Problem is, the German Verfassungsschutz (lit. "Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution", the domestic intelligence agency) was itself infiltrated by the far-right [0] and so didn't ring the alarm in time.

I agree with you that there's probably no way to come out unscathed from trying to ban them now - their followers are already radicalized and it probably wouldn't be pretty. But that being said, what else should we do? Just do nothing and let it all happen once more? Break our promise of never again? Watch history repeat itself? No - we have to at least try.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Georg_Maa%C3%9Fen

Like this is not just me mischaracterizing my political opponents, it is the most accurate label based on their behavior. They're the type of people who want to make the 1930s happen again in Germany.

This is why I react somewhat strongly when people try to relativize their abhorrence and make excuses, most frequently out of incorrectly mapping their own country's political systems.

I hope I could convince you that - especially given Germany's past and its commitment to never let this happen again - banning them is not some sort of political repression, but an immune response from democracy under attack. It is a manifestation of defensive democracy [0] , the principle written into the German constitution after the horrors of fascism.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_democracy#Germany

This explains why they are publicly denying what they are plotting in private.

Here's some choice quotes, translated to English.

"We must proceed completely peacefully and deliberately, adapt if necessary and butter up the opponent [literally: smear honey on their mouths], but when we are finally ready, we will put them all against the wall. (...) Dig a pit, all in and quicklime on top."

-- Holger Arppe, former AfD Vice Chair [0]

"The worse Germany is doing, the better it is for the AfD. [...] Therefore we have to consider a tactic between: How bad can things get for Germany? And: How much can we provoke? [...] Because then the AfD does better. We can always just shoot them all later. That's not an issue at all. Or gas them, or however you want. I don't care!"

-- Christian Lüth, AfD Press spokesman [1]

"It doesn't matter, nothing will change, even if we were to eat chalk [act harmless]. Even if we said: yes, we are separating from X, Y and Z now and acting moderate here."

-- Hans-Christoph Berndt, AfD Brandenburg senate leader [2]

[0] https://taz.de/Frueherer-AfD-Fraktionsvize-verurteilt/!56167... [1] https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/afd-sprecher-wollte-fluc... [2] https://mik.brandenburg.de/sixcms/media.php/9/Einstufungsver...

Just read his Wikipedia article [0] and you'll find out more about his character, like this gem:

> Sellner said that Jews were a problem in the 1920s and made references to the "Jewish question"

> Are there any credible sources for this independent of the correctiv article?

Correctiv is a non-profit investigative journalism outlet that managed to infiltrate this secretive far-right meeting. They are known to be gold-standard levels of credible and have won a ton of journalism prizes. It's not exactly yellow press.

Due to the very nature of it being a secretive meeting, their reporting is exclusive. Obviously the neonazis want to put on a nice face, so they didn't exactly invite Reuters to their lets-plot-deportations-of-foreign-born-citizens meeting.

To quote his ideological companion from across the pond, Nick Fuentes :

> This is why I tell people, hide your power level. OK? You're not hiding your power level if you're in a group chat with hundreds of people saying we're going to put people in gas chambers. OK, guys? [1]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Sellner [1] https://www.mediamatters.org/white-nationalism/nick-fuentes-...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48829288

Points: 5

# Comments: 1

Read just a little bit more of the article ;)

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/01/11/l...

> It would be hard to imagine a US party that didn't believe the other party is out of compliance with US values

This is a limitation of the American two-party system that incentives polarization instead of cooperation.

We have a working multi-party democracy and a majority across parties and ideologies voted for this.

To say this has anything to do with Chat Control betrays either a deep lack of understanding of European politics or a conscious attempt to mislead in order to garner support for extremists.

Obviously the fascists don't put their most odious ideas in writing, they plan them in secret instead.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/19/turmoil-in-ger...

I'm not surprised she's looking to be with like-minded people. A bit like Lord Haw-Haw back in the day, I suppose.

If you see something that looks like obvious dropshipping, chances are you can find it for a fraction of the price without the middleman on Temu, AliExpress or DHGate.

Because this claim is counter to my experience as well.

Letting this guy run the show is a public declaration of the moral bankruptcy of the tech sphere.

Just because something is standard fare doesn't mean it's the only option. Point is, it was quite common in the past.