Here in the US, there's a dumber revival of the Red Scare. The scare mongering isn't as effective this go round because there's no existing abundance for the people. All people want is affordable housing, jobs that let you plan for the future, and healthcare that won't bankrupt you. But there's no solution to any of those problems that don't involve some class of investors losing money/power. So we're stuck with MAGA. Incoherent ideology for incoherent times. When I look at the AfD, I see the same helpless thrashing taking hold.
Right. I want to see the Democrats campaigning on those things. Midterm is near, they should be getting their We-Wont-Let-AI-Take-Your-Jobs campaign in motion.
> But there's no solution to any of those problems that don't involve some class of investors losing money/power. So we're stuck with MAGA.
You got MAGA because the Dems specifically went the diversity route, instead of at least pretending to address the concerns of the voters.
This time round they've been handed an opportunity on a golden platter: Go anti-AI, at least enough so that people aren't worried about losing their jobs to AI.
They will not see an opportunity like this for a long time, and if MAGA wins again, blame will lie squarely on Dems who decided that arguing about men in women's sport is a productive use of their voter goodwill.
However, as soon as he came to power, he broke the promise of fiscal discipline and cutting spending and the first thing he did was passed a bill to burrow more than half a trillion Euros under the votes of old parliament even changing the constitution.
Also because of the firewall they have imposed to AfD, for him the only coalition partner was SPD( which is more of a left leaning party) and they formed a government and since then it has been internal conflicts to pass the important legislations to get the country back on track.
All these has worked as a boost for the AfD because people realised that apart from AfD the only other main right conservative party in Germany is CDU/CSU (which is the party of the chancellor) and voting for them hasn’t resulted in the change they voted in last election and now, they don’t have any other choice than voting for AfD because voting for the same old parties expecting a different result would be the definition of insanity.
So we get to work for the state about half the time (including VAT etc), and on-top of it thanks to the Merz masterstroke we're getting an additional 800bn debt between now-2030.
Meanwhile, everything seems to be getting worse.
We need significant reductions in spending, and I don't think anyone has any clue how to achieve it before the house of cards falls down completely.
Traditional parties have failed badly in economic and migration policies, and Russia does its best to exploit this. They can't win on a battlefield against united Europe, but if small Eastern European countries are left without support, then Russia has much better odds against them.
We see that in Ukraine. No other European country would send their soldiers to die in a battle fields to protect Ukrainians
So that they can secure more and more fanatic followers who will vote for them no matter what. And so that they can remain in power for as long as possible.
To them, the "illegal immigration issue" is just a vehicle to gain power. Nothing more.
Because, from what I can see, their only and actual goal is to get in power. No matter the cost. Then abuse it to the benefit of them and their friends. And never ever give it up ever again.
If what you said made any sense whatsoever, then the parties currently in charge would have stopped it along time ago. Because if according to you that makes the far-right parties grow stronger, then why would anyone in their right mind not do anything about it?
Why wait for these parties to use this issue to fuel their growth?
- The Ukraine war will continue to be supported for the benefit of Blackrock and to tie up Russia for the middle east plans of the US.
- There will be a lot of noise about immigration. Some 1000 people will be deported for the headlines, but Weidel will obey the industry that uses immigration for union busting, driving down salaries and driving up rents.
- Social services will be cut for everyone, including AfD voters.
- Weidel will discover that she can use state TV and refrain from abolishing it.
- Military spending will increase according to Hegseth's wishes.
This is the biggest con in post-war German election history.
Illegal immigrants are a source of cheap labor. Business interests tell politicians that without a pool of cheap workers, costs will go up, voters will feel inflation, and the politicians will get the blame.
The overall cost is not low. Some illegal immigrants get benefits. Some illegal immigrants commit crimes. Almost all illegal immigrants will use the healthcare system eventually. But those costs are not seen by the businesses that push illegal immigration.
Do we all think that another 8, 10 years of being "firewalled" out of national poltitics and being told they're all nazis (I'm sure some of them are, but nowhere near all) is going to make them less or more extreme?
It's hard work making a society that caters to everyone, but the approach of ignoring and belittling a large group and ignoring their concerns entirely has a shelf life, and we aren't going to like the results.
But hey, the boomers will all get their pensions and continue to vote CDU so that's all that matters.
Let's be real: this "issue" is a strawman. It doesn't really exist, especially in that part of Germany. Just like pretty much everywhere else, the German anti-immigrant far right is strongest in the areas with the fewest immigrants.
This is not to say that the wave of immigration that is now more than 10 years past didn't have its challenges, and they were downplayed by some.
But at its core, the immigration scare is just the classic playbook of offering simple but wrong explanations to distract from the class warfare that's being waged by the wealthy.
Ideally, we'd turn down the temperature and have patient conversations, but the media environment was made very counterproductive over the last few decades.
I'm pretty convinced at this point there's almost nothing we can do about it.
This is not a strawman. Even if you believe that the AFD is not correct in its diagnosis of the problems, why are you saying something that is a complete lie: https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/54441/germany-net-migra...
According to this organization which sits on the complete on opposite spectrum of the right/far-right, they write that 2.7M people immigrants moved to Germany in 2022 with a net inflow of 1.5M in a single year.
According to the same organization, today, immigrants make-up at least 20% of the German population and that's from an article from 2024 so that number is probably low. So if we extrapolate roughly 1 in 4 people living in Germany are not German.
That is exactly why the AFD is rising, people just bury their heads in the sand and pretend that there is no problem at all.
But I guess its easier to think that 44% of the inhabitants of Saxony-Anhalt are secretly Nazies than admitting that something must change. Lets continue doing that, its been working so well so far!
Many of their senior leaders are Nazis. The head of the party in the state of Thuringia used to write pro-Hitler articles under a pseudonym.
> ignoring and belittling a large group and ignoring their concerns entirely
The AfD doesn't address their problems either. It tells them that all of their problems are because of foreigners and immigrants.
What's the AfD's solution for affordable housing? Deport immigrants to free up apartments. What's their solution for creating jobs? Deport immigrants.
This is a party that wants to deport all German citizens who don't have a sufficient quantum of German blood. There's no need to pretend the party is anything other than what it is: a fascist party.
My only point was that, perhaps, we should think about these causes and why the core political parties can't solve them; otherwise it's only going to get worse -- hell at this rate they'll actually get enough people onboard to achieve their goals within a few cycles.
It is true that the issues of people who vote far-right are ridiculed, and they themselves are demonised, which the parent holds, and I agree, is unproductive.
Far-right voters are largely the losers of globalisation/economic growth trying whatever they can to improve their situation: the phenomenon of many of these voters alternating between far-right and far-left from one election to the other is one of many indicators of what their real goal is, ie improving their situation.
Re migration: it does have negative effects on the economically marginalised, which the readership of HN and the talking heads in mainstream media are largely not. Among these are increasing housing costs, downward pressure on salaries, rapid and alienating shifts in cultural (and I mean cultural, not racial) makeup of cities and neighbourhoods: none of this should be controversial.
The establishment parties (so right and "left" like SPD, Labour, PS) have financial incentives to increase migration, which they do (see the Boris wave in the UK).
While migration is not an inherent evil at all, the way it's done by these parties does lead to negative effects, which adds one reason among many to vote for the far-right. So the short-term solution (curbing migration) is the simple and popular answer. The long-term solution (curbing capitalism) is harder and unpopular, so radical left parties unfortunately get fewer votes (except in France, where there's a real chance of the LFI showing a better path).
if you could make them powerless by just addressing the issue, why have no parties done that? why hand power to the AfD?
"Voters perceive problems. As is common in a democracy, voters elect people who propose solutions. Why is no other political party proposing solutions voters see as worth voting for?"
If you don't think the problems are real, make the case to the voters.
As far as I can tell, other political parties have no better answer than name-calling. Am I missing some politician/party that is actually making a real argument?
Tax paying citizens who want their concerns addressed absolutely LOVE hearing that "Ackchyually, your problem doesn't exist and is all in your head".
P.S. - I have no skin in the game regarding EU immigration policies, just making an honest observation about engaging with people who might have opposing views.
why can't I then migrate to the US or whatever country I wanna go to?
It does not mean fringe or rare or low-in-numbers - unfortunately, "far right politics" have frequently been in the majority in our history and will certainly be again :-/
Just because authoritarianism has emerged from the fringes doesn't make it any less authoritarian.
As for a resurgence of the nazi horror: their leader is in a mixed race lesbian relationship.
Also, the Free State of Anhalt was the first Weimar state to elect a local parliament with a Nazi leader. History sure does rhyme.
Getting a lot of votes does not mean a party is not far-right. Germans of all people know that.
In 2020, florida was called for trump and biden won. Saying florida was a sign of things to come was simply not true.
What a weird position to be in, where you acknowledge the fascism but think Nazi comparisons go too far...
You're the problem here. I'm not on the side of the AFD, never will be -- and let me be clear: I and my family are directly impacted if they take power.
I don't think calling literal nazis nazis is a problem, my point, if you read it properly is that shutting down the (reasonable or not) concerns of a big chunk of the population and calling them all nazis only makes them more extreme, and grows their power. We need a better way.
In normal English, it would be from the average (median) voter. A party is "far-right" (or "far-left") if it is substantially to the right (left) of the average voter.
Assume that people vote for the person/party closest to their own view on an issue. 44% of voters choose the far-right candidate, meaning 44% of voters are closer to the far-right candidate than any other option.
How can this happen? Several ways, but only one is realistic: the other candidates are even farther away (to the left or right) from the position of the median voter. 40%+ of voters are themselves "far-right".
> The Nazi party got 37% of votes nationwide (not just in one state).
The Nazi party was not that far to the right of the median German voter at the time.
The far-left is using scary words ("Nazi", "Far-right", etc.) to tar a group they dislike (see what I did there?) They are counting on the fact that most voters can be influenced by group-think and name-calling. They are probably correct. But this is Hacker News, and the people here ought to be smart enough to see this for the stupid political smear that it obviously is. If you don't like a party, make the case that their policy is wrong. If vague analogy to the Nazis is the best argument you have, then you have no argument at all.
lol. lmao.
Labelling or bullying people because they have exercised their right and calling them Nazis is not gonna make them change their mind at all. After all who are you or anyone else to say that what other person has voted is right or wrong. You can have your opinion, but you cannot judge them
If https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_II had not done such a comprehensive job of discrediting hereditary nobility, it might be healthier if German voters had the option to replace their elected government with a ruling Kaiser for 4 or 5 years. Ideally, that would lessen the appeal of more-extreme political parties. And the threat of indefinite irrelevance (the Kaiser could be reelected) might even motivate the politicians to occasional competence.
Anyway this topic shouldn't even be on HN. The story will likely be flagged soon.
Oh, it should. Where should we discuss it? Because we really should discuss it.