A new report by legal experts has found that efforts to ban Germany's far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) could be successful — but there would be political dangers to such a move.
Are you argumenting that partys are above laws and constitution?
It depends on how popular it is. If it’s 5% of the pop- def not. If it’s 30%, probably not. If it’s 60% then the laws and constitution might need amendment.
But that’s besides my point. If you rely on forcing a third of Germany to make another party to represent it, you might not like what the new party’s popularity would be.
Ok, now I am confused. You are saying that they, as a party with around 30% popularity, shouldnt be above the law but the law shouldnt be enforced because it may make them more popular?
I’m suggesting that just enforcing the law without providing an aternative (for AfD), at this point in time, is likely to make them (the figures that formed the AfD) more popular, along with their new party they’ll inevitably form. I doubt Germany would round all of them up and throw them in jail. I think the time to ban the AfD was when there were significantly fewer people on their bandwagon. The other comment under mine says AfD voters aren’t too fervent supporters, so perhaps it won’t go the way I think it would. But that’s not my bet. (What I think would happen isn’t what I hope btw.)
When I say alternative I don’t mean another deporters party but with nicer messaging. That clearly doesn’t work. I mean an alternative that gives people real improvements by counteracting the austerity policies of the past for example.
SPD and C*U are already doing a lot of anti immigration stuff. Immigration is sinking for years now and more and more get exported. What is actually missing for them being an alternative for AfD followers?
Also hopefully the new party they form would learn to not break laws anymore.
They would need a new party that needs to be created and need to get popular. And the new one would hopefully learn to not break the constitution.
Are you argumenting that partys are above laws and constitution?
It depends on how popular it is. If it’s 5% of the pop- def not. If it’s 30%, probably not. If it’s 60% then the laws and constitution might need amendment.
But that’s besides my point. If you rely on forcing a third of Germany to make another party to represent it, you might not like what the new party’s popularity would be.
Ok, now I am confused. You are saying that they, as a party with around 30% popularity, shouldnt be above the law but the law shouldnt be enforced because it may make them more popular?
I’m suggesting that just enforcing the law without providing an aternative (for AfD), at this point in time, is likely to make them (the figures that formed the AfD) more popular, along with their new party they’ll inevitably form. I doubt Germany would round all of them up and throw them in jail. I think the time to ban the AfD was when there were significantly fewer people on their bandwagon. The other comment under mine says AfD voters aren’t too fervent supporters, so perhaps it won’t go the way I think it would. But that’s not my bet. (What I think would happen isn’t what I hope btw.)
When I say alternative I don’t mean another deporters party but with nicer messaging. That clearly doesn’t work. I mean an alternative that gives people real improvements by counteracting the austerity policies of the past for example.
Any follow-up party is automatically banned too. That’s how this law works.
SPD and C*U are already doing a lot of anti immigration stuff. Immigration is sinking for years now and more and more get exported. What is actually missing for them being an alternative for AfD followers?
Also hopefully the new party they form would learn to not break laws anymore.
Sorry I added an edit abt what I meant by alternative before I saw your reply.
Ah read the update. Not sure what you mean with austerity policies? Also partys with real improvements like the leftist parties?