How extreme are the AfD?
Discussion
I know very little about the AfD apart from what the media has told me which is they are far right racists, fascists, antisemitic etc
I've just watched a couple of interviews with the leader and seems very far away from being a Nazi. Then after reading this in the Times of Israel, I'm a bit confused. Is the mainstream political spectrum SO far to the left, that anything slightly right of centre is considered extreme now? Or is anyone with a different a opinion to the mainstream just automatically labelled as a Nazi?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/german-nationalist-l...
I've just watched a couple of interviews with the leader and seems very far away from being a Nazi. Then after reading this in the Times of Israel, I'm a bit confused. Is the mainstream political spectrum SO far to the left, that anything slightly right of centre is considered extreme now? Or is anyone with a different a opinion to the mainstream just automatically labelled as a Nazi?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/german-nationalist-l...
Username888 said:
I've just watched a couple of interviews with the leader and seems very far away from being a Nazi.
How strange, to have somebody that can talk a good game as a frontman...A regional leader said the Berlin holocaust memorial was a "memorial of shame", clearly implying it shouldn't be there.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38661621
Frauke Petry - the MP who left the party before the ink was even dry on the results - suggested that the German police should shoot on sight at those crossing from Austria.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35452306
As for their "right and freedom" URL...
https://www.rechtundfreiheit.de/
Have a look at some of the posters. I don't think you need to speak fluent German to get the gist.
https://www.rechtundfreiheit.de/plakate/
"New Germans? We make them ourselves"
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9155459/21013763_1599992003364466_4195552195590995111_o.jpg)
Not sure that needs much translation...
Plenty on here would say "That's not extreme, that's just sensible", I'm sure...
BTW, "Times of Israel"? Is this your idea of a centrist, credible, unbiased source?
pgh said:
Blaming the vehicle attacks on the Vice-Chancellor seems like a stretch too far, however, the numbers on that image give pause for thought. There's some sick people in the world. I hope we can overcome them without resorting to extremism ourselves.
Yep, but we seem to be playing RIGHT into their hands at the moment.Oh, and...
There's ALWAYS been sick people. It just varies as to which direction they come from.
BOR said:
When even their own founder, right wing nut job Petry, thinks the party is too extreme, then it's too extreme.
It is nothing more than another scapegoater party for those mentally weak left-behinds who need someone else to blame.
Do you need to be a mentally weak left-behind to object to mass immigration that will cost the country Billions of Euros ? It is nothing more than another scapegoater party for those mentally weak left-behinds who need someone else to blame.
Throw in a couple of deaths along the way and you can call it a great success.
Surely you would be a mentally weak to take on such a huge financial burden without thinking the consequences through ?
I was thinking about this the other day. Anything that deviates from traditional centre-right is deemed "extreme" or "far".
Its not surprising really, as the much of the media and many political commentators are left leaning and the usual tactic of anti-right wing arguments adopted by the left is to "close out" a topic of discussion by instantly labelling it as 'extreme'.
It will no doubt get to a point whereby even centrist politics is considered too extreme for the lefties.
Its not surprising really, as the much of the media and many political commentators are left leaning and the usual tactic of anti-right wing arguments adopted by the left is to "close out" a topic of discussion by instantly labelling it as 'extreme'.
It will no doubt get to a point whereby even centrist politics is considered too extreme for the lefties.
AreOut said:
they are very divided and they will likely split into extremist and non-extremist part very soon
A bit like UKIP. A party that is based on knowing what it doesn't like is never going to cut it when it comes to having any sort of positive policy on actually doing anything constructive. Such parties tend to fall apart.Eric Mc said:
A bit like UKIP. A party that is based on knowing what it doesn't like is never going to cut it when it comes to having any sort of positive policy on actually doing anything constructive. Such parties tend to fall apart.
They only had one policy, which they got, so I am not sure why they still exist - what else do they want to be independent from ?They keep spouting something about being a brexit enforcer - despite having no pull in parliament any more, and the fact that the electorate also sees their political journey as complete by and large.
But you're right, they are dwindling from public consciousness and don't have the cohesion to rebuild themselves on another issue.
But that's off the point.
I will admit I know nothing about this party.
However, this thread does demonstrate the issue of perspective quite nicely.
Everyone basically perceives themselves as politically central - maybe a sniff in either direction. (Unless they are proper skinheads or members of the communist party)
Now, in my opinion, the party sounds rather more than right of centre, from my limited exposure. But clearly some disagree. But that's because relative to PH my views are rather more to the left.
But you're right, they are dwindling from public consciousness and don't have the cohesion to rebuild themselves on another issue.
But that's off the point.
I will admit I know nothing about this party.
However, this thread does demonstrate the issue of perspective quite nicely.
Everyone basically perceives themselves as politically central - maybe a sniff in either direction. (Unless they are proper skinheads or members of the communist party)
Now, in my opinion, the party sounds rather more than right of centre, from my limited exposure. But clearly some disagree. But that's because relative to PH my views are rather more to the left.
The problem, of course, is that it's really essentially irrelevant how extreme they are, as the point will still be missed!
Whenever an extremist party has any success in elections, what should happen - to my mind, at least - is that all of the rational parties should be saying to themselves "how come so many voters feel so let down by us that they needed to vote for these nutters and what can we do to change it?"
In reality, of course, they'll just condemn the nutters for being nutters, then wonder why said nutters get an even larger share of the vote at the next election!
The above reached the ultimate nadir in 2000, when it looked like the Austrian Freedom Party was going to enter into a ruling coalition there, prompting the EU and various individual member nations to threaten sanctions against Austria!
Do I agree with the AFP? Absolutely, categorically not. Do I think the EU or anyone else had a right to meddle in the internal politics of a democratic nation? Equally categorically not. It's the height of hypocrisy!
Whenever an extremist party has any success in elections, what should happen - to my mind, at least - is that all of the rational parties should be saying to themselves "how come so many voters feel so let down by us that they needed to vote for these nutters and what can we do to change it?"
In reality, of course, they'll just condemn the nutters for being nutters, then wonder why said nutters get an even larger share of the vote at the next election!
The above reached the ultimate nadir in 2000, when it looked like the Austrian Freedom Party was going to enter into a ruling coalition there, prompting the EU and various individual member nations to threaten sanctions against Austria!
Do I agree with the AFP? Absolutely, categorically not. Do I think the EU or anyone else had a right to meddle in the internal politics of a democratic nation? Equally categorically not. It's the height of hypocrisy!
del mar said:
Eric Mc said:
A bit like UKIP. A party that is based on knowing what it doesn't like is never going to cut it when it comes to having any sort of positive policy on actually doing anything constructive. Such parties tend to fall apart.
They only had one policy, which they got, so I am not sure why they still exist - what else do they want to be independent from ?I'm sure if they had fully costed policies, in a 10 year manifesto to drive the UK forward post brexit they stood a chance. Now UKIP voters have all fled back to their respective parties.
What the latest GE did show was, to the shock of many 'analysts' was the UKIP vote was made up of both aggrieved tory AND labour voters.
UKIP was not, and never had been solely for 'right wingers'.
I'd gamble my pancreas on AfD being similar; anti immigration is just a single policy, and one that can appeal to both left leaning voters and right leaning voters. To simply dismiss them as 'extreme right wing' is naive in the least.
I was having a long think about this in the car this morning, and it struck me as odd. Think of people not as 'people' but a labour force. Labour, or 'workforce' is a commodity. Labour allows the production of GDP and like any commodity, labour is subject to market forces. In any capitalist economy, market forces control the value of any commodity, labour included. In a bull market, the labour commodity will flow towards the market.
Consequently, it can be said that free movement of labour, like any commodity that is directed through market forces alone, is a vital aspect of any capitalist economy.
The restriction of migration is the antithesis of a true capitalist economy, and market control by the state is a fundamental aspect of left wing politics. Restriction of a commodity including labour will artificially inflate its value within the market place, and interference by the state in a market economy can and does lead to disaster. Think soviet era supermarkets, where the state dictated the price of corn and not the market, making bread far cheaper than the market could tolerate, leading to a run on the commodity.
So why then, if the AfD wish to restrict a market commodity and consequently affect the market, are they labelled 'far right' when intervention in a market commodity is traditionally the preserve of the left?
"Far right" is simply becoming another label the lefties willfully throw around towards any group that happens to disagree with their communist policies.
Other than anti immigration, I have no idea who or what the AfD are, or what they stand for. To suddenly materialise out of nowhere suggests something is drastically wrong with German politics and voters feel aggrieved.
Wiccan of Darkness said:
Agreed. UKIP missed a fantastic trick there, they only existed to achieve brexit. They never had any longer term plans, such as how to manage the UK on the world stage post brexit.
I'm sure if they had fully costed policies, in a 10 year manifesto to drive the UK forward post brexit they stood a chance. Now UKIP voters have all fled back to their respective parties.
What the latest GE did show was, to the shock of many 'analysts' was the UKIP vote was made up of both aggrieved tory AND labour voters.
UKIP was not, and never had been solely for 'right wingers'.
I'd gamble my pancreas on AfD being similar; anti immigration is just a single policy, and one that can appeal to both left leaning voters and right leaning voters. To simply dismiss them as 'extreme right wing' is naive in the least.
I was having a long think about this in the car this morning, and it struck me as odd. Think of people not as 'people' but a labour force. Labour, or 'workforce' is a commodity. Labour allows the production of GDP and like any commodity, labour is subject to market forces. In any capitalist economy, market forces control the value of any commodity, labour included. In a bull market, the labour commodity will flow towards the market.
Consequently, it can be said that free movement of labour, like any commodity that is directed through market forces alone, is a vital aspect of any capitalist economy.
The restriction of migration is the antithesis of a true capitalist economy, and market control by the state is a fundamental aspect of left wing politics. Restriction of a commodity including labour will artificially inflate its value within the market place, and interference by the state in a market economy can and does lead to disaster. Think soviet era supermarkets, where the state dictated the price of corn and not the market, making bread far cheaper than the market could tolerate, leading to a run on the commodity.
So why then, if the AfD wish to restrict a market commodity and consequently affect the market, are they labelled 'far right' when intervention in a market commodity is traditionally the preserve of the left?
"Far right" is simply becoming another label the lefties willfully throw around towards any group that happens to disagree with their communist policies.
Other than anti immigration, I have no idea who or what the AfD are, or what they stand for. To suddenly materialise out of nowhere suggests something is drastically wrong with German politics and voters feel aggrieved.
Do you also think that chairwoman of AfD who left the press conference and refused to take part in parliament is leftie? Or that something is so fI'm sure if they had fully costed policies, in a 10 year manifesto to drive the UK forward post brexit they stood a chance. Now UKIP voters have all fled back to their respective parties.
What the latest GE did show was, to the shock of many 'analysts' was the UKIP vote was made up of both aggrieved tory AND labour voters.
UKIP was not, and never had been solely for 'right wingers'.
I'd gamble my pancreas on AfD being similar; anti immigration is just a single policy, and one that can appeal to both left leaning voters and right leaning voters. To simply dismiss them as 'extreme right wing' is naive in the least.
I was having a long think about this in the car this morning, and it struck me as odd. Think of people not as 'people' but a labour force. Labour, or 'workforce' is a commodity. Labour allows the production of GDP and like any commodity, labour is subject to market forces. In any capitalist economy, market forces control the value of any commodity, labour included. In a bull market, the labour commodity will flow towards the market.
Consequently, it can be said that free movement of labour, like any commodity that is directed through market forces alone, is a vital aspect of any capitalist economy.
The restriction of migration is the antithesis of a true capitalist economy, and market control by the state is a fundamental aspect of left wing politics. Restriction of a commodity including labour will artificially inflate its value within the market place, and interference by the state in a market economy can and does lead to disaster. Think soviet era supermarkets, where the state dictated the price of corn and not the market, making bread far cheaper than the market could tolerate, leading to a run on the commodity.
So why then, if the AfD wish to restrict a market commodity and consequently affect the market, are they labelled 'far right' when intervention in a market commodity is traditionally the preserve of the left?
"Far right" is simply becoming another label the lefties willfully throw around towards any group that happens to disagree with their communist policies.
Other than anti immigration, I have no idea who or what the AfD are, or what they stand for. To suddenly materialise out of nowhere suggests something is drastically wrong with German politics and voters feel aggrieved.
ked up with AfD that even someone who advocated that German police should fire on immigrants thinks that party is gone too far. Maybe she was leftie plant all along. TooMany2cvs said:
Yep, but we seem to be playing RIGHT into their hands at the moment.
Oh, and...
There's ALWAYS been sick people. It just varies as to which direction they come from.
Do you happen to have a graph for the world ? I suspect that it might look a bit different, especially around 2001.Oh, and...
There's ALWAYS been sick people. It just varies as to which direction they come from.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff