Relevant context: Dobrindt was in favour of banning the Left party and was in favour of juristically going after the Last Generation.
They’ll want to form a coalition with the Nazis in 2029, just like last time, so obviously they don’t want to ban them. Fucking “conservatives”.
Genuine question: what/who do you base that assumption on?
So far, those most thinking about such a coalition seem to be those that aren’t in the Union.
Merz hat gone from “firewall” over “ah, let’s not fuss over state level cooperation” to literally inviting them to help him win a vote against the old federal government in a time span of less than 4 years. CDU/CSU representatives didn’t abandon him over this, so I have to assume they are ok with it.
Spahn (new conservative faction leader, one of the most powerful positions in the next parliament) publicly calls to treat them like any other opposition party (that would logically include being open to a coalition).
Many other prominent conservative figures are actively working to adopt and normalize AfD positions in their policies, which is how the public gets prepared to be more open to the idea.
You have to actively want to not see it to be able to ignore the writing on the wall. They absolutely will do it as soon as it appears beneficial to them.
And don’t forget that CDU/CSU both have deep ties to the Republicans and they to this day have those connections
Merz is power-hungry and wanted to become chancellor pretty bad. Also, I’d agree that there is too much spinelessness in the party when push comes to shove (but also in the SPD, as can be seen in the ‘cautious’ comments concerning a ban of the AfD).
Yet, I don’t really see them wanting to form a coalition with the Nazis in 2029 and concerning Merz, it is one of the very few things I actually believe him that he personally won’t form a coalition with the AfD. They also don’t want to burn themselves in a failed attempt to ban the party, or, in the Unions case, don’t want backlash from the voters they want to attract back from the AfD. But I honestly wouldn’t say they are keen to cooperate with the AfD, especially as long as it is possible to achieve their goals with a partner as malleable as the SPD. The reasons of them not wanting to ban the party are primarily fears of accountability and backlash, not strategic ones.
But I honestly wouldn’t say they are keen to cooperate with the AfD, especially as long as it is possible to achieve their goals with a partner as malleable as the SPD.
That’s the key condition. As soon as other partners aren’t willing to give them what they want, they will not hesitate. They have literally just shown us that they won’t. Those votes were a power play by Merz to signal to the SPD they shouldn’t be too confident in their position as the only possible partner. That only makes sense if he’s willing to go through with it.
Of course they are telling the public now that they won’t do it. About three years ago Merz told us anybody who cooperated with the Nazis in the slightest would be excluded from the party the next day. I may have missed all the exclusions, but actually I think you cannot trust one word this man says.
Also it’s not even a sure thing that Merz will be in charge for the next election. The “first row” in the CDU took a big step back when it came to posts in the new government, possibly because they are gambling it won’t make it for the full 4 years. And if it doesn’t, it’ll be Spahn or one of the other extremists next.
Last time the Nazis came into power the conservatives acted in the same way and they will do it again. It’s a property of conservatism, not of the individual actors. You can see that in other nations, the USA are only the most recent example. Conservatives will help anybody to power as long as it means they can avoid taxing the rich.
I honestly wouldn’t say they are keen to cooperate with the AfD, especially as long as it is possible to achieve their goals with a partner as malleable as the SPD
And when they don’t get what they want from any of the other parties they will cooperate with the AfD.
As they have done in Thuringia, as they have done in the Bundestag. Once voting together has been established as normal, forming a coalition is not a big next step.
Future coalition partners are not easily dismissed, eh?
Steigbügelhalter gotta Steigbügel halten!
Thanks to AFD and ALL other extreme right wing parties in european countries, our hard-earned freedom will be gone in the future, thanks a lot douchebags 🖕 and instead of working on things that actually matter we have to worry about extremist parties … Thanks for ruining our precious time, money, energy and freedom douchebags 🖕🖕
AfD takes money from the Kremlin and they are not interested in "out governing"anyone, but this man in the actual government is eager to frame them as loyal opposition.
AfD was popularized by German media first. This is controlled opposition, created by the upper class. The Kremlin money and the racial politics were a poisoned gift because they will prevent them from ever gaining the absolute majority.
There is the threat of a new strong, successful party if the AfD is forbidden. Then a party without racist politics like Volt has space to grow.
The Kremlin money and the racial politics were a poisoned gift because they will prevent them from ever gaining the absolute majority.
Uhm what? I don’t see the ~40% Afd voters in my area give a hoot about Kremlin money and many are absolutely against all foreigners. And while many people in Western Germany would rather not see that, the reason that so many people still vote CxU despite everything is that they are copying Afd language on immigration.
This seems like a really bad take.
Oh no, if we ban the racists, non-racists have a chance to grow!
God forbid!I mistook OP’s comment, so the comment is a bit out of context.
However I think that’s the real reason why the government hasn’t forbidden the AfD. They want to prevent an opposition party that can be elected without repercussions.
The really key thing about controlled opposition is the first bit. The control. It’s crucial to the entire concept, because without it you’ve got uncontrolled opposition.
If you raise a mean dog to scare people away, you really don’t want to let your neighbour start feeding it in secret… Especially if that neighbour has jumped the fence and kicked your arse before.
The analogy with the dog doesn’t work. The AfD is not there to protect anything.
Don’t be obtuse, it was made in reference to your comment about “controlled opposition”.
I understood that. But who cares about the neighbor feeding the dog if the dog is not there to protect?
Still obtuse.
Last thing I can say is that feeding the dog references the financing of the AfD by Russia. Please tell me, how is this a problem if the AfD is not part of the government?
