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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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