Hacker News Reader

There's a big difference between "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it" and "I disapprove of your stated objective to expel german citizens who don't meet your ethnic/cultural standard of German-ness, but will defend to the death your right to govern." A century ago, Germans tolerated a völkisch-nationalist party that wanted to expel non-german ethnic groups as well. They did; they expelled millions of them to Poland and liquidated them there. The Verfassungschutz was implemented after WWII to prevent that element in society from taking power again.

I find the vociferousness with which clueless Americans have decided to defend the AfD bizarre. You don't know the political context, you clearly don't know the history, but you've decided that "Germany has a democracy problem." Why are you so entitled to an opinion?

> "I disapprove of your stated objective to expel german citizens who don't meet your ethnic/cultural standard of German-ness, but will defend to the death your right to govern."

I can't believe you're still insisting on this complete straw man. AfD's stated position on immigration is very easy to look up and it's NOT this. At all. You are parroting a leftwing lie.

They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians. You're free to disagree with that position, but lying about it and then descending into such an absurdly histrionic spiral over the matter does your argument absolutely no favors. That only supports what people like Caldwell are saying and, ironically, precisely bolsters AfD's argument about suppression of the discourse and an honest discussion of Germany's problems.

In fact, you've offered a perfect demonstration of what Caldwell covered in the first section of this very essay.

> you clearly don't know the history

Are you seriously trying to imply I'm not aware of the Holocaust?

By your own admission, (top of your first comment) you don't know what you're talking about. I never implied you aren't aware of the Holocaust. Thinking that the Holocaust is the only history to know here is indicative. You don't seem to understand the history of the BRD or how its constitution is structured, and you clearly don't know the internal history of the AfD, which started as a mixed center-right libertarian anti-EU party and has become more and more extreme over the past decade. You being angry doesn't make anything I've said wrong.

You just said:

>I'm not German and knew little of this subject

Yet now you know their party stance by heart and come to their rescue? That is Sus, with a capital S.

>They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians.

This is not what they really want, is it now? They also want to deport Germans with attained citizenship. It's what they said out loud. There are records of this. Anything else is

>parroting a

right wing

>lie.

> They also want to deport Germans with attained citizenship. It's what they said out loud. There are records of this.

It's what who said aloud? When and where? At the referenced Potsdam meeting where certain extremist CDU politicians did the same?

If I judged Democrats in the US by what their most extreme members have said, I would have to assume a vote for them would be a vote to end private property. But I don't assume that, because I'm not a moron.

So, show me a trusted source that argues a plurality of mainstream AfD politicians are claiming they want to deport German citizens. Show me where this is the official policy of the party. I see no good source to support that accusation.

And that's likely because it is in fact what it appears to be: a desperate smear campaign generated by extremists arrayed at the opposing political polarity. And it's also apparently failing since large percentages of the German population are moving the other way.

This is entirely reminiscent of the foolishness that sunk the Democrats in the US and put us in the mess we now find ourselves in. "Why moderate our policy stances when we can just call them bigots and Nazis instead?"

I expect the outcome of this strategy will be much the same in Germany.

They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians.

No. They want an ethnical homogeneous country, hence their remigration institute. Feel free to educate yourself on the institutes own website: https://www.remigration-institute.com/

What about them being right extremists, as the Verfassungsschutz has demonstrated, looking at hundreds of pieces of evidence?

The party, meaning the people composing the party, are extremists.

And either they are crazy (possible, like with all extremism) or they want to destroy Germany (maybe a mix of both).

You can look at their carefully phrased statements all you want, they are all about leaving a doubt. These are politicians.

But sometimes they slip: What about leaving the EU and the Euro? Shouldn’t that worry anyone? How is that not in the Programm yet their leader states it is her position? Not really a detail. Political parties all lie, but this one is at the far end of the spectrum.

> “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

This has not led to positive outcomes currently in the US.

I agree with it in theory, I truly do. I think it also gets used as a tool for politicians, companies, and governments to say unhinged shit not based in fact to drive emotional reactions that actually hurts other people in various ways.

> This has not led to positive outcomes currently in the US.

I can't disagree. But, paraphrasing Churchill, (true) democracy is indeed 'the worst form of government except for all the others.'

And Americans will be given opportunities to remedy their mistakes. Both this year and especially in 2028.

We might find that MAGA having the freedom to speak their mind will turn enough of the electorate against them. Or we will continue to choose poorly and suffer the consequences.

But those consequences will have been arrived at honestly. And that matters.

> But those consequences will have been arrived at honestly

The problem with that is that Republican voters will not be the first, and certainly not the only, people to experience those consequences. Nor will they be the ones to suffer the majority, and especially not the worst, of them.

The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless

> The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless

The problem with this statement is that, in context, it clearly only prioritizes the interests and suffering of particular groups.

MAGA emerged because an altogether different group was completely disenfranchised by neoliberalism and ignored for a very long time. But it turns out they were still a major part of our country and they still had voting power.

So did the system actually break or did it work precisely as intended?

“I'm not German and knew [sic] little of this subject, and here are my opinions for why you’re wrong.”

Participation is not mandatory, you know. What is the agenda you’re trying to push at all cost through your misinformation?

The agenda is TRUTH, which apparently doesn't matter anymore because almost everyone has become a tribal extremist.

I consider myself an accidental moderate. I look for the best answer. I don't turn off my brain and bow down to any specific party or platform.

Every extremist thinks their ideas are moderate and so are the ideas of the rest of extremists they support. Elon Musk also thinks his agenda is truth. Trump created a social network named Truth Social

If we were to examine your political views, I'm quite certain that your positions would correlate highly with those of the Democratic Party, and likely rather closely to its most polarized incarnation found in San Francisco.

By contrast, I make up my own mind on each individual issue. I believe strongly in restrictive and controlled legal immigration, orchestrated in a manner that maximally benefits the citizenry to which a government is beholden. I support anti-trust enforcement. I am in favor of legalized abortion. I am opposed to wealth taxes that might trigger capital flight. I am in favor of progressive property tax levies on luxury homes. I am strongly in favor of solar geo-engineering as a solution to climate change (unlike progressives). I am deeply opposed to tariffs as a mechanism to remedy the woes of the disenfranchised. I support right to work laws.

I do not have a political home. I choose what I see as good sense and it aligns with no party. THAT is what a true moderate is.

> I do not have a political home. I choose what I see as good sense and it aligns with no party. THAT is what a true moderate is.

Yeah, purity tests are the hallmark of the political center