German Institute for Human Rights: Requirements for banning the far-right party AfD are met

38 comments
  1. It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).

    Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://newsingermany.com/german-institute-for-human-rights-requirements-for-the-afd-ban-are-met/](https://newsingermany.com/german-institute-for-human-rights-requirements-for-the-afd-ban-are-met/)**

    *****

    ^(I’m a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)

  2. I don’t know this webpage. The story has been posted by virtually every single reputable and big news outlet in German, but I couldn’t find it in English, so I picked this page. That’s literally the only reason.

    It is a big topic and point of discussion in Germany.

  3. I really am not a fan of banning parties. It just functions as a dictatorship of the status quo.

    If your opinions are too far from the ‘regular’, they will be banned because they are deemed too immoral because they conflict too much with the regular set of values. As a result, we just cannot really move beyond those sets of values in a quick way. Especially if those regular sets of values are so institutionalized in our legal system.

  4. Turks opressed, controlled and eventually banned conservative parties for a long time, then lost the country totally. Banning political parties is not the solution

  5. Not even the NPD (the actual Nazi party) got banned. Thinking that the AfD could actually get banned is extremely, extremely unrealistic.

    Also it would not be a good idea either. The AfD is already playing the victim as in “everyone is out to get them”. Actually giving them a reason to assume that victim status might lead to bloody riots when you try to ban a party with double digit % vote shares.

  6. Banning parties just because they don’t fit the globalist agenda is just giving points to conspiracists, even if you don’t agree with them. I’d support them if they weren’t islamophobic tbh.

  7. It happened in Belgium too, they banned the ‘Vlaams Blok’ party on racism grounds.
    At that time the party had ± 15% of Flemish voters.

    After that the party changed name and changed his programma a tiny bit, and now they are the biggest party in Flanders… (northern Belgium) with 24% of voters in recent polls.

  8. Before anyone asks: yes, I think they should.

    The only reason they didn’t ban the NPD (literally what’s left of the Nazi party) is because they argued they are too irrelevant to be of concern. It’s a stupid argument, but it’s true.

    They cannot argue this with the AfD. The AfD started out as a euro-sceptical party and repeatedly had its leadership ousted by someone who is further to the right. They have long passed the stage where one could argue that it’s just a fraction of the party. It’s not. Anyone left is indeed in support of their ideals, and is radicalised more and more by their propaganda. They explicitly want to overthrow our democracy. They create a “them vs us” mentality for their supporters (and the rest of the country, for that matter), and work towards revising our history.

    They are dangerous and need to go, in my very honest opinion.

  9. Honestly not a good idea. The voters will not vanish if you ban the party, they will just move to another, new far-right party and become even more radical.

    In my country, the communist party was also not banned. We simply waited until it slipped into oblivion as it’s voters slowly died out.

  10. Good. Do it. Ban it and tell their voters to go fuck themselves and move to a country more of their liking. They need no consideration or appeasement.

  11. bad idea, you can ban a party but you cant ban people from thinking that way. we are a democracy and we need to accept people having different opinions. banning political parties always made things worse in the end.

  12. isn’t easier to find out and work on whatever is making that these parties ara gaining such popularity?

    isn’t banning them going to increase their popularity due to some martyr kinda thing?

    20% is a biig number and can easily go higher if they follow that path of marginalising them

  13. A ban on a party can only be decided by the federal constitutional court. It really doesnt matter what this institute thinks.

    The threshold for a ban is very high and thus has happend only twice so far. Both 60+ years ago, with the de facto successor party to the NSDAP and the German Communist Party.

    The AFD are anti-democratic, far right, russia friendly, science denying morons. Still, this isnt really enough for a ban.

  14. At least a third of their voters are protest voters according to polls. Rather than take a step back and consider why people feel compelled to vote for more radical platforms, the powers that be choose to shit on pluralism even more and double down on enforcing their beliefs under the guise of “protecting democracy”. This won’t make the voters disappear or change the underlying reasons for afd polling at 20%.

  15. If they really turn out to be a threat to the federation and act in unconstitutional ways, obviously look into and start the process of banning them.

    But many people seem to be hellbent on banning the AfD because of their (completely ignorant, misanthropic, populistic and far right) policies.

    And as much as i can’t stand populists like AfD, just banning the party will never take care of the problem. It most likely just solidifies it and will create an even more aggressive / extreme party.

  16. I remember something similar was discussed about in Sweden regarding Sweden Democrats a long time ago. It only ended up making the party stronger and giving them more sympathy and votes.

  17. Banning then would cause a big backlash from the supporters and it might increase their support if they form a successor party

  18. Imagine wanting to ban a democratic party that got ~30%+ votes in some parts of the country.
    Fascistic censorship and extremism creeps back into everyday life and the idiots do actually cheer for it. Very, very concerning.

  19. >Try to ban a party with 20% popular support
    >Call yourself a ‘democrat’

    Nothing to see here, move along.

Leave a Reply