Canada and Australia must also be fascist countries, because they have the exact strict migration system the AfD wants. So I guess those are also "brown people-hating nazi cunts", riiiiight?
Time to bomb them aswell
Not how that works.
I can't get upset about something that doesn't effect me, it's an observation that made me laugh.
As for that rating? That guy decided to have a melodramatic melt down on a forum where you can think a good while before you post, then came at me personally for it. I haven't singled anyone out. Dammed if I reply, damned if I don't. And for anyone who thinks me a fascist sympathizer you're free to find evidence in my posts for that, because I ain't. Only thing I've ever strongly posted about in recent times is the defense of freedom of speech.
Source please
I read the thread and it's basically the same conversation every time. So I wrote this
Our understanding of the far-right is flawed, same with our responses. Newspapers may be correct that parties like AfD are a challenge to liberal-democracy, but it's hard to conclude whether that's because of actual fascism or that party politics has become so refined towards a managerial role with a smaller part of the political spectrum represented, the ones which best handle the complicated needs of growth under capitalism in an unprecedented expansion period beginning in the 80s/90s which follows a) the death of keynesianism and the oil crisis b) the final death of the old left with the collapse of communism and the 60s left going into a slumber c) the expansion of the EU.
That refinement in the spectrum of the liberal center coming from sequence of of contraction and expansion helps explain the Cold War-era collapse of protectionism/isolationism on the right, policies strongly favoring labor on the left, and where the two have historically overlapped a bit on the issue of immigration. This could only happen temporarily as that sequence continues into the 21st century, where it appears we're in a contraction period. This also means the far-right and far-left are going to be defined relatively and distinct from past forms 100 years ago, when they were much more clear and ideological rejections of liberalism.
Populist parties are likely to rise since explosive growth like we've seen in the West always reveals weaknesses, unequal stake in the future, and a growing state. If we understand capitalism as constantly prone to crisis and liberalism as having adopted a managerial role since the strife-ridden era of industrialization, mass unrest, great war, and depression, then we start to get a better idea of the far-left and far-right beyond the crappy tropes in our media-driven political culture, yuppies that want free stuff and racist provincials. These forces are different responses to ailments in the middle and lower class complicated by growing political inequality where politics is driven by a) a small set of wealthy people b) a small set of regions and cities c) a changing set of industry
Populism of left and right variety is therefore two different kinds of responses to two aspects of the same thing: the rise of free flow of labor and capital, therefore a new height in capitalism's creative-destructiveness, and therefore a new kind of liberal and state managerialism. Like every period of capitalism revolutionizing our society, it has always come at a great social cost that is unevenly shared and has implications for political balance.
This complex issue can't be boiled down to a simple matter of tolerance and intolerance, which was already settled by John Rawls as not a paradox at all and just a non-moral question of whether institutions (if they are liberal) have a right to use their power to defend their self-interests, meaning even this argument fails to escape the question of power and contestable political rule of some over others. This has already happened, the left rejects the paradox argument of the right that is applied to intolerant cultures as an a disproportionate burden and therefore a veil for their political rule. The right will do likewise. When it comes to this argument, it's important to remember liberal-democracy is less about reconciling different parts of society on the basis of tolerance and more about ensuring peaceful transfer of power, stable conditions for growth, and rational management of a large society despite their continuing differences. Democracy under capitalism is too flawed for anything beyond that, and it's disillusionment with exactly that reality that powers the far-right and far-left.
There is a better alternative instead. Unlike the past, today's far-right largely comes not as a desire to overturn the order created by a world war but dilapidated regions and classes from a bygone era which deal with the possibility of falling into an economic, therefore cultural, and therefore political junior role. It is impossible to not notice the AfD's popularity in East Germany, Trump's dependence on frustrations with the grossly uneven recovery, and the popularity of Brexit in Northern England. These are working and middle class demographics that can be influenced with a consistent socialist message.
can we get a mod mandated sourcing on this, thanks
Well there's no source because it's just not true. The original misleading story (at least the one about Denmark) was that 75% (or close enough) of the people claiming to be kids were actually adults. The misleading thing (and what everyone got wrong) was that only refugees suspected of lying about their age was included in this statistic - so 75% of the cases where there was reason to believe they weren't minors. In reality only a comparatively small number of refugees falsely claimed to be minors; around 10% of the total amount of children in 2015 (according to https://www.dr.dk/ligetil/hvert-10-udledsagede-flygtninge-barn-er-over-18-aar). To put that into context, that would mean about 1 in every 100 asylum seekers would be falsely claiming to be a minor. Pretty far from "a majority".
I mean this was just for Denmark, but I have no reason to believe that the statistics for Sweden or Germany are much different. The idea that a majority are men who claim to be kids is just absurd. Most are men, though.
Coming from the guy who you always see drinking beer in front of Aldi in the morning
I suspect this is a false flag.
To add on top of this, the story was framed as being asylum seekers lying, but there's no discerning between them lying and them not knowing due having no documents actually stating when they were born.
causing property damage is just as bad as mass murder
The party has been described as a German nationalist,[2][3][4] right-wing populist,[19] and Eurosceptic[6] party. Since about 2015, the AfD has been increasingly open to working with far-right extremist groups such as Pegida.[20] Parts of the AfD have racist,[21] Islamophobic,[22] anti-Semitic[23][24] and xenophobic[11][25][26] tendencies linked to far-right movements such as neo-Nazism[27][24] and identitarianism.[28][29]
yea, they're nazis. @ me.
You're full of shit. Canada and Australia both have strict immigration policies, just like Germany. But refugees are judged by entirely different standards by all three of our countries. Let's not pretend our government's immigration policy can be judged against Germany's refugee policy.
because thats EXACTLY what I was saying, spot on.
Dont care about the ratings I get, this is a good thing.
'punch them in the face' as a solution to political extremism is about as effective as 'build a wall' as a solution to illegal immigration. it's so naive and simple minded
I advocate a combination of political action and violent direct action outside political structures. The more you allow them to form the more they gain a support base among the disgruntled of society that capitalism inevitably creates.
Seeing people on Facepunch praise bombings and terror attacks against people they don't like really has shown me there's a real radical issue growing in this website community.
Its not "people we dont like" its neonazis and if you try to argue they arent it shows your ignorance on the subject.
I've got photographic proof right here.
https://2static1.fjcdn.com/comments/Heres+my+birth+certificate+_bf4e30b27b4dceb83c186eed7195e4dd.jpg
I think I'd rather be ignorant than condemn people to persecution and death because of your doomsday scenario of Adolf Hitler reincarnating and turning X nation fascist.
Got any more big-brained solutions other than rehashing 1970's Punk Rock songs and hitting fascist people in the head hoping that will stop them?
Its a doomsday scenario to you? So you are gonna pretend the AFD arent nazis? How is that claim that far fetched to you? Are you 100% blind to the current wave of right wing anti immigrant populism?
I don't care about the AFD. However weirdly they tried that whole fight fire with fire tactic in the beer halls of Germany some years back and it didn't work out very well. I even heard there were better (and effective) solutions to combating radical behaviour other than trying to persecute and kill them, methods that don't reinforce siege mentality and sympathy for their cause.
neo-nazism is what you get when you're too soft on a cancerous ideology and give people too many rights they take for granted. Fascism and Nazism should've kicked the bucket as far as possible with world war II, with everybody even remotely believing in either of those two ideologies being reduced to wolfsheads. I'm not stupid enough to believe you can entirely kill ideas, not without complete and total historical revisionism, but you can damn well make it extremely difficult for the likes of nazis, wannabe or otherwise, to have a platform or even societal acceptance among people. The paradox of tolerance is a very real thing, just so you should know, the problem is nobody's willing to make the hard decisions to do what has to be done, when it comes to scum of this nature.
https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/206080/605e2239-149f-47f0-9f65-406d8d0ba83d/intolerance.jpg
Debating these people just makes them have more of a voice. If they wanna use fear tactics and paramilitary gangs then the left should do the same to combat them in their communities.
Any political group that advocates the death or forced deportation of others should be considered illegitimate and raided by police, I dont give a shit about if it makes martyrs. Its more important to prevent them from organizing at all.
Violence does not 'put the fear' in these people, it just hardens them, it justifies their actions. It becomes propaganda for their cause. Violence just begets violence.
The national socialists of the 1920's made very sure to spread tales of persecution and attacks against them (and as a result, Germany itself) when the communists tried to use violence to fight ideology. There are many factors in play for causing a country to turn fascist that that you cannot beat away with your fists.
It didn't work out for Clodius and neither will it work out for you.
It sure as hell worked for 1945
You could've at least chosen a better example than fucking Clodius. Clodius was a deviant and a sack of shit, a common thug who thought he could play the system to his own benefit. Better people than him had tried and failed to actually fix the problems, like the Gracchus brothers, or Marcus Drusus.
Let's dispense with the fancy wordplay: under fascism, everyone loses. If you don't toe the line of your fascist government, like what happened in Nazi Germany, you stood a chance of ending up in a detention camp just as much as one of the untermensch or muselmanner.
If the AfD ever decide to annex Poland I'm sure Germany will step in to snub it in the nose.
Are you trying to be funny? what's this supposed to imply, exactly, that you think the AfD will try to break away from germany to go do their own thing? for one thing that's the absolute last thing an idiot might try, and that's attempted secession, because that brings down the wrath of an army down on your head.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
