What the actual fuck?
Advertisement
by Illestia » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:51 pm
by Zottistan » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:53 pm
by Zaras » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:54 pm
Illestia wrote:So, would that be ok too? I would be fighting for MORE democracy (or better for "direct democracy") but i would still be, in a way, trying to demolish the current form of democracy that is practiced now.
Bythyrona wrote:Zaras wrote:Democratic People's Republic of Glorious Misty Mountain Hop.
The bat in the middle commemmorates their crushing victory in the bloody Battle of Evermore, where the Communists were saved at the last minute by General "Black Dog" Bonham of the Rock 'n Roll Brigade detonating a levee armed with only four sticks and flooding the enemy encampment. He later retired with honours and went to live in California for the rest of his life before ascending to heaven.
Best post I've seen on NS since I've been here. :clap:
by Zaras » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:55 pm
Zottistan wrote:The holocaust was issued by the state, so it was legal under state law.
If it restricts who can and can't run for government, or how they do it to within reason, it's undemorcatic. It might be democratically approved, but it's still undemocratic.
Bythyrona wrote:Zaras wrote:Democratic People's Republic of Glorious Misty Mountain Hop.
The bat in the middle commemmorates their crushing victory in the bloody Battle of Evermore, where the Communists were saved at the last minute by General "Black Dog" Bonham of the Rock 'n Roll Brigade detonating a levee armed with only four sticks and flooding the enemy encampment. He later retired with honours and went to live in California for the rest of his life before ascending to heaven.
Best post I've seen on NS since I've been here. :clap:
by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:56 pm
Zottistan wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
In Germany's case, not really, given that it was approved by elected members of the Parliamentary Council and then ratified by the democratically-elected governments of each Land.
If it restricts who can and can't run for government, or how they do it to within reason, it's undemocratic. It might be democratically approved, but it's still undemocratic.
by Zottistan » Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:59 pm
If it restricts who can and can't run for government, or how they do it to within reason, it's undemorcatic. It might be democratically approved, but it's still undemocratic.
Your semantic sophistry is really getting nowhere.
by Zottistan » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:00 pm
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Zottistan wrote:If it restricts who can and can't run for government, or how they do it to within reason, it's undemocratic. It might be democratically approved, but it's still undemocratic.
So in your vision of a democracy a post-Holocaust Adolf Hitler would have been allowed to run for President?
by Mycellena » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:01 pm
by The Anglo-Saxon Empire » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:07 pm
by Priory Academy USSR » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:09 pm
The Anglo-Saxon Empire wrote:Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:
So you want the German Constitution to be amended to allow antidemocratic, violent and racist parties to be legalised?
Yes. Boohoo, bad things happened once. Bad things happen all the time. If the majority of a population wants something they should be allowed to have it, at the very least all ideas should be given fair consideration regardless of what they are. The best way to defeat ideas of racism or political extremism isn't to outlaw them, it is to debate them, to use logic to prove them wrong. You are the worst kind of person, the kind that is willing to trade freedom for potential security. You wanna know what organizations are legal in the US? The KKK is legal, the Black Panthers are legal, you can be a member of the Skinheads, yet the US has yet to fall into a state akin to Nazi Germany.
by Zottistan » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:10 pm
by Port Myreal » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:14 pm
by Herskerstad » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:28 pm
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Herskerstad wrote:Cleverly done by Merkel, as her party being the mainstream right will probably absorb the fringe right votes on top of it.
It's the left which should be worried about this, as the party banned only carried ceremonial weight. If it looked to become a genuine contender then there would be an issue, but there's no way such would occur.
Why should the left be worried about anti-democratic parties being banned when the largest leftist party in Germany is democratic socialist?
by Crata » Sat Dec 15, 2012 2:48 pm
by Euronion » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:02 pm
Zyx wrote:If you are in favor of democracy, then you should be against this.
Thomas Paine wrote:"to argue with someone who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead"
by Kvatchdom » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:03 pm
Crata wrote:There still are two right-wing parties without the NPD - the Christian Democrats and the Free Democrats.
by Euronion » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:03 pm
Port Myreal wrote:Banning an extreme nationalist party will only cause the establishment of a more popular moderate nationalist party.
In Germany's neighbouring countries Switzerland, Austria and the Netherlands, in which no far-right parties exist, nationalists tend to vote right-wing populist parties like the SVP, the FPÖ or the PVV. Their program may be less radical but they manage to attract way more voters (SVP 26.6%, FPÖ 17.54%, PVV 10.1%; NPD 1.8%).
Thomas Paine wrote:"to argue with someone who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead"
by Euronion » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:12 pm
Mycellena wrote:"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -Voltaire
Not being an expert in German legal practices I cannot say for certain if any laws have been broken or the constitution violated in some way. I can however completely see how the banning of even the most deserved of parties can potentially be seen as a weakening of German Democracy. Will Germany's democratic system collapse because of this act? Certainly not. In all likelihood the 1% of the population affected by this decision will disperse among other political parties or else form some kind of new coalition. They'll be back before long if their membership is truly determined to the ideals of their former party. Mark my words, we'll be having this same conversation again around next year.
Martin Niemöller wrote: First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a catholic.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
Thomas Paine wrote:"to argue with someone who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead"
by Trotskylvania » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:19 pm
Zottistan wrote:EDIT: Bear in mind, while reading this, that I'm working on the premise that constitutions shouldn't be legally binding.
Zottistan wrote:What harm? Until laws are broken, they are legitimate, and, for better or for worse, nothing can be done about legitimate actions.
Zottistan wrote:Which is exactly why we don't need to worry, and can keep such parties legal.
Zottistan wrote:The Nazis were an entirely different situation. They used illegal methods like coercion to come to power, and they should have been nipped in the bud for the illegal way they came to power, not for their beliefs, or what they intended to do after they came to power.
Zottistan wrote:Indeed. But outlawing parties on the basis of "ha! preemptive strike!" is incredibly undemocratic and unnecessary. If any laws are broken, then you can do something about it. If not, you really have no case.
Zottistan wrote:I could make the argument that constitutions shouldn't be legally binding, but it'd probably be threadjacking.
Zottistan wrote:What harm? Until laws are broken, they are legitimate, and, for better or for worse, nothing can be done about legitimate actions.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Ultra - The Left Wing of the Impossible
Putting the '-sadism' in PosadismKarl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital
Anton Pannekoek, World Revolution and Communist Tactics
Amadeo Bordiga, Dialogue With Stalin
Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism
Gilles Dauvé, When Insurrections Die"The hell of capitalism is the firm, not the fact that the firm has a boss."- Bordiga
by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:22 pm
Euronion wrote:Mycellena wrote:"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -Voltaire
Not being an expert in German legal practices I cannot say for certain if any laws have been broken or the constitution violated in some way. I can however completely see how the banning of even the most deserved of parties can potentially be seen as a weakening of German Democracy. Will Germany's democratic system collapse because of this act? Certainly not. In all likelihood the 1% of the population affected by this decision will disperse among other political parties or else form some kind of new coalition. They'll be back before long if their membership is truly determined to the ideals of their former party. Mark my words, we'll be having this same conversation again around next year.Martin Niemöller wrote: First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the catholics,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a catholic.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
by Trotskylvania » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:25 pm
Euronion wrote:Zyx wrote:If you are in favor of democracy, then you should be against this.
wrong. If you are in favor of Freedom or any kind of representation then you should be against this. I hate Communism vehemently yet I detest the decision of the USA to ban the Communist Party. Why? because Freedom of Speech, Religion, Expression, and Press are what separate us from tyranny both totalitarian and authoritarian.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Ultra - The Left Wing of the Impossible
Putting the '-sadism' in PosadismKarl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital
Anton Pannekoek, World Revolution and Communist Tactics
Amadeo Bordiga, Dialogue With Stalin
Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism
Gilles Dauvé, When Insurrections Die"The hell of capitalism is the firm, not the fact that the firm has a boss."- Bordiga
by Port Myreal » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:30 pm
Euronion wrote:And this matters why?
Euronion wrote:I do not see how one can justify silencing a group of people, far-left or far-right.
by Trotskylvania » Sat Dec 15, 2012 3:31 pm
Euronion wrote:Port Myreal wrote:Banning an extreme nationalist party will only cause the establishment of a more popular moderate nationalist party.
In Germany's neighbouring countries Switzerland, Austria and the Netherlands, in which no far-right parties exist, nationalists tend to vote right-wing populist parties like the SVP, the FPÖ or the PVV. Their program may be less radical but they manage to attract way more voters (SVP 26.6%, FPÖ 17.54%, PVV 10.1%; NPD 1.8%).
And this matters why? I do not see how one can justify silencing a group of people, far-left or far-right.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Ultra - The Left Wing of the Impossible
Putting the '-sadism' in PosadismKarl Marx, Wage Labour and Capital
Anton Pannekoek, World Revolution and Communist Tactics
Amadeo Bordiga, Dialogue With Stalin
Nikolai Bukharin, The ABC of Communism
Gilles Dauvé, When Insurrections Die"The hell of capitalism is the firm, not the fact that the firm has a boss."- Bordiga
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Ethel mermania, Hidrandia, Keltionialang, Kreushia, Likhinia, Plan Neonie, Talibanada, Taosun, The Vooperian Union, Trump Almighty
Advertisement