After their recent success in regional elections, the political party Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland, AfD) has adopted an anti-Islam plank in their party platform. Needless to say, the other parties, especially those on the Left, are outraged by such blasphemous talk. And a Muslim leader has compared the AfD with — surprise! — the Nazis.
Rembrandt Clancy has translated two articles about the AfD’s platform and the reactions to it. The first is from Die Zeit:
The General Secretary of Muslims Compares the AfD with Hitler’s Germany
The AfD meet criticism with their Islam thesis. Aiman Mazyek accuses the party of threatening, for the first time since the National Socialist period, an entire religious community.
Original German-language Source: Zeit Online
18 April 2016
Aiman Mazyek, the Chairman of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, compared the AfD, the right-wing, populist party, with the anti-Semitism of the National Socialists. For the first time since Hitler’s Germany, there is a party in Germany which once more discredits and existentially threatens an entire religious community, Mazyek told the NDR Info broadcaster [Norddeutscher Rundfunk Info is a radio programme]. In order to counteract this policy, he calls for more clarification regarding the goals of the AfD, whose aim is to create a republic without a liberal-democratic constitutional order. To that end, Islam is misused. Mazyek characterised the AfD as inconsistent with the Constitution.
Over the weekend, the leading AfD politicians characterised Islam as incompatible with a liberal constitutional order. The deputy party leaders Alexander Gauland and Beatrix von Storch announced in the Fankfurter Allgemeinen Sontagszeitung (FAS) their intention of giving a distinctly Islam-critical focus to their party platform. “Islam is inherently a political ideology, which is incompatible with the Constitution,” von Storch said. Gauland warned of an “Islamisation of Germany”. Many Muslims belong to Germany, “but Islam does not belong to Germany.”
The former AfD leader Bernd Lucke criticised the statements of the current party leadership: “By making populist demands such as the prohibition of minarets or that Islamic worship take place only in the German language, we only support the radicalisation of Muslims,” said Lucke, who is currently chairman of the conservative-liberal Alfa party [Allianz für Fortschritt und Aufbruch, Alliance for Progress and Renewal].
In the opinion of the SPD [Social Democratic Party of Germany] representative for religious denominations, Kerstin Griese, the AfD is fomenting “unfounded prejudices in a highly dangerous way”. It goes without saying that there is “an Islam which is in line with the Constitution” and this is practised by “far in excess of 90 percent of the Muslims who live here.” Griese considers the planned restrictions on the practice of religion to be unconstitutional, for “freedom of religion is integral to the Constitution.” Therefore, what they are now demanding, says Griese, is “not a discourse about Islam, but something unconstitutional”: it is not Islam which lacks conformity to the Constitution, but “the AfD, who are inconsistent with the Constitution.” The policy spokesman for religion of the Left party [die Linke], Christine Buchholz, accused the AfD of poisoning the social climate with Islam-hatred and of fomenting “racism against Muslims”. The President of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, said that following the AfD’s initial crusade against the EU and then against refugees, they are now putting Islam in the crosshairs: “On that account they are no alternative, but a disgrace to Germany.”
The federal government is unwilling to have any debate about Islam imposed on them by the AfD. A government spokesman stated that the Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) has said several times: “it is clear that Islam beyond question now belongs to Germany.” The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion and the unimpeded practice of religion. “That applies,” he added.
At their party convention, which is to take place in two weeks in Stuttgart, the AfD will decide their first party programme. The objective is to ban symbols of Islam from the public space. The draft programme of the party’s National Association, which has already been available for several weeks [German version only], contains the demand for a ban on minarets, muezzins and full-body coverings (p. 35). There is no intention to forbid the building and operation of mosques or to prohibit circumcisions, said von Storch.
The link to the Frankfurter Allgemeine leads to an article published yesterday:
Von Storch: “Islam is not Compatible with the Constitution”
In their first party programme, the AfD intends to lay down a clear anti-Islam policy. Koran schools and mosques are to be more strictly controlled. It is likewise desirable to forbid minarets entirely.
Original German language source: Frankfurter Allgemeine (F.A.S)
17 April, 2016
The Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) intends to place the anti-Islam policy at the centre of their objectives. What is more, Islam as religion is described as incompatible with the liberal Constitution. “Islam is inherently a political ideology, which is not compatible with the Constitution, the deputy party chairman and representative in the European Parliament, Beatrix Storch, told the F.A.S.
Alexander Gauland, party whip for the AfD in Brandenburg and as well deputy party leader, made similar comments: Islam is not a religion in the same way as Catholic or Protestant Christianity, but is intellectually always connected with the takeover of the state. For that reason the Islamisation of Germany is dangerous,” Gauland told the F.A.S.
[…]
“In Reality There is no Euro-Islam”
Gauland rejected the idea, that along side the fundamental orientation of Islam there is an enlightened Islam compatible with the liberal-democratic constitutional order. We are a Christian-laicist country; Islam is a foreign body. “In reality there is no Euro-Islam,” said the deputy AfD chairman. Von Storch also said that Islam will not be able to find any home in Germany. “Many Muslims belong to Germany, but Islam does not belong to Germany.”
The AfD is committed to monitor Koran schools and mosques more strictly; and if necessary they will be closed: “It is important to stop the proliferation of privately financed Islamic religious instructors and Koran schools. “There must be regulation of those who finance these places and teach in them,” said Gauland. According to him, that applies especially to mosques where Imams from Saudi Arabia preach and receive Saudi funding. “Only when these connections are disclosed, can the connections to the supporters of a strict religious practice in Saudi Arabia be cut, Gauland told the F.A.S.
Hat tip: Hans-Peter Raddatz.
Good for AfD. They are cutting off political correctness, and openly stating that Islam is a threat to Western representative governments. There are no Islamic teachings, except for perhaps the Amadiyya, which are compatible with Western political philosophy. The compatibility is simply not there.
This means that an individual Muslim can only identify with a western government by eschewing his religion, which is a capital offence in sharia law.
Given these facts, it seems suicidal to not make every effort for countries to discourage Muslim immigration and to not keep a close eye on the Muslims already there.
Hi Ronald
More on the AfD and the upcoming manifesto, also, actual mpoints that will be in the manifesto, as reported by Pi (Politically Incorrect) and Tichy, plus others.
Further down there’s something about Kohl and – Victor Orban! Kohl got his revenge on Merkel.
Go to: https://gatesofvienna.net/2016/04/thilo-sarrazin-what-price-is-europe-paying-for-the-refugee-agreement/
It’s the 4th one down of the posts, last one actually.
It is only a small step, a line in the sand, a minor push back, but at least a beginning.
Still it is important to do what is possible, even if it is a small slice. I fear it is very urgent to get this in place.
It will also mean that some of the genuine refugees may become ex-muslims, to escape the cult, as long as they remain firm.
Under that small umbrella, free speech must be regained and protected. It must be used so that the koran, hadiths, sira and sunnah can be fully and openly discussed, debated and to what it means in the life of a muslim, in Germany. That is to learn all about the dualistic “double think” in islam that acts as cover.
Then again just as important are the truths of “Critical Thinking” where that seems to be corrupted by “Critical Theory” that leads to “Politically Correct” and “Multiculturalism” and understanding of “New Ageism”, that will sink Western Civilization itself.
The sweet tasting poison that Couldenhove Kalergi has insidiously been used by “universal-ism” spread through the politics, education and media gaining much power and influence, as now a movement that has infected and so numbed many of the general public.
We must be strong, in our culture, to be a beacon, so that is ok to become an ex muslim, and they can be assured that Western Culture is strong enough to protect them.
The option is up to muslims, whether to honestly join, forsake islam, or leave and go to one of the 57 genuine islamic states.
Unfortunately knowing history, such as Spain’s “reconquista” of 700+ years, it will not be fast or easy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconquista
A definition of the problem and differences, though far from perfect was Chronica Prophetica (883–884)
Though the efforts were up and down, the lesson that there was not be any acceptance of Spanish-islamism eventually cemented in.
Identify the problem, and some of the reasons.
“ A landmark was set by the Christian Chronica Prophetica (883–884), [160 years after the first invasion], a document stressing the Christian and Muslim cultural and religious divide in Iberia and the necessity to drive the Muslims out.” from above comment, wiki, reconqista
A full translation of “Chronica Prophetica” .
http://pages.pomona.edu/~kbw14747/prophchr.htm
Where one can go easily to the heading of “HISTORY OF MUHAMMAD”, (a long paragraph) where there is a summation of just some of the deeds of Muhammad.
It is the calling out of very much of what Muhammad is about, to name the difference, and in those days it was naturally from an old style Christian perspective.
The problem was named, and despite hitches, politics, it was 600 years, before the job was completed, but always with the knowledge and saying exactly that islam was compatible with Christianity.
In today’s terms there is no getting around that islam, being in considerable part an ideology, is not compatible with democracy!
The other major part of our problem is also how to expose the “double think” in our institutions, and through out the general public. though calling out Mohammad is exposing both “double thinks”
2nd of last paragraph
compatible* should be = incompatible
Unfortunately, this discussion is too information-free. Neither of these articles cites any quotation from Islamic scripture supporting the claim that Islam is not compatible with the constitution (Grundgesetz).
By the way, the Frakturschrift on the standards held by the marchers in the photograph is too stylized to read. It does not look very much like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_be_upon_him_%28Islam%29
It’s from the same circular-motif shahada that I scavenged to make this with:
https://gatesofvienna.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/islamintern.gif
Mark, could you perhaps please provide us with some detail to the fill the gaps that you say are missing in this report?
Mark Spahn said: “Unfortunately, this discussion is too information-free. Neither of these articles cites any quotation from Islamic scripture supporting the claim that Islam is not compatible with the constitution (Grundgesetz).”
They can’t proclaim that straight out. However, with what is already destined for the manifest it will have to got to constitutional court (Bundes Verfassungs Gericht). Essentially, should they (*HOPEFULLY*) win the election 2017, they can’t just outlaw Islam. But with those points enough issues will be raised to take it to the court, that is the aim of these – politics. More than often you can’t just whack the enemy dead on. Not in a a democracy that is, fortunately. That’s why democracies have such save guards.
I listed the points that will be in the manifesto at: Go to: https://gatesofvienna.net/2016/04/thilo-sarrazin-what-price-is-europe-paying-for-the-refugee-agreement/ (the fourth post/reply down)
Also, there’s something about Kohl and Merkel, and Victor Orban, very enjoyable. Sources were PI (Politically Incorrect), Junge Freiheit, Tichy and others.
I hope you like it…
“unimpeded practice of religion”
Honour killing?
FGM?
Sexism?
Jihad?
cannibalism?
murder of apostates?
forced marriage?
forced conversion?
nice? 🙁
“Cannibalism”, MC? I’m sure you wouldn’t make such an allegation without evidence, but may we see it please?
MC may have more examples, but I know of at least one from the past couple of years, when an ISIS mujahid ate the heart (I think it was) of someone he killed. There’s a video of it, and it was fairly widely reported at the time, at least in the “Islamophobic” press.
Thanks, I’d forgotten that one, strange as this seems to me. Senility approaches…
At a feast a woman, enemy of Mohammed, had one of his followers murdered by a spear thrower, I forgot the name. She then ate his heart, that’s were that comes from.
It’s actually shown in that Muslim propaganda movie: “The Message”. I think you can download it at you tube. I saw it listed there a while ago.
“It is clear that Islam beyond question now belongs to Germany.”
What she really means is: “It is clear that Gerrmany beyond question now belongs to Islam.”
“it is clear that Islam beyond question now belongs to Germany.”
I am afraid that Frau Merkel has it the wrong way round or umgekehrt as they say in German.
Hitler liked Islam, Winston Churchill did not. It is amazing how many people get the two mixed up.
If it helps
Islam hates Jews
Hitler hated Jews
Hitler liked Islam.
Churchill hated Hitler.
Hitler liked Islam.
Churchill hated Islam.
Churchill called Mein Kempf the Koran for our times.
“It goes without saying that there is an Islam which is in line with the Constitution and this is practised by far in excess of 90 percent of the Muslims who live here.”
A few weeks back there were 99.99976% of those compatible ones. In a leftist’s way of thinking, mathematics only applies to adding and subtracting currency, all the rest can be guessed.
I, too, took notice of references to Hitler and Nazi’s with recent reports regarding AfD or one of the National Defense Leagues.
Yahoo 4/18: German right-wing AfD party under fire over anti-Islam comments
4/18 UKDailyMail: Revealed: The two Scottish neo-Nazi sisters at forefront of anti-Muslim race-hate campaign
Irony here…opposition recognizes dangerous evil when European nationalists seek secure borders, social cohesion based on centuries of cultural development yet are blinded when the Saudis or Japanese remain unquestioned about their nationalist interests as they each insist on maintaining their individual nation’s social/religious cohesion.
Anonymous said:” ….when the Saudis or Japanese remain unquestioned about their nationalist interests as they each insist on maintaining their individual nation’s social/religious cohesion.”
What do you expect? Neither Saudis nor Japanese are Germans.
Sooner or later the Muslims will realize how to win without effort: Proclaim that they want to protect the west from the Germans and that they hate Germans.
They will be given full power and authority to govern in every western nation. To the full approval even of every anti-jahadi website.
Aha, so it’s the political slogan
“Es gibt keinen Führer außer Allah, und Muhammad is sein Propagandaminister.”
Correction: “is” should be “ist”.
I hate when that happens; like writing “underdrücken” for “unterdrücken”.
There has been a relevant interview tonight on public TV, aired at half past midnight. I believe it is the first time some of these things have been said on TV.
I did a translation for you below, and provide the original link at the end. Please excuse any weird English, or typing mistakes, I tried to do this quickly.
On a personal note, I don’t think it is correct to describe Mrs. Abdel-Samad as a Muslim, as the anchorwoman did, I would think he is rather an ex Muslim.
April 19 2016; 0:38 AM
ARD Nachtmagazin
GB: Gabi Bauer, anchorwoman, public TV
HAS: Hamed Abdel-Samad, well known author, Egypt-born, naturalised German. Lives under constant police protection due to death threats and a death Fatwa against him since describing Islam as “fascist”.
Video: Hamed Abdel-Samad, publiciser, on the Anti-Islam-Debate of the AfD
April 19 2016; 0:38 AM
ARD
GB: Now I am connected with a well known critic of Islam, he is a German-Arab Muslim, working here as a publiciser. Hamed Abdel-Samad, good evening.
HAS: Good evening Hamburg, hello.
GB: Say, how does this debate come across here, in the Muslim population?
HAS: Everything seems emotional, has consequences. I don’t know why one needs this debate. Why would one need Islam to legitimise democracy, or the other way round?
I don’t get it.
When someone says, Islam and democracy are not compatible – that is actually, fundamentally not wrong.
Islam has got many issues with democracy. But one should differentiate between Islam as a religion, as a political ideology and –
GB: [Interrupting him] On this point, stop, excuse me! I must dwell on this point. You have just said, essentially, what, essentially the AfD has said. So – you confirm that?
HAS: Yes. Where is the Problem? If the AfD said, the sun is shining today, I would not object. That is the problem of the parties of the center. Everything the AfD says, they are compelled to deny. That is unneccesary. You have to free yourself from this constraint. You have to get this debate, this Islam-critical debate, into the middle of society. Then we won’t have this problem.
GB: Good. So, to summarise, you confirm what Mrs. von Storch has said: “Islam is rather a political ideology than a religion”?
HAS: Islam is both. Islam is a religion, a political force, and also a political ideology, a legal order, a social order, and exactly those parts of Islam are problematic, and cannot become parts of Germany.
GB: Hm-hm. So, again, the question: how does this debate come across to the Muslim population?
HAS: As the Muslims themselves do not discuss this debate, as one constantly tries to defend Islam, hypocritically tries to foreground the compatibility of Islam and democracy, therefore others pick up the debate. And discuss it in a politically and emotionally charged way which does not help much. The middle of society, the politics, the Muslim society themselves, have to admit that Islam as a political ideology, as a legal order, is not compatible with democracy. And that they have to break away from many aspects of the authentic Islam, to be at home in Europe.
GB: Mhm. You have been invited a few times by the AfD. Went there, as a speaker. And were received awesome. Erm. Do you feel a certain – closeness? Or is this in your opinion the perfect debating culture?
HAS: This is the perfect culture of debate. I am not a voter of AfD. And I would not vote for them. Actually, formerly, I used to vote for the SPD [Social Democratic Party of Germany].
But I am not susceptible to blackmail, as many German publicisers are. I am talking to everyone. And it is not true that I was received awesome by the AfD. In one instance AfD members were angry at my thesis’s, as I differentiate between Islam as a religion and Muslims as persons, who are more multifaceted and complex than the ideology. You have to differentiate between both. But Islamic organisations don’t do that, and politicians don’t do that. And a few racists in this country don’t. All three are in my opinion problems for Integration. One has to differentiate between the religion and the followers of that religion, you can respect people, but you don’t have to respect everything they believe in, and accept the whole package.
GB: Interesting remarks by you. I cordially thank for the conversation, Hamed Abdel-Samad.
https://www.tagesschau.de/multimedia/video/video-175931.html
PS – Apologies, it should of course be:
“I don’t think it is correct to describe **Mr.** Abdel-Samad as a Muslim”
I’m not sure if it needs pointing out, but the Islamic Organisations that he is referring to is Mr. Mazyek’s organisation.
The tendency to call ex-muslims ‘muslims’ as if Islam is an unchangeable part of identity feeds into the meshing of opposition to Islam (a belief system) with racism.
Mayzek accuses Germany of being anti-semitic. He had better take the log out of his eye instead of trying to remove the splinter from Germany’s eye. His Muslim people hate the Jews with a vengeance. They are the ones attacking the synagogues. They are the ones who slaughtered hundreds in the Jewish owned nightclub in Paris. But we know how good Islam is at playing the victim. They are the problem but play the victim so western civilization will not attack them.
John in Cheshire writes, “Mark, could you perhaps please provide us with some detail to the fill the gaps that you say are missing in this report?” (My complaint is that Islam was called non-compliant with the German constitution, without citing evidence from Islamic scripture.)
Well, just off the top of my head, compare Quran 98:6 (“Infidels bad”) with Q3:110 (“Muslims good”); this is the model for the later primitive feminist doctrine “men bad, women good”, and is anti-multicultural. Q8:60 “Terrify the enemies of Allah.” Q8:12 “Lop off the infidels’ necks, fingertips, and toes” (extreme barbering, manicure, and pedicure). Lots more passages of this type can be found at, for example,
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx
Hi folks, a bit off topic, but here’s some good news.
Brief recap, the AfD is a new German party, founded only 3 years ago, and by now in between 2nd and 4th place… Frau Frauke Petry, leader of the party, has already stated that the federal border police and the regular police at the borders should use and employ the constitutional right, and duty, to repel anyone who wants to cross the border illegally or without sufficient reason, by use of firearms – after a warning of course.
The new party manifesto will be issued in two weeks. However, they have already released some of what will be in there, namely, and enjoy!:
1) An end to the defamation of critics of Islam as Islamophobes, Racists etc. That will become illegal.
2) Prohibition for unconstitutional organizations to build and / or to operate mosques
3) Prohibition of the financing of mosques by Islamic states or foreign financiers
4) Any imams will have to educated in German universities and in German (not Arabic or any other language)
5) Prohibition of minarets and muezzin prayer calls
6) Denial of the status of a “public rights body/institution” (my best possible translation of the actual German, I think you can guess the meaning) of all Islamic organizations.
7) Prohibition of Burqas in public
8) Prohibition of any type of headscarf for teachers and pupils / students
You can guess, the enemedia (what Pamela Geller calls them) exploded, NSDAP comparisons, the usual bull… However, there’s a highly – if not extremely – significant exception, the ‘Bild Zeitung’, probably Europe’s largest tabloid, the (financial) flagship of the Springer Verlag, Europe’s equivalent to Murdoch.
They seem to have recently began to disengage from the “hurrah for refugees” theatre clap trap. Perhaps the magnates are sensitive to were, and on what, we spend our money, just a thought. Be that as it may, the Bild Zeitung articled that it is unwise for the major parties to condemn, and to badmouth the AfD. Instead, they should be engaged in dialogue, and then proven to be wrong. They stated further that a large part of the views of populace should not be ignored, or ridden rough-shot over by the mainstream parties. Which is a tell tale, coming from such a paper. Consider this, and smile, the AfD is polled with 15% currently, but many of those questioned don’t want to be slandered as Islamophobes, Nazis etc. Before the German Super-Sunday the AfD polled a mere 7-9% at best. However, it averaged ~20%, and in Saxony it put the CDU in the second or third place. To put that into context, until about 10 or 15 years ago the CDU and the SPD pulled between them something like 80-90%. Merkel has practically taken the CDU from the right center / conservative to the left of the SPD, which is now more left than ever. They current poll is ~38-39% for the CDU, whilst the SDP is down to it’s lowest in modern German history, 19%… And, as said, AfD 15%, after existing for only 3 years. Take heart Trump supporters, you are on the right track.
People, it gets better.
Many, or at least some of you, will remember Helmut Kohl, chancellor of reunification, chummy with Ronny Reagan. It was stipulated or understood that NATO stays where it is, and even the Bundeswehr would not move into the former east Germany. Fat chance, Kohl had the Bundeswehr in east Germany within weeks, and thus NATO. And continued to press for and prepare NATO’s eastern expansion. Even his friend Reagan was rather sceptical if that could be pulled off. In essence, Kohl is the grand old man of European politics, if not western politics, I think he’s the oldest of the survivors. He’s now 86 and wheelchair bound, and everyday counts…
Right, scene is set. Despite his frailness and long term absence from politics he invited an active, serving politician, whom he never met and who is many years his junior, for a personal visit, and a full hour at that! And a head of state on top of that – who duly came and attended. Practically an audience, guess whom: Victor Orban! One hour. The press was out in force, but preselected by Kohl’s guards. Victor Orban presented flowers and they talked. There was a joined statement and two personal comments. The statement was that Mrs. Merkel runs Germany and her politics are good – so said Victor Orban, and Kohl. Diplomatically.
Victor Orban said as a personal comment that a gentleman, or dean, like Mr. Kohl should not be pressed into current politics, and instead should be able to enjoy his peace and remaining time.
Helmut Kohl said as a personal comment that it was wrong to let such a vast, uncontrollable number of refugees into Europe, and Germany. He said further that it is right for Europe to help in such a humanitarian catastrophe to the utmost of its abilities – in their home or safe countries. Which can provide them with a compatible environment. And then added that Victor Orban ran his country wisely. (I translated as much as I transliterated).
Voctor Orban left beaming, like a kid who received his most desired present at an early Christmas.
Personally, I think Merkel is drooling venom and looking for a voodoo priest. And perhaps resents the day she stabbed Kohl, her former mentor, in the back. Ah, sweet justice, how does it go? Revenge tastes best when enjoyed cold. Revenge? How about, vendetta?!
I trust you liked, and enjoyed, the off topic news…
Regards all, DFD
(And forgive me for a bit of cross posting 🙂 )
A bit off topic, but here’s some good news.
Brief recap, the AfD is a new German party, founded only 3 years ago, and by now in between 2nd and 4th place… Frau Frauke Petry, leader of the party, has already stated that the federal border police and the regular police at the borders should use and employ the constitutional right, and duty, to repel anyone who wants to cross the border illegally or without sufficient reason, by use of firearms – after a warning of course.
The new party manifesto will be issued in two weeks. However, they have already released some of what will be in there, namely, and enjoy!:
1) An end to the defamation of critics of Islam as Islamophobes, Racists etc. That will become illegal.
2) Prohibition for unconstitutional organizations to build and / or to operate mosques
3) Prohibition of the financing of mosques by Islamic states or foreign financiers
4) Any imams will have to educated in German universities and in German (not Arabic or any other language)
5) Prohibition of minarets and muezzin prayer calls
6) Denial of the status of a “public rights body/institution” (my best possible translation of the actual German, I think you can guess the meaning) of all Islamic organizations.
7) Prohibition of Burqas in public
8) Prohibition of any type of headscarf for teachers and pupils / students
You can guess, the enemedia (what Pamela Geller calls them) exploded, NSDAP comparisons, the usual bull… However, there’s a highly – if not extremely – significant exception, the ‘Bild Zeitung’, probably Europe’s largest tabloid, the (financial) flagship of the Springer Verlag, Europe’s equivalent to Murdoch.
They seem to have recently began to disengage from the “hurrah for refugees” theatre clap trap. Perhaps the magnates are sensitive to were, and on what, we spend our money, just a thought. Be that as it may, the Bild Zeitung articled that it is unwise for the major parties to condemn, and to badmouth the AfD. Instead, they should be engaged in dialogue, and then proven to be wrong. They stated further that a large part of the views of populace should not be ignored, or ridden rough-shot over by the mainstream parties. Which is a tell tale, coming from such a paper. Consider this, and smile, the AfD is polled with 15% currently, but many of those questioned don’t want to be slandered as Islamophobes, Nazis etc. Before the German Super-Sunday the AfD polled a mere 7-9% at best. However, it averaged ~20%, and in Saxony it put the CDU in the second or third place. To put that into context, until about 10 or 15 years ago the CDU and the SPD pulled between them something like 80-90%. Merkel has practically taken the CDU from the right center / conservative to the left of the SPD, which is now more left than ever. They current poll is ~38-39% for the CDU, whilst the SDP is down to it’s lowest in modern German history, 19%… And, as said, AfD 15%, after existing for only 3 years. Take heart Trump supporters, you are on the right track.
People, it gets better.
Many, or at least some of you, will remember Helmut Kohl, chancellor of reunification, chummy with Ronny Reagan. It was stipulated or understood that NATO stays where it is, and even the Bundeswehr would not move into the former east Germany. Fat chance, Kohl had the Bundeswehr in east Germany within weeks, and thus NATO. And continued to press for and prepare NATO’s eastern expansion. Even his friend Reagan was rather sceptical if that could be pulled off. In essence, Kohl is the grand old man of European politics, if not western politics, I think he’s the oldest of the survivors. He’s now 86 and wheelchair bound, and everyday counts…
Right, scene is set. Despite his frailness and long term absence from politics he invited an active, serving politician, whom he never met and who is many years his junior, for a personal visit, and a full hour at that! And a head of state on top of that – who duly came and attended. Practically an audience, guess whom: Victor Orban! One hour. The press was out in force, but preselected by Kohl’s guards. Victor Orban presented flowers and they talked. There was a joined statement and two personal comments. The statement was that Mrs. Merkel runs Germany and her politics are good – so said Victor Orban, and Kohl. Diplomatically.
Victor Orban said as a personal comment that a gentleman, or dean, like Mr. Kohl should not be pressed into current politics, and instead should be able to enjoy his peace and remaining time.
Helmut Kohl said as a personal comment that it was wrong to let such a vast, uncontrollable number of refugees into Europe, and Germany. He said further that it is right for Europe to help in such a humanitarian catastrophe to the utmost of its abilities – in their home or safe countries. Which can provide them with a compatible environment. And then added that Victor Orban ran his country wisely. (I translated as much as I transliterated).
Voctor Orban left beaming, like a kid who received his most desired present at an early Christmas.
Personally, I think Merkel is drooling venom and looking for a voodoo priest. And perhaps resents the day she stabbed Kohl, her former mentor, in the back. Ah, sweet justice, how does it go? Revenge tastes best when enjoyed cold. Revenge? How about, vendetta?!
I trust you liked, and enjoyed, the off topic news…
Regards all, DFD
(And forgive me for a bit of cross posting 🙂 )