
Germany attempts to ban neo-Nazi party amid fears over rising racist attacks - Tomte
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/01/germany-attempts-to-ban-neo-nazi-party-amid-fears-over-rising-racist-attacks
======
vox_mollis
This is a great idea. Cutting people off from democratic representation is
historically an effective way to reduce violence and insurrection.

~~~
rogersmith
On the plus side, it sets a nice precedent for governments to ban any party
whose opinions they don't like.

It's entirely unlikely that the anti-EU sentiment that fuels the rise of
remarketed right-wing parties all over Europe will persist much longer.

~~~
hackuser
> it sets a nice precedent for governments to ban any party whose opinions
> they don't like.

If so, this precedent has existed for many decades in Germany, which has had
this law in place and banned two other parties for the same reason over that
time.

It hasn't led to the slipperly slope you fear, in Germany or elsewhere. I
think people understand that Nazis in Germany are a special circumstance.

~~~
rogersmith
As the second part of my comment pointed out, I see this being used to also
outlaw parties becoming too overtly anti-EU (which in case you didnt notice,
is conveniently conflated with "populist right wing parties" a la UKIP, FN
usw).

As the economic and social situation deteriorates, I see anti-EU sentiment
becoming waaaaaaaaay more prevalent than it has been during the 70 years post
WW2 period you're on about.

~~~
hackuser
> I see this being used to also outlaw parties becoming too overtly anti-EU

This is hard to understand. The party in power in the UK, the Conservatives,
are overtly anti-EU and have called a nationwide referendum on leaving the EU.
I don't see anyone talking about banning them or the many leading public
figures are coming out for Brexit.

> in case you didnt notice, is conveniently conflated with "populist right
> wing parties" a la UKIP, FN usw

No, it's may others too, as I pointed out above. The parties you mention are
actually populist, right-wing, and often racist and xenophobic nationalists.

> I see ... I see ...

To be clear, those are one person's predictions; nothing like it has happened.
If any group is at risk of oppression, it's the Muslims and other minorities
against whom many of the parties you list openly advocate discrimination.

~~~
parenthephobia
> The party in power in the UK, the Conservatives, are overtly anti-EU and
> have called a nationwide referendum on leaving the EU. I don't see anyone
> talking about banning them or the many leading public figures are coming out
> for Brexit.

It's a little more complicated than that.

The Conservative party is officially in favour of the EU, although not all of
its members are. Whilst it has allowed party members to campaign for leaving
the EU, it hasn't allowed them to use parliamentary resources to fund or
support their campaign.

"Anti-EU" is also a vague term. There's a difference between "we don't mind
the EU existing but don't want to be a member" \- a typical UK Euro-sceptic
view - and "the EU is great in principal but maybe it needs more skulls on its
uniform" \- a typical neo-Nazi view.

Whilst nobody is suggesting banning people who campaign for "brexit" \- it
would be odd considering we're having a referendum on it - it's worth noting
that the UK has not, in living memory, attempted to subjugate all of Europe
under its ruthless mass-murdering rule. Given their past, German sensibilities
may not be as receptive to the idea of wanting to change Germany's position in
Europe, and parties which adopt policies of that ilk may be viewed with deep
suspicion.

~~~
hackuser
Thanks for filling in some of the details. I know it's more complex than what
I wrote, but I'm not paid by the word here. :)

> it's worth noting that the UK has not, in living memory, attempted to
> subjugate all of Europe under its ruthless mass-murdering rule

I agree with this point but would like to add a tangential one: The UK didn't
do that in Europe, but they did it many other places around the world, as did
other world powers. Why is murderous oppression acceptable in
Rhodesia/Zimbabwe but not in Poland or England?

~~~
parenthephobia
Well of course it isn't. :)

Amongst people who think it is, there are basically two reasons:

1\. Africa is where brown people live.

2\. We (in the UK) tend to have a romantic rose-tinted view of how the British
Empire treated its colonies. We imagine that our rule was a net positive for
the countries we occupied, bringing civilization to primitive tribes. One of
the effects of losing the war is that the German people weren't allowed to
forgot the atrocities of Nazi Germany. We, on the other hand, were allowed to
forget our own atrocities.

~~~
hackuser
> We imagine that our rule was a net positive for the countries we occupied

Just adding to your excellent points: The words _net positive_ are used to
justify almost every attrocity in history, including Hitler, Stalin, Mao ...
torture by the US government (not comparable to those three but the same
rationale) ... etc. etc. You have to break a few eggs to make an omlette, as
they say.

------
hackuser
Remember that the Nazis were elected to the legislature, a minority party, and
once they were put in power they ended democracy in order to retain power.
Another way to look at it: Would it be acceptable for even a majority, 55% of
a nation, to elect a leader who would bring an end to future elections (even,
for the sake of example, one who pledged to do it)?

Democracy, which I very strongly favor, does have some weaknesses. As someone
said, 'Democracy must be more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for
dinner.'

Also, Germany, with its history, is in a very unusual situation. Neo-Nazis in
power is not an acceptable outcome. They also censor new-Nazi materials.

------
mpweiher
But that's the old and busted neo-Nazi party. We now have a new-hotness neo-
Nazi party (Alternative für Deutschland, AfD).

Sigh.

~~~
actionwords
weren't the nazis the ones who banned political parties? It seems merkel is
being a bit... fascist.

~~~
mtmail
Please stop comparing the current German government with fascists.

Trying to ban a political party in the open after year (decade?) long
preparation is very different from taking all civil liberties (freedom of
expression, freedom of press, freedom to assemble) and putting political
opponents in prison
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree)
1933)

------
Zikes
> Justice Minister Heiko Maas also cautioned that “even if the NPD is banned,
> that unfortunately doesn’t mean there is no more right-wing extremism in
> Germany”.

Hit the nail on the head right there. Say they ban the NPD, what's stopping
the same people from forming another party that's the same in all but name?

~~~
Tomte
Successor parties are automatically banned, as well.

Of course it's possible to found a completely unrelated neonazi party, but
when they miraculously share the top brass, have the same locations for
meetings etc. it is pretty obvious.

So it at least puts some administrative and organizational hurdles in the way.

------
rogersmith
"They will also seek to prove the NPD is creating a “climate of fear” in
Germany and “shares essential characteristics” with the Nazis."

Like most governing political parties all over the world then?

