In the post shared by Musk, the account lamented the presence of humanitarian groups in the Mediterranean Sea that rescue migrants from distressed vessels.
“These NGOs are subsidized by the German government,” the account posted. “Let’s hope AfD wins the elections to stop this European suicide.”
10-15 years ago I remember being told that Nazism couldn’t take hold again in Germany because of all the laws, and the education in schools about Nazis, and stigma, and people who would fist-fight Nazis in the street if they saw right-wing symbols.
Was I sold an optimistic outlook or has the situation just changed that drastically since then?
As a non-German who is particularly not keen about Nazism but who doesn’t speak enough German to keep a closer eye on it over there, I’m grateful for your name and shame overview.
For one, calling every person who is against migrants or refugees “a Nazi” is really bad. I don’t know where this originally started, but people seem to use this word for all kinds of assholes.
Nazis were a political party and in Germany you learn about history of the Nazis and second world war. That’s not the same as learning how to not be against migrants or something.
Nazi symbols etc. are still forbidden and even many extremely right wing people would be appalled if you call them a Nazi. These are two different things. And the inflationary use of the word is really stupid (not directed at you, I see it everywhere online for all kinds of things). You give them an easy way out because they will start a discussion about the word or try to push the narrative that only “real Nazis” are the problem.
The movement to the right you see currently in Germany has the same reasons as the movement to the right you see in other countries currently as well.
Not particularly well-off people and/or not particularly bright people and/or just greedy people are scared they will get left behind or become less wealthy if other people take or even participate in what they see as theirs. Refugees and migrants are by far the easiest target for these frustrations.
Sorry, but no. They arent just a party that happens to be against migrants and is called nazis because of that. That is a part of their reportoire, but the connections go far deeper than that.
The AfD is anti-migrant, anti-gay, anti-trans, anti-women, anti-handicapped, anti-minority and anti-“”“bankers”“” (i.e jews).
Their members routinely (both in public and even more severely in private) make reference to programs and actions by the nazis. Every now and then a photo of one of them doing a hitler salute or standing in front of the hakenkreuz-flag goes public. They have connections to right-wing terrorists.
At the latest when höcke called for a “180 degree turn in history politics" (i.e towards the third reich, not away from it), I have lost any semblence of understanding for anyone who isnt willing to realize that the AfD isnt just a conservative party to the right of CDU/CSU.
They are Nazis.
And not calling them that for some attempt at political maneuvering just means that they and their voters arent confronted with the history and opposition to their ideas, and can instead continue to mask as “just conservatives”.
I am not saying they are just a conservative party. I also didn’t thought the person I reacted to was only talking about AFD, but the general rise in right wing rhetoric in different parties and the populace. It’s also not just the AFD that is problematic.
Just calling them Nazis plays right into their hands and won’t help at all. They will simply turn it around and complain you insult them as Nazis and lament you are just trying to kill their arguments with it.
The term “Nazi” sees so much overuse, you gain absolutely nothing by using it. In my opinion it is better to directly address and call out what they say precisely.
The majority of people voting for the AFD don’t do the Hitler salute and similar. And calling them Nazis won’t change their mind but instead it will do the exact opposite! It will encourage them to vote for the AFD or similar parties because now they can claim you are just trying to insult them and won’t address what they say. “The evil left just wants to silence us!”
Their arguments are easily refuted and that’s what needs to happen again and again. While it might feel satisfying labeling them, it won’t help the cause.
While I’m not convinced the distinction between extreme right wing supporters and Nazis is as significant as you suggest, I do understand that it is possible to object to unchecked mass migration without being a Nazi or even being right-wing.
Refugees and corresponding xenophobia are a pretty standard global topic for obvious reasons, and as much as I wish infrastructure could be instantaneously built, I know it can’t be.
But:
We’re well past discussing the nuances of “what separates Nazis from other far-right ideology” and plausible deniability when someone starts invoking the name of fucking Buchenwald. Even if the rest of that list were somehow acceptable or could be explained away, there’s no mistaking what Buchenwald means.
I’m not surprised by the global rise of the right-wing rhetoric as the situation gets harder for 99% of people. I have been watching that closely for years. Xenophobia is always presented everywhere as the false easy solution. What I am surprised by is that Germany is allowing politicians to advocate specific Nazi atrocities when there are purportedly laws against glorifying Nazis.
Calling for a second holocaust, demanding refugees should be executed, all of this is forbidden in Germany. I don’t know where you got your information from but none of this has happened:
There are Nazis in the AFD, though. They want to stop teaching so much about the Holocaust at schools and they use rhetoric tricks to get people riled up or circumvent the laws around denying the Holocaust.
For example Björn Höcke (who almost certainly is a Nazi) said: “Alles für Deutschland” (All for Germany) and has to go to court for this.
I think we still misunderstand each other on why calling right wing people in general Nazis is a problem. And Björn Höcke is a good example.
The word is used as if you are right wing, then extremely right wing and then you are a Nazi. As if this is somehow worse than being extremely right wing. But “Nazi” is not the superlative of being right wing. And people like Höcke will use this to get people to vote for the AFD.
A Nazi is someone who is, for example, denying the Holocaust. Or believes in Herrenrasse or something like that. Right wing people simply have to deny that they are Nazis (which is easily done, look above) and suddenly your “argument” is gone.
That’s exactly what Björn Höcke did before and will do in court again. It will again be about whether or not he can be called a Nazi which is completely irrelevant if you want to tackle the problem that is people voting for AFD and other politicians being increasingly right wing.
When the court says: “Yes, Björn Höcke used Nazi rhetoric!” The AFD will say: “Oh no what an evil man! With Nazis we don’t want to have anything in common! He is not AFD anymore.” And all the people can continue to vote for AFD, they aren’t Nazis afterall. Great!
Old twitter screenshot of Mirko Welsch’s account apparently calling for Antifa to be deported to Buchenwald
I was unable to determine what other interpretations this might have:
Perhaps there is some nuance I have missed, ‘nach’ is a very versatile word even if the rest are very unambiguous.
This factchecker analysis looked even-handed enough for me to be satisfied it was not just my poor German or inaccurate auto-translation.
For the other incidents, I’ll leave you to check the post I initially replied to for names and accuracy checking.
Literally every single one of these quotes where either proven as false or the people are not part of the AFD and/or they were brought to court and judged for it. That’s all on the site of Faktencheck.
Are you referring to a different Factchecker than the link i posted? Or are you saying they just left up the page with incorrect information? “Proven as false” doesn’t seem to match this quote from the link I posted.
Did you ever argue with one of the AfD voters? They don’t take facts well, they don’t care about facts anymore. It’s a bit like arguing with conspiracy theorists.
There definitely is overlap between them and those who believe in conspiracy theories. But there are a lot of average people who vote for them as well. Like, middle aged, not particularly poor or wealthy. Your typical boomer…
Many AFD voters I’ve heard talking or saw what they write believe that specifically Muslim immigrants are bad for Europe. And/or they think that the green party is responsible for them having less money.
For those AFD voters who are immigrants, they vote for them because they believe refugees specifically cost too much money and they are also against the green party. At least, that’s what I hear from the people in my neighborhood, which is mostly people whose families migrated from Turkey, sometimes two generations ago.
A third group think they somehow get back at the “elite” when they vote for AFD. Like a poor example of an act of defiance.
I believe that at least those who are not primarily xenophobic are still people we could bring to the other side. We waited to long to ban the AFD. I fear if they ban them now, the next right wing party will get a headstart in voters…