Recent assaults spark national debate over Germany’s increasingly raw political climate, with some seeing echoes of its dark history.
One politician ruthlessly beaten while hanging campaign posters. Another assaulted in a public library. Yet another, pushed and spat on by suspects who were part of a group of people allegedly calling out “Heil Hitler.”
A string of violent attacks on politicians in Germany — including a brutal assault on a member of the European Parliament in Dresden — has shaken many and sparked a national debate over the increasingly raw political climate in the country, with some drawing comparisons to the kind of political violence that accompanied the rise of the Nazis.
Recent attacks on politicians are “reminiscent of the darkest chapter in German history,” said Hendrik Wüst, the conservative premier of North Rhine-Westphalia, in an interview on German public television.
If you read the actual article, it mentions a political assassination that did succeed. Regardless, political assassination is political assassination, it is never justified in a society where the law applies to all people, regardless of the target. We need to take a stand against extrajudicial political violence period, unless we want to encourage more chaos and criminality in our societies. People that believe in violence are unlikely to stop at just some violence, that would be inconsistent and irrational.
I don’t read Axel Springer trash but I certainly don’t recall the AfD assassinating one of their own party for not following the extremists line.
I was not saying they did, was I? I guess you don’t read a lot of stuff.
That’s highly ironic, because you should start by reading the wiki that article you posted, since you clearly lack the understanding of what happened in that event. Hence why you try to make it applicable to events that have absolutely nothing to do with it. Nice insult though.
So, you think some political assassinations are justified, or do you think the article does not have any political assassinations in it? It’s one of the two.
I do. Staufenberg’s attempt to assassinate Hitler for example. Nazis killing Nazis is just a win win situation for everyone else. But I can see how Nazi sympathizers struggle to understand this.
I guess we disagree then.
I can make an exception for Hitler during WW2, but outside of that, people should not be simply killing the people they disagree with. That’s how you get Putin’s Russia.
Calling Nazis “people you disagree with” is already enough of a dogwhistle that tells us exactly what kind of person you are. And yes, if some mobster in Russia wants to eff Putin, he should go for it.
You can try to say I’m whatever you want, I don’t really care. What I’m more concerned about is living in a country with democratic values.
Perhaps it’s being an American, where we have various freedoms, but disagreements should be handled with words and debate. If you cannot beat someone with your words, you don’t deserve to win.
Regarding Putin, unfortunately, that would probably not make anything better. Just more chaos, and the war would continue. There’s plenty more Putins behind him, and whoever offs him is probably not a nice guy.