German Interior Ministry shuts down Linksunten.indymedia.org(dw.com)
dw.com
German Interior Ministry shuts down Linksunten.indymedia.org
http://www.dw.com/en/interior-ministry-shuts-down-raids-left-wing-german-indymedia-site/a-40232965
85 comments
Every single one of these "scoops" carries the narrative "the authorities / the police / people who don't share our opinion collaborate with or are nazis"; laying the mental foundation for further G20 type riots and their self-justification. This narrative is getting quite old for most people these days, even though most support non-violent anti-neonazi and anti-extremist organizations.
Outlets like indymedia and the notorious local establishments appear to be more interested in searching in their local neighbourhood politics for justification to riot than in novel kinds of extremist or outright fascist movements developing on a global scale. This makes it a bit difficult to believe their self-proclaimed goals.
Outlets like indymedia and the notorious local establishments appear to be more interested in searching in their local neighbourhood politics for justification to riot than in novel kinds of extremist or outright fascist movements developing on a global scale. This makes it a bit difficult to believe their self-proclaimed goals.
any evidence for that first charge there? There have been some well documented collusion between elements of the police and far right wing types in Germany. AfD is also winning local elections there.
To provide a more balanced picture, there's a competition held at that site:
Riot-Bundesliga [1]. Who fucks up cities the most? Throw paint at buildings! Set cars on fire! Destroy property of political enemies! And banks! And stores! Beat up (probably) right-wing people! And cops! Go win the crown!
[1] https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gVWB7G...
Riot-Bundesliga [1]. Who fucks up cities the most? Throw paint at buildings! Set cars on fire! Destroy property of political enemies! And banks! And stores! Beat up (probably) right-wing people! And cops! Go win the crown!
[1] https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gVWB7G...
> No wonder they made some good enemies.
The problem is that it's the hot phase right before the election, and Interior Minister de Maiziere, who himself comes from a family with close Nazi ties (https://twitter.com/wasloshamburg/status/901010204598222848) wants to prove, especially after G20, that he is the personification of "law and order".
What I am really afraid of is Joachim Herrmann (CSU, Interior Minister of Bavaria) succeeding that moron after the election. Herrmann recently introduced the possibility of "indefinite jailing" ("Endloshaft") for people that the police deems as "dangerous".
The German Conservatives always have been rightwing-authoritarian, but the pressure from AfD neonazis has shifted their entire politics even more towards right-authoritarian than I would ever have thought possible.
To make matters worse, the SPD has not been able to produce a qualified candidate who actually wants to take back stuff like Hartz IV which the working class really hates, the Green Party got their policies stolen / made irrelevant (environmental protection, exit from nuclear energy), and the Left Party (as well as the non-parliamentary lefties) are rather battling themselves than the Conservatives and the Nazis.
The problem is that it's the hot phase right before the election, and Interior Minister de Maiziere, who himself comes from a family with close Nazi ties (https://twitter.com/wasloshamburg/status/901010204598222848) wants to prove, especially after G20, that he is the personification of "law and order".
What I am really afraid of is Joachim Herrmann (CSU, Interior Minister of Bavaria) succeeding that moron after the election. Herrmann recently introduced the possibility of "indefinite jailing" ("Endloshaft") for people that the police deems as "dangerous".
The German Conservatives always have been rightwing-authoritarian, but the pressure from AfD neonazis has shifted their entire politics even more towards right-authoritarian than I would ever have thought possible.
To make matters worse, the SPD has not been able to produce a qualified candidate who actually wants to take back stuff like Hartz IV which the working class really hates, the Green Party got their policies stolen / made irrelevant (environmental protection, exit from nuclear energy), and the Left Party (as well as the non-parliamentary lefties) are rather battling themselves than the Conservatives and the Nazis.
* Leak of NPD (the other right-wing populist party) donors' names and addresses.
@raverbashing https://youtu.be/vypByg_H_YY?t=51s
@raverbashing https://youtu.be/vypByg_H_YY?t=51s
NPD is more extremist than AFD
Particularly worrisome here is the potential for a raid on a pretext, ostensibly the main reason for the raid was the presence of an anonymous threat against the police.
The only way to deal with anonymous general threats against authorities is to ignore them. The potential for abuse of such threats as a fabricated pretext is simply too high, as is the number of idiots.
The only way to deal with anonymous general threats against authorities is to ignore them. The potential for abuse of such threats as a fabricated pretext is simply too high, as is the number of idiots.
Anonymous threads that have become reality in the past. They're hard to ignore.
The page in question also introduced a "Randale Bundesliga", a rioting competition in which they crowned the city with the most riots. Anything from throwing paint at buildings to setting cars on fire to beating up people from the opposite political spectrum counts.
The page in question also introduced a "Randale Bundesliga", a rioting competition in which they crowned the city with the most riots. Anything from throwing paint at buildings to setting cars on fire to beating up people from the opposite political spectrum counts.
linksunten.indymedia is a widely known platform of the German Antifa. During the most recent weeks many texts glorifying or whitewashing the Hamburg G20 riots were published there. Texts can be submitted by any anonymous person, however the website owners decide whether they leave it online or not – so there is reason to see responsibility under law.
I wouldn't be surprised either if it becomes accessible again just after the German federal elections in 4 weeks.
I wouldn't be surprised either if it becomes accessible again just after the German federal elections in 4 weeks.
I remember that during G20, some grandstanders set fire to some cables in the Berlin S-Bahn system, disrupting train service for a day. They then claimed responsibility with a letter on linksunten. [1]
Thing is, the comments on linksunten were uniformly condemning of the letter and the act. Yet still by sympathizers, not outsiders coming to the site. I'd link to the web archive version but the only thing the crawler was able to retrieve was a 'DDOS protection for civil society' banner [2].
"Antifa" is a bogeyman currently, imo.
[1] https://linksunten.indymedia.org/de/node/215853 (offline) [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20170620143720/https://linksunte...
Thing is, the comments on linksunten were uniformly condemning of the letter and the act. Yet still by sympathizers, not outsiders coming to the site. I'd link to the web archive version but the only thing the crawler was able to retrieve was a 'DDOS protection for civil society' banner [2].
"Antifa" is a bogeyman currently, imo.
[1] https://linksunten.indymedia.org/de/node/215853 (offline) [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20170620143720/https://linksunte...
Yes, what could possibly motivate individuals to join ..... a german antifascist movement. Totally bizarre. So strange. Almost as if there was some kind of historical precedent....
Actually the operators themselves have shut it down - press reports have surfaced that the servers are located in France, and I guess that the ops team which did not get their apartments fleeced is busy moving the servers to somewhere well out of the reach of de Maiziere.
This is probably done just for the election, and it's not clear whether the ban will hold in front of courts.
linksunten.indymedia is not actually a club, as which it was forbidden, nor did they publish the contents themselves. As such, they should be subject to the 'Telemediengesetz' just like e.g. Facebook and sued on this basis.
linksunten.indymedia is not actually a club, as which it was forbidden, nor did they publish the contents themselves. As such, they should be subject to the 'Telemediengesetz' just like e.g. Facebook and sued on this basis.
What happened on that site was straight down illegal and was tolerated for far too long. They shared instructions for making weapons and explosives, publicly shared personal information and called for attacks against the state and individuals.
Right wing organizations have been shut down for far less and extremism on both sides should be treated the same way.
Right wing organizations have been shut down for far less and extremism on both sides should be treated the same way.
Care to name a single example where "right wing organizations have been shut down for far less"?
Anonymous Germany Facebook account with millions of followers.
Einzelfallmap social media accounts that tracked refugee crimes.
Some of their content was debatable, but they were nowhere near the level of indymedia.
Then they put the identitarian movement on a watch list, who have done very little so far in terms of actual crime.
Einzelfallmap social media accounts that tracked refugee crimes.
Some of their content was debatable, but they were nowhere near the level of indymedia.
Then they put the identitarian movement on a watch list, who have done very little so far in terms of actual crime.
> Anonymous Germany Facebook account with millions of followers.
... which regularly posted conspiracy theories, fake news and distributed hate speech against migrants.
> Einzelfallmap social media accounts that tracked refugee crimes.
...ONLY "refugee" crimes, without a comparison to German crimes this is nothing more than inciting hate.
> Some of their content was debatable, but they were nowhere near the level of indymedia.
It was Twitter and Facebook that shot them down. Private entities, not the government - that's a difference.
> Then they put the identitarian movement on a watch list, who have done very little so far in terms of actual crime.
One IB guy in Berlin nearly ran over a cop with a car. The IB tried obstructing of SAR NGOs, and they were filmed while trying to pirate a speedboat of Open Arms NGO boat. IB activists have committed many crimes, ranging from simple vandalism over shooting with (fake) guns (Martin Sellner in Austria) to attempted murder (the guy with the truck and the police officer).
... which regularly posted conspiracy theories, fake news and distributed hate speech against migrants.
> Einzelfallmap social media accounts that tracked refugee crimes.
...ONLY "refugee" crimes, without a comparison to German crimes this is nothing more than inciting hate.
> Some of their content was debatable, but they were nowhere near the level of indymedia.
It was Twitter and Facebook that shot them down. Private entities, not the government - that's a difference.
> Then they put the identitarian movement on a watch list, who have done very little so far in terms of actual crime.
One IB guy in Berlin nearly ran over a cop with a car. The IB tried obstructing of SAR NGOs, and they were filmed while trying to pirate a speedboat of Open Arms NGO boat. IB activists have committed many crimes, ranging from simple vandalism over shooting with (fake) guns (Martin Sellner in Austria) to attempted murder (the guy with the truck and the police officer).
Thanks for proving my point. None of that is anywhere close to the crimes committed by indymedia users.
None of these were shut down by the government.
Yeah, the government now uses agencies for that. Makes it easier to shift the blame if something goes wrong.
Deutschlandecho would be an example where the state shut down a right-wing page.
Also, there's the continuous effort to ban the right-wing party (NPD).
Also, there's the continuous effort to ban the right-wing party (NPD).
>Also, there's the continuous effort to ban the right-wing party (NPD).
"Normal" right-wing as in conservative would be CDU and CSU. To quote the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) [0]
>Die Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (NPD) vertritt ein auf die Beseitigung der bestehenden freiheitlichen demokratischen Grundordnung gerichtetes politisches Konzept.
The Nationaldemocratic Party Germany (NPD) stands for a political concept aimed at abolishing the free democratic constitutional structure.
[0] https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Pressemit...
edit: fix'd formatting
"Normal" right-wing as in conservative would be CDU and CSU. To quote the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) [0]
>Die Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands (NPD) vertritt ein auf die Beseitigung der bestehenden freiheitlichen demokratischen Grundordnung gerichtetes politisches Konzept.
The Nationaldemocratic Party Germany (NPD) stands for a political concept aimed at abolishing the free democratic constitutional structure.
[0] https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Pressemit...
edit: fix'd formatting
You mean the NPD which was ruled unconstitutional but too small to be of importance, therefore not outlawed?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/world/europe/german-court...
Horrible.
Horrible.
I'm not fully following on what your point is; My post was primarily intended to be informative of political actions on the other side of extremism.
Also, banning a political party is quite a big hammer, regardless of how important the party itself is.
Also, banning a political party is quite a big hammer, regardless of how important the party itself is.
Do you have any awareness about the laws governing the history of violent extremism in Germany? Theres a reason right wing and far right wing parties face legal scrutiny.
Technically speaking, there's no law governing any history; There's laws governing behavior in the present that arose from events in history. I live in Germany for 12 years by now; I can't claim a lawyer-level knowledge of e.g. §130 StGB, but I have a basic understanding.
What I'm having trouble following is the logic of "the violent extremism on the other side is less bad, because it hasn't led to similarly horrible effects yet".
What I'm having trouble following is the logic of "the violent extremism on the other side is less bad, because it hasn't led to similarly horrible effects yet".
Does it matter?
Breaking the law is breaking the law.
Breaking the law is breaking the law.
It matters because of transparency. Getting rid of some bad organizations.. and then a few that they just don't like. Like, it's easy to say "terror organizations" - and when you look at the actual organizations under that umbrella, there probably is some really bad shit, but there may also be a few that someone just doesn't like. Makes sense?
Not in Germany, but pretty salient: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/09/geert-wilders-...
Literally illegal to call for less immigration.
Literally illegal to call for less immigration.
Literally illegal to call for less immigration.
Not at all.
In that specific hate-inciting speech Geert Wilders was calling for fewer Moroccans. And this is primarily directed towards Dutch people with a Moroccan background who've already live in the Netherlands for decades or are second-generation immigrants. There is virtually no immigration from Morocco, in 2015 approximately 1% of the immigrants arriving in The Netherlands was Moroccan [1].
[1] https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/publicatie/2016/47/jaarrapport-inte...
Not at all.
In that specific hate-inciting speech Geert Wilders was calling for fewer Moroccans. And this is primarily directed towards Dutch people with a Moroccan background who've already live in the Netherlands for decades or are second-generation immigrants. There is virtually no immigration from Morocco, in 2015 approximately 1% of the immigrants arriving in The Netherlands was Moroccan [1].
[1] https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/publicatie/2016/47/jaarrapport-inte...
So as long as the immigration was in the past, you're not allowed to criticize it?
Criticising past immigration is something different than inciting an audience to chant to reduce the number of Dutch citizens with a specific background.
Most political parties in The Netherlands have talked about the problems of immigration and integration in The Netherlands at least since Pim Fortuyn 15 years ago. Some parties longer (e.g. Frits Bolkenstein of the VVD, who Geert Wilders worked for). So, it is by no means illegal to talk about current or past immigration policies.
Most political parties in The Netherlands have talked about the problems of immigration and integration in The Netherlands at least since Pim Fortuyn 15 years ago. Some parties longer (e.g. Frits Bolkenstein of the VVD, who Geert Wilders worked for). So, it is by no means illegal to talk about current or past immigration policies.
You got a few. Satisfied?
Good. It's really high time German authorities take care of this situation.
This is really scary how laissez faire they were before. Bored bands of anarchists destroying public and private property (e.g. burning down cars) on daily basis accompanied by cheers of "useful idiots".
I really hope this is a first step in direction of solving this dangerous precedent.
This is really scary how laissez faire they were before. Bored bands of anarchists destroying public and private property (e.g. burning down cars) on daily basis accompanied by cheers of "useful idiots".
I really hope this is a first step in direction of solving this dangerous precedent.
>portal popular with leftist readers and activists
The world's smallest violin is weeping. I guess "big government" isn't such a good thing now, is it?
The world's smallest violin is weeping. I guess "big government" isn't such a good thing now, is it?
Damn anarchists and their """""""""big governement love""""""""". Damn!
(Explaining: Your post only exposes the size of your ignorance)
(Explaining: Your post only exposes the size of your ignorance)
...authorities were treating linksunten.indymedia.org as an "association" rather than a news outlet, which would help officials get around constitutional protections on freedom of expression. [...] The anonymous threat to police - called "bulls" in Germany - led officials to determine that the site had become a "lawless realm," and, for now at least, the authorities have ended it.
Which I find pretty concerning. "Don't say anything nasty about the state or the police, or we will shut you down" Isn't a message I was expecting to hear from a European Government.
Which I find pretty concerning. "Don't say anything nasty about the state or the police, or we will shut you down" Isn't a message I was expecting to hear from a European Government.
There's a difference between saying 'anything nasty' and calling for physical action against individuals. Content on that page called for violence against individuals, including members of the police.
I'm not saying I disagree with your argument, but "don't say anything nasty" doesn't represent the facts accurately.
I'm not saying I disagree with your argument, but "don't say anything nasty" doesn't represent the facts accurately.
> calling for physical action against individuals
They weren't raided for making true threats, but for letting the site become a "lawless realm" and/or for "sowing hate against different opinions and representatives of the country", charges so vague they could apply to almost any online forum or uppity news site.
They weren't raided for making true threats, but for letting the site become a "lawless realm" and/or for "sowing hate against different opinions and representatives of the country", charges so vague they could apply to almost any online forum or uppity news site.
Germany does not have the protections of free speech that the US has.
"Hate speech" is a real thing there that will land you in jail.
"Hate speech" is a real thing there that will land you in jail.
> "Hate speech" is a real thing there that will land you in jail.
This is wildly inaccurate. In Germany there are mainly three kinds of speech punishable by law:
(1) Defamation
(2) Volksverhetzung ("all jews must die")
(3) Incitement (there are two different kinds of this, one where a specific person is incited to do something criminal, and the other where you publicly instigate a group to do something criminal)
It is quite clear that these don't nearly cover everything that may be commonly considered "hate speech".
This is wildly inaccurate. In Germany there are mainly three kinds of speech punishable by law:
(1) Defamation
(2) Volksverhetzung ("all jews must die")
(3) Incitement (there are two different kinds of this, one where a specific person is incited to do something criminal, and the other where you publicly instigate a group to do something criminal)
It is quite clear that these don't nearly cover everything that may be commonly considered "hate speech".
I agree that it is disconcerting that it was easier to make these vague charges effective than to charge them with inciting to violence or something similar. It appears to call for a refinement of legislation and perhaps general sentiment of the courts (which is often an extension of that of current culture).
> Which I find pretty concerning. "Don't say anything nasty about the state or the police, or we will shut you down" Isn't a message I was expecting to hear from a European Government.
If you look at the legal basis they used, you will find that the organization was actually banned as (inter alia) being a criminal conspiracy with the goal of facilitating the commission of criminal offenses (and in particular, violent crimes). Searches found knives, truncheons, and other weapons [1].
[1] http://www.n-tv.de/politik/De-Maiziere-verbietet-linksunten-... (in German).
If you look at the legal basis they used, you will find that the organization was actually banned as (inter alia) being a criminal conspiracy with the goal of facilitating the commission of criminal offenses (and in particular, violent crimes). Searches found knives, truncheons, and other weapons [1].
[1] http://www.n-tv.de/politik/De-Maiziere-verbietet-linksunten-... (in German).
Apparently the fact that the site had administrators (i.e. more than one) made it an association. By that definition a newspaper, TV network and anything else are associations too I guess?
[deleted]
The association part is a red herring. Of course a group of administrators is an association, just like CNN also happens to be (part of) a company. The important thing he is saying is that they treat them as if they weren't also a news outlet. I find that decision questionable, and I expect an interesting court case centered around the question which kinds of websites qualify as news outlets and which don't.
They had the legal form of a registered association [0] and the ministry claims it went against the German constitution:
Associations whose aims or activities contravene the criminal laws, or that are directed against the constitutional order or the concept of international understanding, shall be prohibited. [1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_association_(German...
[1] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.h...
Associations whose aims or activities contravene the criminal laws, or that are directed against the constitutional order or the concept of international understanding, shall be prohibited. [1]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_association_(German...
[1] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.h...
By that definition almost anything is an association.
According to http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vereinsg/__2.html (my translation, emphasis mine, legalese is hard):
(1) A Verein is regardless of the legal form any association formed voluntarily by a multitude of natural or legal persons over a longer timespan for a common purpose, subject to organized decision-making.
(2) Vereine are not
1. political parties as defined by article 21 of the Grundgesetz [essentially the constitution]
2. parliamentary groups of the Bundestag and and the parliaments of federated states
EDIT: banning a Verein is regulated by http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vereinsg/__3.html
(1) A Verein may only be treated as banned (article 9 par. 2 of the Grundgesetz), if the banning agency determines that its purpose or its actions run counter to the criminal law or that it is directed against the constitutional order or the ideal of peaceful exchange between the peoples [Gedanke der Völkerverständigung; let me know if you have a better translation] ; the declaration is to order the dissolution of the Verein (ban). The ban is usually to involve the seizure of [a bunch of stuff I'm too lazy to translate]
(1) A Verein is regardless of the legal form any association formed voluntarily by a multitude of natural or legal persons over a longer timespan for a common purpose, subject to organized decision-making.
(2) Vereine are not
1. political parties as defined by article 21 of the Grundgesetz [essentially the constitution]
2. parliamentary groups of the Bundestag and and the parliaments of federated states
EDIT: banning a Verein is regulated by http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vereinsg/__3.html
(1) A Verein may only be treated as banned (article 9 par. 2 of the Grundgesetz), if the banning agency determines that its purpose or its actions run counter to the criminal law or that it is directed against the constitutional order or the ideal of peaceful exchange between the peoples [Gedanke der Völkerverständigung; let me know if you have a better translation] ; the declaration is to order the dissolution of the Verein (ban). The ban is usually to involve the seizure of [a bunch of stuff I'm too lazy to translate]
[deleted]
Could we change the title so it doesn't read like the German Interior Ministry itself was shut down?
The title was a great example of misuse of the oxford comma. I might borrow that.
(for reference, original title was "Germain Interior Ministry shuts down, and raids Linksunten.indymedia.org")
(for reference, original title was "Germain Interior Ministry shuts down, and raids Linksunten.indymedia.org")
I wouldn't recommend borrowing this, because there's only two items in the list which would never include a comma before the conjunction. The Oxford comma is used in lists of 3 or more items.
Also, it seems the person who posted this modified the title for some reason. The actual article title is "German Interior Ministry shuts down, raids left-wing German Indymedia site". We can probably agree that this title isn't great either, but it's far better than the hatchet job the poster did.
Also, it seems the person who posted this modified the title for some reason. The actual article title is "German Interior Ministry shuts down, raids left-wing German Indymedia site". We can probably agree that this title isn't great either, but it's far better than the hatchet job the poster did.
That's why I said misuse :)
If you extend the list to three items, an oxford comma actually helps with understanding the sentence: "German Interior Ministry shuts down, brings charges against and raids Linksunten.indymedia.org" vs "German Interior Ministry shuts down, brings charges against, and raids Linksunten.indymedia.org". But in general it's just a really bad sentence no matter how many commas there are.
If you extend the list to three items, an oxford comma actually helps with understanding the sentence: "German Interior Ministry shuts down, brings charges against and raids Linksunten.indymedia.org" vs "German Interior Ministry shuts down, brings charges against, and raids Linksunten.indymedia.org". But in general it's just a really bad sentence no matter how many commas there are.
The site was closed for "sowing hate against different opinions and representatives of the country,"
I am shocked - shocked - that anti-hate animus would be used this way!
I am shocked - shocked - that anti-hate animus would be used this way!
The mechanism for closing the site is what interests me. There are certain laws in place to prevent exactly this kind of thing from happening. Authorities worked around this by classifying the site as a "club" instead of a publication platform / news portal. The move is widely seen as a response to violent G20 protests. The way to deal with that should be to find and prosecute the violent offenders, not shutting down lawful websites.
Ironically, broad bans of anything right wing are exactly what the left have been asking for all these years.
I told people it's going to be used against them one day. Shortsighted idiots.
I told people it's going to be used against them one day. Shortsighted idiots.
People don't have a problem with 'anything' right wing, people have a problem with far right wing, and the views that come along with it. You know, nationalism, supremacy, xenophobia.
Holding the interests of your own country above those of others is by definition nationalism, and almost any opposition to immigration is labelled xenophobia.
They are, and have historically been, the policy for the vast majority of countries, and are advantageous positions for a population to have - is that all it takes to be far right?
They are, and have historically been, the policy for the vast majority of countries, and are advantageous positions for a population to have - is that all it takes to be far right?
The problem is that we don't live in the 1800s, we live in a global market, and consumers want the best products available. Additionally, these are people, why would we limit the movements of people?
Immigrants help Countries they move to, they build the economy and workforce, and are the only reason why the US does not have an aging population as bad as Canada, Japan, and many other nations. Opposition to immigration is xenophobia.
Historically, many things have been bad, and/or wrong. Mental Health treatment, treatment of the aboriginal people, food safety, environmental policy and protection. How is history any sort of an argument?
Immigrants help Countries they move to, they build the economy and workforce, and are the only reason why the US does not have an aging population as bad as Canada, Japan, and many other nations. Opposition to immigration is xenophobia.
Historically, many things have been bad, and/or wrong. Mental Health treatment, treatment of the aboriginal people, food safety, environmental policy and protection. How is history any sort of an argument?
History was not the argument - it was to illustrate that what you consider far right has been and is common.
> we live in a global market,
Treating local businesses preferentially does not mean abolishing international trade. Just look at China, or US agricultural subsidies, or tariffs, or countless other examples.
> Immigrants help Countries they move to
Countries, perhaps, but what about the local people? Don't they compete for the same jobs, driving down wages? Vote and take advantage of common resources (drinking water, arable land, existing infrastructure, etc.), reducing the political and economic capital of the locals? Encourage policies for more immigration, instead of policies that would encourage parenthood? Won't immigrants look out for their own interests more than for those of the local population?
Let me rephrase that last question - is racism real?
> Immigrants [...] are the only reason why the US does not have an aging population
It's a sick society indeed that can't even sustain its own population. And instead of improving itself, it makes up the shortfall with immigration. Do you really believe immigration is the only way to sustain population levels? Why can other countries manage without?
> we live in a global market,
Treating local businesses preferentially does not mean abolishing international trade. Just look at China, or US agricultural subsidies, or tariffs, or countless other examples.
> Immigrants help Countries they move to
Countries, perhaps, but what about the local people? Don't they compete for the same jobs, driving down wages? Vote and take advantage of common resources (drinking water, arable land, existing infrastructure, etc.), reducing the political and economic capital of the locals? Encourage policies for more immigration, instead of policies that would encourage parenthood? Won't immigrants look out for their own interests more than for those of the local population?
Let me rephrase that last question - is racism real?
> Immigrants [...] are the only reason why the US does not have an aging population
It's a sick society indeed that can't even sustain its own population. And instead of improving itself, it makes up the shortfall with immigration. Do you really believe immigration is the only way to sustain population levels? Why can other countries manage without?
Common, but not as common anymore since it doesn't make as much sense.
> Treating local businesses preferentially does not mean abolishing international trade. Just look at China, or US agricultural subsidies, or tariffs, or countless other examples.
Yes, this is true, they can both exist together.
> Don't they compete for the same jobs, driving down wages? Vote and take advantage of common resources (drinking water, arable land, existing infrastructure, etc.), reducing the political and economic capital of the locals? Encourage policies for more immigration, instead of policies that would encourage parenthood? Won't immigrants look out for their own interests more than for those of the local population?
Why are you making this about us vs them? What is your purpose? Once they immigrate, they are the local population. Everyone takes advantage of those resources, tough. Parenthood doesn't need to be encouraged through policies.
> is racism real?
Yes, it's absolutely insane to me that you are even asking that. You must have lived a sheltered life to think it doesn't exist.
> And instead of improving itself, it makes up the shortfall with immigration
It won't sustain it's own population, this is on us, as a society, and due to changes in the job and technology markets, populations are shrinking dramatically. We aren't and can't force people to have 10 children anymore, that just won't happen.
Other countries don't manage without, what are you saying? They allow immigration, and the population is still shrinking.
What do you have against immigrants, against immigration?
> Treating local businesses preferentially does not mean abolishing international trade. Just look at China, or US agricultural subsidies, or tariffs, or countless other examples.
Yes, this is true, they can both exist together.
> Don't they compete for the same jobs, driving down wages? Vote and take advantage of common resources (drinking water, arable land, existing infrastructure, etc.), reducing the political and economic capital of the locals? Encourage policies for more immigration, instead of policies that would encourage parenthood? Won't immigrants look out for their own interests more than for those of the local population?
Why are you making this about us vs them? What is your purpose? Once they immigrate, they are the local population. Everyone takes advantage of those resources, tough. Parenthood doesn't need to be encouraged through policies.
> is racism real?
Yes, it's absolutely insane to me that you are even asking that. You must have lived a sheltered life to think it doesn't exist.
> And instead of improving itself, it makes up the shortfall with immigration
It won't sustain it's own population, this is on us, as a society, and due to changes in the job and technology markets, populations are shrinking dramatically. We aren't and can't force people to have 10 children anymore, that just won't happen.
Other countries don't manage without, what are you saying? They allow immigration, and the population is still shrinking.
What do you have against immigrants, against immigration?
yAnonymous(3)
Using the Alanis Morisette definition here I guess
Shutting down a club seems just as oppressive. And the definition of 'club' is blurry and stretchy, so it's not unexpected a law against 'clubs' would get abused.
good news finally coming from the left
* Leak of AfD (right-wing populist German party) internal chat, which reveals Nazi quotes.
* Article showing collaboration between a neonazi and police in Leipzig.
* Outing right-wing arsonist who was also a police informant.
* Research on the Identitarian Movement, revealing organizational structure.
* Leak of customer data of a Nazi online shop outing parliament member as customer.
No wonder they made some good enemies.
[1] https://twitter.com/Chronik_ge_Re/status/901033270133096452