, while there may be challenges facing Germany's democratic system, it is not accurate to say that democracy is dying in the country. Rather, Germany continues to uphold its democratic values and work towards a more inclusive and equitable society for all citizens.
But the Green party ain't much better either. Ever since I watched Owen Jones reporting about that Berlin film festival incident where a green member only clapped for an Israeli not a Palestinian, I know this party has quite some racism in their ideology, this is also supported by what the German FM and Robert Habeck is doing and expressing.
Nonsense
😂😂😂😂😂democracy they said
Frightening news
The BRD is truly evil
Vote AfD!
Nur noch AfD!!!!!!
One party rule thats not democracy.
that is was the afd want
@@arnodobler1096 : How's the view from the Alt-Left, you need a telescope to see the centre.
@@buildmotosykletist1987 “Die Linke” hardly exists here anymore.
👍