Far too late but good luck.
Let’s see how the 30% of nazis and / or uneducated idiots who voted for them will react.
There are a LOT of far right MEPs who pretend they’re not far right and are members of the conservative parties. So I’m not holding my breath.
Also wondering when Weidel will be arrested for treason.
Yes, let us learn from past mistakes for once!
I just want to mention that this procedure is raised by party that have majority right now in parliament. That are European People’s Party - christian and conservative. They are the same as MAGA just not as radical (yet) as AfD. Whoever thinks that’s good thing may go to hell because I don’t want to be ruled by christian conservative idiots but I want them to fight against each other so they can show their true nature.
You’re absolutely right and those who downvote you need to have a wee looksie into parties like that.
Good, fuck them and their anti-democratic brethren.
as much as i hate AfD and the far right, i think banning them will just put fuel on the fire and it gives them easy propaganda material, where they can pose as the victims here
it’s a really hard situation and banning feels like the bad move to me tbh
Take it from us in the USA, do not fuck around with these types of groups
Tolerance paradox.
Banning a political party leads to a loss of funding and they’re not allowed to get back together in the same or similar constellation. It would set them back for at least a decade and destroys all of the work they put into their Nazi projects. It absolutely helps and it’s absolutely vital that this ban happens.
banning them just leads to some other even more radical party to rise up as the voter base who supports them won’t disappear
But to build up the infrastructure, the network, the funding takes years. That’s the main reason behind the ban.
Amputation is a valid course of treatment while the cancer or infection is spreading. Leaving the limb alone can lead to dead much more quickly.
except it’s a bad analogy because you don’t get rid of the relatively big following of the far right this way, quite the opposite and it will just fuel them more and it annihilates this group from the democratic process, which leads to even harder radicalization
Not seeing any alternatives presented here…
Solve the problems that the voterbase is experiencing. Those problems are real even if what they believe the cause is is wrong.
Nice, take nazies (and Putin pawns) down one party at time
Found this a few posts down
https://feddit.org/pictrs/image/6676522c-4cc7-42a1-abe7-9e005f9e0c53.jpeg
Hey, german government, parliament and federal council. This is how that works, now do that, too. For fucks sake!
So theyre banning the group these parties are a part of, and no the parties. Thats not even clickbait, thats just misinformation if im reading this correctly.
This is about parties in the EU parliament which are made up of representatives from national parties. The EU can’t ban parties on a national level.
ESN is all about freedoms and democracy unless it goes against their interests
Maybe the people downvoting your comment should’ve read the article to figure out what ESN stands for.
to clarify: ESN is the EU’s far right party pool.
You just enabled people to continue not reading the article :(
I hate him so much right now 😭
Just your average fascists. It’s always the same with them, wherever you look.
Yup
deleted by creator
Ain’t it the same parliament that recently passed mass invigilation of EU citizens without a vote?
Quite the contrary. That mass surveilance was pushed through by the EU commision against the parliament that already rejected it (twice).
That mass surveilance was pushed through by the EU commision against the parliament that already rejected it (twice).
Commision and the council. Especially the most recent chat control 1.0 proposal that the parliament will vote for tomorrow (July 9)
EU ambassadors agree to push a temporary revival — unprecedented, as Parliament’s rejection was considered final. Because an expired regulation cannot be extended, the Council proposes a formally new law with identical content via an expedited procedure.
Gods, comission? What a farce.
Banning a party will not magically make the support they have disappear. When people with fascist views get isolated, we only make them close more and more in their own bubble, which will just create more extremism. It’s the same with people that make fun of flat earthers. You are not going to change their mind, you are just sending them deeper into their delusions. People still don’t get that banning everything we don’t like is not a long term solution, but makes the problem worse (war on drugs, forbidding prostitution, etc)
It will not magically cure all problems, but it is indeed important to ban them. It will do multiple things, for example they will not receive any EU funding or other support. It will also prohibit them from advertising their views and they will not have a platform anymore in television and radio. Which will reduce the amount of propaganda they can spread and therefore reducing the impact they have on the population and in return reduce the support they have.
And this is just one aspect.
I disagree. Trump got elected (twice) with >30 felonies and after having said all sort of things that only few years ago would have made him completely uncandidable. Deplatforminng doesn’t have the impact that it used to have and only make the person look like “they are going against the strong powers”, that’s why the afd in germany keeps getting stronger despite the multiple bans, Trump in the US, the neo-fascists movements in the uk, the neofascists in Italy. What has calling these people “fascists” and isolating them has achieved? Only raising their consent. Also, television and radio are not so meaningful anymore as they used to be, internet has made them completely obsolete and most people take their info from the latter. It’s counterintuitive, but the political history of the last 10 years has proven this multiple times. It’s very useful to look into how cult works and what’s the best way to unlock them. Isolating the people in the cult is the worst move one can make.
Trump was not deplatformed, if anything the total opposite of that.
True, but not because they didn’t try, which is my point. The attempt was to make him so much of a monster and demonise him that nobody would have voted him. The point was to isolate him and they achived the opposite, as you correctly said.
Reporting on his crimes and policies is not demonising him.
I agree with you. When i say demonising i mean from the point of view of maga folks. The democrats wanted to show how shitty and corrupt he is, they ended up making him a working class hero that is fighting the power and then president for the second time. Trump won thanks to inhability of the democrats and the american public at large to understand that times have changed. Trump understood it and made the “persecution” his winning horse. They manage to transform his mugshot in a huge political win ffs.
I’m not sure what you mean by all this. Your assumption is that the perception of Trump by MAGA is entirely based on a distorted view made up by Democrats, and that’s not true. He won a second term because Democrats were unpopular and the exiting president (Biden) left average folks with a piss poor economy, regardless of how high the stock market was at the time. Trump, a populist, just capitalized on that, and the fact that most people have short term memory and forgot how bad the US economy was in Trump’s last year in office.
There’s no “understanding of the new times”. There’s no grand plan. Nothing changed in between Trump presidencies. I would even say that nothing has changed in the past twenty years or so: most voters will take the bait of a populist if they feel like they need to punish the outgoing administration.
Trump is a bug inherent to democracy. Strongmen tend to do well when people are upset but cannot verbalize it or are unable to find the root cause. Saying that Trump’s victory is partly a consequence of how Democrats pictured him is also extremely naive, since the mf has again and again leaned on what he has been accused of.
If the republican party was banned after the first trump presidency, they wouldn’t have recovered fast enough to get a second presidency. Most likely they would have stayed fractured and we may have gotten actual reforms.
I’d love to hear the thoughts of the people that downvoted. If they disagree with what i said, or if stimply they don’t like it and want it to disappear. Unironically, the (very expected) reactions to my comment are proving my point.
What would you suggest we should do, if one day, flat earthers find themselves in positions of power and start demanding their bullshit to be taught in schools?
I’m not suggesting to let anybody say what they want and offering them a platform. I’m saying that if you don’t want these people in power, like you didn’t want trump in power or fascists in the streets, the key is not to do the easiest thing that comes to mind, but to listen to what people that study other people say, and they all say the same thing: the more you isolate shitty people, the more and more shitty they will become, because they will create their own closed community, which history tells us will only grow. What happened when the flat earthers became mainstream and people started to ban them everywhere and threat them like idiot? Their numbers decuplicated and the closeted flat earthers suddenly were public, to the point that athletes, politicians and other public figures came out as flat earthers. The point was to isolate them, they ended up way more and widespread than before.
If you can’t neutralize a toxic spill you contain it instead.
Exactly, but seems that we have been proven multiple times that banning/shunning/shaming only achieves the opposite.
They are already in a bubble and it’s extremely hard to pull them out. Their influence is spreading, so clearly current efforts to deprogram them are less effective than their recruitment efforts. At that point containment is the best option we have, even if it’s not the one I’d like we had.
Yes, because current efforts seem to be focused in only trying to isolate the people we don’t like. During pre-internet time might have relatively worked, now it’s clear it doesn’t and saying “it’s the best option we have” is just false. It’s the easier option that people (but not sociologist or social psichologist) keep adopting because it’s very easy, fits with our desire to not have shitheads around us and because people assumed that’s how it worked so far.
Stop ignoring the reality and accept the fact that despite attempts to isolate them, the right is getting stronger everywhere. It’s time to change approach or to start to get used to the new reality. Don’t trust me, go beyond social media and go check what experts of hate and extremism say, not the politician we like this year.
This is already an improvement over the previous policy of shooting Nazis.
I don’t know if that’s true. Here in Sweden people were deadly afraid of being called racists for a long time. Being a nazi wasn’t acceptable in the public eye. Then being a racist nazi got normalised and here we are.
Giving bigots a platform and visibility serves to normalise them. They should be shamed into nonexistence.
I don’t know if that’s true Please inform yourself about it then, because that would change the entire discussion. This is an entire field of study, it’s not hidden stuff.
I agree they shouldn’t have a platform and visibility. Definitely shouldn’t be normalised. Shaming them and isolating them is HOW their ideas grew so much. The key is to invalidate their points with arguments, even if they don’t listen, it’s important they are out there and visible to other potential viewers. If you cannot do that because you are isolated from the fascist/flat earthers or whatever, their bubble will grow constantly because they talk to the belly of the people, and these folks will look for the opinions their belly tells them their are right. This is how we got wehere we are now. People saw something they could relate to when they heard these extremists complain about immigrants, corrupted system, secret plots to rule the world. Without access to a counter argument (becuase of the isolation) the spiral started to go deeper and deeper, until full extremization. We have seen something similar with covid.
For example i think banning Hitler’s Mein Kampf, like they do in Germany, is a mistake. The only copies in circulations will be from people that probably simpatize with him and there will be little or no control over the content, which could be altered. This is very dangerous. If the book is freely available there could be laws that force to have notes on the book, which explain why Hitler was a bullshitter and out of his mind. People will be in contact with this content if they look for that book for any reason, it’s not a small thing. They will still find the “altered” copies, but they will be much less attractive (not fascinating because forbidden and easy to find) then will be much easier to see the alteration and to counter it. I hope my point is clearer now
Letting more and more people radicalise further is no solution either. We’ve seen what happened in the US.
No, the key is general education, deradicalisation for those most prone to spreading fascism, and improvement of life standards.
Restricting immigration is one way, but we should add an article that for all the anti-immigration statements fascists make (even about refugees), they’re forced to live like the refugees did.
What, don’t want to live in a tent in a starved area? Or not have access to medication? Then how about you go improve their life standards instead of sucking oligarchs’, oil and gas industries’ dicks?
pls make it happen
Not a fan. This is inherently anti-democratic, regardless of the views that the efn espouses.
I’m not a fan of killing cockroaches but I’d rather do that than let them run around the house.
That said, these particular cockroaches are everywhere now.
You are wrong. People like this shouldn’t be given a chance to be voted for, lest their propaganda wins and we end up in a full blown WW3.
Obviously these powers to ban a party must be kept under high scrutiny of the public incase they start banning all of their competition, but in this case right now It is good.
These groups are themselves anti-democratic. Democracy is allowed to defend itself.
I would go further, democracy must defend itself. It’s an embarrassing failure to allow anti-democratic parties to gain power through democratic means.
Well, this is democracy undermining itself. Parties with millions of supporters don’t just randomly pop up for no reason. They come about due to real people having real problems.
Banning parties is a good way to become blind to that.
That is just a pragmatic argument, independent of my conviction that every citizen should have a right to equal representation, a right to be heard. No ifs’ and buts’ and no “but not like that” if I find their opinions unpalatable.
It is the same foundation I stand on to assert my own right. I will have my say. If that were taken away, I’d be inclined to tear it all down.
One very angry person can do a lot of damage today. How about the ten million who voted for AFD in the most recent German election? Or maybe just the seventy thousand who are active members? They are surely more extreme than you or I. That’s more people than there are jail cells in Germany right now.
Those aren’t real problems. They are lies specifically meant to influence people into believing that foreigners are a problem. That is why they are antidemocratic and must be banned. There’s already plenty of official evidence from a legal standpoint. How is this so difficult to understand?
How is this so difficult to understand?
Did you even read my comment?
Let me repeat the most important part for you:
every citizen should have a right to equal representation, a right to be heard. No ifs’ and buts’ and no “but not like that” if I find their opinions unpalatable.
That is my conviction, regardless of ideology. It doesn’t matter how much you highlight what the AFD stand for, because it is fundamentally irrelevant to my opinion on the subject.
Those aren’t real problems.
Which problems?
Decreasing standard of living? Rising energy prices? High home prices? A stagnating economy?
You don’t convince someone to change ideology by saying “your problems aren’t real”. You do it by identifying the real problems, because I promise you that they exist. Then, convince them that a better solution exists than what their current ideology proposes.
When people are being brainwashed into focussing on brown people = bad, then no. Fuck that. That has nothing to do with democracy. The AfD stands for nothing other than their own gains.
And the problems you listed aren’t the things they’re addressing.
There is no reasoning. It’s pure brain washing. Don’t support that kind of shit.
It is definitely far too late for this, it should’ve been done 10 years ago, but better late than never. The cancer should’ve been surgically removed when it was small, now it has grown very large and removing it means losing an arm and half a lung but that’s no reason to give up and let it overtake the rest of the body.
There is no room for fascists.
Check out the concept of the tolerance paradox, it might shift your point of view a bit. Think there’s a copy pasta of a nazi bar that’s in a similar context
I’m familiar with both, and the nazi bar equivalency is a false parallell.
The antidote to anti-establishment movements in democracies (which AFD & their related parties across Europe are at this point) is strengthening public trust and legitimacy, not creating the tools to dismantle it.
That’s like saying that since crime is mostly a symptom of a systemic issue, we shouldn’t prosecute it.
No, it’s like saying the police shouldn’t fight crime by breaking the law, because it undermines trust in the legal system.
For a prime example of that in action, see the US.
