Germany To Ban Far-Right Political Party

[Ifreann]

I think ze Tschermans are doing fairly well relative to the rest of us, but that isn't saying very much, and besides which, they're the ones bailing the rest of us out.

Speak for yourself. They're not bailing us.

Or at least, not directly. They're our biggest trading partner.

Okay, they're bailing us and the Greeks out. Maybe Spain.

[Ralkovia]

No, they shouldn't and they aren't, luckily.
Some opinions can't be allowed expression. Expecially hypocritical opinions that try to exploit democratic rights to destroy democracy and rights.

Like using freedom of speech to trample on other's freedom of speech?

Agreed. Nazism is a disgusting idea and I cannot agree with it. However, I would defend their right to say I'm somehow an evil zionist wanting to take over the World.

[Herrebrugh]

I'm only in favour of banning a political party when that party is proven to utilise violence.

[The Blaatschapen]

I'm only in favour of banning a political party when that party is proven to utilise violence.

So... only pacifistic parties should be kept?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Lawmakers in Berlin have been given the green light to file a complaint with the country's highest court seeking to ban the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD) following a Friday vote by Germany's upper legislative chamber, the Bundesrat, on the issue.

The approval of the legal bid to ban the right-wing extremist party comes after governors of the 16 states had already agreed on supporting the measure earlier this month. They recommended that the Bundesrat, which represents Germany's 16 states, do the same.

"We are convinced that the NPD is unconstitutional," said Christine Lieberknecht, the governor of the eastern state of Thuringia and a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), who added that the far-right party was aggressively pursuing its goals.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/ger ... 72969.html

Opinions?

Mine? I don't think it's a terrible idea, but it does increase the risk of them organizing underground.

How dare people vote for something other than the approved, mainstream (and useless) political parties?

*gasp*

How dare they?

Perhaps instead of acting to squish this "NDP", the powers-that-are in Germany could instead sit up & take note that they're losing their connection to the German electorate and do something about it. But that would require upsetting their comfy neo-liberal corporate gravy-trains, so we all know that's not going to happen. Instead, they'll sit there and continue to use the law as a bludgeon against anyone who doesn't conform to their lovely little setup.

Oh how lovely. Defending Neo-Nazis' right to organise politically, in a violation of the Grundgesetz.

They're not gaining in support to any particular degree, it's just that there's a solid case against them. I could have sworn that NiS linked to electoral data just a few posts earlier.

[Bojikami]

One thing to say.

i thought communists support political freedom?
i am not communist thats why we burned our far-right party
ps:i am neither capitalist, dictatur hooray

We do. Its just that a lot of communist or turning communist countries are single party or just have a Communist and Socialist party.

[Laerod]

What would banning them as a political party actually do?

The party would no longer function as a legal person, would not be allowed to own property, participate in elections, and membership would be forbidden.

Would the NPD thereafter be considered a criminal organisation?

Pretty much.

Could one be imprisoned for membership in the NPD?

Afterwards? Quite possibly. There's laws prohibiting the joining of criminal organizations.

Or would they just no longer be an official, taxpayer supported party?

Taxpayer funding isn't dependant on official status. It depends on how well you did in the last election. Since the NPD is currently represented in two (?) state parliaments, they get funded.

Could a banned NPD just run candidates as independent out of their own pockets?

In theory. In practice that might work on a communal level, but is pretty unlikely on a state level and unthinkable on the federal level. They could also join other parties. Of course, simply refounding the NPD under a different name would end up with that being banned even faster, as then they'd be guilty of refounding a forbidden party.

[The Huskar Social Union]

While i may stand against the NDP and their Political and Social Beliefs and ideals, i believe it is wrong that they should be banned as a political party. If Germany Calls itself a democracy and practices a democratic system then it should abide by it and not ban them. Their Ideals may be disgusting but they still have the right to Freedom of Speech and to take part in the elections.

[Tmutarakhan]

National Democratic Party sounds pretty legit though.

Not nearly as legit as the People's Democratic Republic of Korea sounds.

[Great Nepal]

Like using freedom of speech to trample on other's freedom of speech?

Exactly.
Or freedom of "being what they are" to get to the power and start taking away the rights of some people "because of what THEY are".

Fine, so firstly we should prevent you from speaking since you are using your freedom of speech to trample on other's freedom of speech.

[Laerod]

No, they shouldn't and they aren't, luckily.
Some opinions can't be allowed expression. Expecially hypocritical opinions that try to exploit democratic rights to destroy democracy and rights.

Like using freedom of speech to trample on other's freedom of speech?

Just because you consider major crimes and terrorism "free speech" doesn't mean they are.

[Herhangi bir]

Some opinions can't be allowed expression. Expecially hypocritical opinions that try to exploit democratic rights to destroy democracy and rights.

They still are going to have those objectives in mind. This reasoning just supports the practice of people silencing one another on what is technically a subjective level, where anyone could feel as if they are warranted in subduing another's set of ideals.

Open communication is required to progress on a social level. When people are physically attempting to corrupt another's freedom, then that is where issues will initiate.

[Laerod]

Some opinions can't be allowed expression. Expecially hypocritical opinions that try to exploit democratic rights to destroy democracy and rights.

They still are going to have those objectives in mind. This reasoning just supports the practice of people silencing one another on what is technically a subjective level, where anyone could feel as if they are warranted in subduing another's set of ideals.

Not really. They're not being banned for being far-right, they're being banned for being criminals.

[Great Nepal]

Like using freedom of speech to trample on other's freedom of speech?

Just because you consider major crimes and terrorism "free speech" doesn't mean they are.

Mind linking to these "major crimes" and "terrorism" that the party funded or organized?

[Crata]

violation of the Grundgesetz.

Just quoting the exact article here:
Art. 21 GG (excerpts):
"(1) [...] Their [political parties'] internal organisation must conform to democratic principles. [...]
(2) Parties that, by reason of their aims or the behaviour of their adherents, seek to undermine or abolish the free democratic basic order or to endanger the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany shall be unconstitutional. The Federal Constitutional Court shall rule on the question of unconstitutionality."

[Ublia]

Lawmakers in Berlin have been given the green light to file a complaint with the country's highest court seeking to ban the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD) following a Friday vote by Germany's upper legislative chamber, the Bundesrat, on the issue.

The approval of the legal bid to ban the right-wing extremist party comes after governors of the 16 states had already agreed on supporting the measure earlier this month. They recommended that the Bundesrat, which represents Germany's 16 states, do the same.

"We are convinced that the NPD is unconstitutional," said Christine Lieberknecht, the governor of the eastern state of Thuringia and a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), who added that the far-right party was aggressively pursuing its goals.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/ger ... 72969.html

Opinions?

Mine? I don't think it's a terrible idea, but it does increase the risk of them organizing underground.

In my own opinion Nazism in Germany must be utterly eradicated. And the NPD should be illegal. Now about this notion of an underground party indeed it might prove a nuisance however Nazism in Germany is never going to achieve any real power. Germany must move forward in the world and Nazism is the one thing holding it back. Once that seed of evil has I been eradicated then they shall be truly free.

[Ralkovia]

Like using freedom of speech to trample on other's freedom of speech?

Exactly.
Or freedom of "being what they are" to get to the power and start taking away the rights of some people "because of what THEY are".

There's no such thing as an absolute right to free speech.

Yes there certainly is. No matter how disgusting the idea is it should be protected under free speech.

I think the point of free speech is that it allows those people to put their ideas on a public forum and they can be heard.
Banning these free speech gets rid of that and leaves only the alternative of violence. It doesn't do anything about the root cause of the problem, it only hides it until the roots have entangled everything.

[The Black Plains]

Oh my God, I love NS. "Freedom is good, but not for those conservatives."

[Crata]

Nazism in Germany is never going to achieve any real power.

That's also up for debate. Of course Germany is far from it and it appears unlikely, but to say "never" seems to be an assumption rather than a fact.

[Herhangi bir]

Not really. They're not being banned for being far-right, they're being banned for being criminals.

Because you render them as criminals. Someone who is pro-democracy could, under specific law, be a criminal.

When they are legitimately attempting to cause harm against unconsenting people, then that is where there will be problems will lie.

[Ralkovia]

i thought communists support political freedom?
i am not communist thats why we burned our far-right party
ps:i am neither capitalist, dictatur hooray

We do. Its just that a lot of communist or turning communist countries are single party or just have a Communist and Socialist party.

If we're banning Nazis, there's a strong argument towards banning Communist as well.

[Nazis in Space]

Lawmakers in Berlin have been given the green light to file a complaint with the country's highest court seeking to ban the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD) following a Friday vote by Germany's upper legislative chamber, the Bundesrat, on the issue.

The approval of the legal bid to ban the right-wing extremist party comes after governors of the 16 states had already agreed on supporting the measure earlier this month. They recommended that the Bundesrat, which represents Germany's 16 states, do the same.

"We are convinced that the NPD is unconstitutional," said Christine Lieberknecht, the governor of the eastern state of Thuringia and a member of Chancellor Angela Merkel's conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), who added that the far-right party was aggressively pursuing its goals.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/ger ... 72969.html

Opinions?

Mine? I don't think it's a terrible idea, but it does increase the risk of them organizing underground.

How dare people vote for something other than the approved, mainstream (and useless) political parties?

*gasp*

How dare they?

Perhaps instead of acting to squish this "NDP", the powers-that-are in Germany could instead sit up & take note that they're losing their connection to the German electorate and do something about it. But that would require upsetting their comfy neo-liberal corporate gravy-trains, so we all know that's not going to happen. Instead, they'll sit there and continue to use the law as a bludgeon against anyone who doesn't conform to their lovely little setup.

I like you.

Copy & pasting drivel > making oneself familiar with the specifics of a given case before commenting on it. Always. It's so nice when opinions are nicely streamlined, not requiring any kind of significant research or thought, isn't it? A perfect rolemodel for the modern, globalised consumer society.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Oh my God, I love NS. "Freedom is good, but not for those conservatives."

They're in (potential) breach of Article 21 of the German Constitution, quoted by Crata a few posts above.

So it's a bit more nuanced than that lovely lil' strawman you've got there.

Also, neo-Nazis, not conservatives. Slight difference.

[Crata]

Oh my God, I love NS. "Freedom is good, but not for those conservatives."

Because Conservatives are so weak in Germany. It's not like the ruling party (Christian Democratic Union / Christian Social Union) is conservative.

[Divair]

Oh my God, I love NS. "Freedom is good, but not for those conservatives."

That's why we see so much support to ban the CDU.


Oh, wait, nope.