Germans... is the "far right" really a threat?

[Neomega]

Germany alarmed by far-right gain in eastern states


BERLIN, Sept 12 (Reuters) - German political leaders on both the left and right said on Sunday they were alarmed at the rising popularity of far-right parties ahead of regional elections in two eastern states next week.

Opinion polls show the far-right NPD could win 9 percent in relatively prosperous Saxony and the rival DVU could take 6 percent in Brandenburg, another eastern former communist state, triggering fears of an international backlash against Germany.

Leaders from Social Democrat Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder to Saxony's Christian Democrat state premier Georg Milbradt said the strong gains for the far right would give Germany a black eye, scare away foreign investors and frighten off tourists.

In Saxony, the lone bright spot in otherwise depressed eastern Germany booming thanks to foreign investors, the National Democratic Party might even surpass Schroeder's SPD, which is projected to get just 11 percent on September 19.

"Everything connecting us to the brown (Nazi) cesspool damages us, damages Germany, and damages our standing with international investors," Schroeder told RBB radio on Sunday. "I hope voters won't give right-wing extremists a chance."

Riding a wave of protest against Schroeder's reform policies that aim to trim unemployment benefits and scale back Germany's generous welfare safety net, the NPD came from nowhere in the western state of Saarland last Sunday to win four percent.

That even fast-growing Saxony, which has attracted investors ranging from U.S. semiconductor maker Advanced Micro Devices Inc. to carmakers BMW AG and Porsche AG , would be vulnerable to the rise of far-right voters has stunned local leaders.

"That will frighten away investors and tourists," Milbradt was quoted on Sunday in the Stuttgarter Zeitung newspaper. "With the NPD in the state assembly I won't have to bother even making trips to the United States to look for investors for Saxony."

JOBS UNDER THREAT

Saxony's Economy Minister Martin Gillo said the NPD's entry into the state assembly would cost jobs.

"The rightists aren't going to create a single job in Saxony but rather will endanger existing jobs," Gillo told Der Spiegel news magazine. "Those thinking about voting for the far right to hit their leaders should know they might be hurting themselves."

Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, a leader in the Greens, said success for the far right would tarnish Germany's standing.

"All the fears (abroad) about the safety of people with different skin colour (in Germany), those who speak different languages or those with other religions will return," he said.

Most of Germany's population of 82 million was born after 1945, but the Nazi regime still haunts post-war Germans.

A film out next week about Hitler's final 12 days, the first time German filmmakers have attempted a drama about the Nazi leader, has received unprecedented media attention, with critics challenging its treatment of the "monster" as a human being.

I ask this, because it seems to be a piece of slanted journalism.... or is the "far right" really in danger of taking over Germany?

 

[The Last Conformist]

Hardly any immediate danger of such takever, but the political mainstream in Germany is, understandably, very concerned with any hint of far-rightism on the rise.


I always find it odd when people speak of "monster" and "human being" as if they were mutually exclusive ...

 

[Neomega]

Hardly any immediate danger of such takever, but the political mainstream in Germany is, understandably, very concerned with any hint of far-rightism on the rise.


I always find it odd when people speak of "monster" and "human being" as if they were mutually exclusive ...

Actually, I am more curious as to whether this threat is actually hard-right, or is it just being portrayed as so by it's opponents who are afraid of losing power.

Also, is it right American right? Like less taxes, chrstian conservatism, or is it European right, like more taxes and state control of economy?

 

[The Last Conformist]

I'm not up-to-date on these particular blokes, but probably they're populist and xenophobic.

Where did you get the idea that European rightists are in favour of higher taxes and state control of the economy? They may be more fond of such than the American right (well, that's not exactly hard), but seen in the political landscape they act, they're usually the free-market guys. The so-called "far right" is often economically left of the "moderate", mainstream, rightists.

 

[Neomega]

I'm not up-to-date on these particular blokes, but probably they're populist and xenophobic.

Where did you get the idea that European rightists are in favour of higher taxes and state control of the economy? They may be more fond of such than the American right (well, that's not exactly hard), but seen in the political landscape they act, they're usually the free-market guys. The so-called "far right" is often economically left of the "moderate", mainstream, rightists.

The Wall Street Journal is where I got the idea that many times the right in Europe actually wants more government control of the economy, and the left is more for liberalizing the economy, and creating more private control.

 

[Grisu]

The Wall Street Journal is where I got the idea that many times the right in Europe actually wants more government control of the economy, and the left is more for liberalizing the economy, and creating more private control.

couldn't this be due to the different meaning of the word "liberal" in europe and the us? In europe someone who is liberal (especially neoliberal) are people who want minimal government controll on the economy, they are usually slightly right of the middle. in the US I get the idea that liberal refers to a leftwinger.

 

[Mario Feldberg]

The so-called "far-right" in Germany has almost nothing in common with US style right-wingers. Our right-wing extremists are racist xenophobic pagan socialists. Wallstreet capitalism (aka Jewish World Order) is their archenemy.
However they are not a threat. Even if the NPD would get 9% (I don't believe this for a second) it wouldn't matter at all. Rather look at France: the neo-fascists were the second strongest force during the last election there. Should the NPD ever manage to accomplish that in Germany I would leave the country the same day (the NPD is a direct offspring of Hitler's NSDAP).
Of course we have nazi problems: I remember some global cooperate overlords complaining that they couldn't fully use their multi-billion dollar labs built in East Germany because their (colored) international experts (who were supposed to work there) refused to-do so after being assaulted by racist thugs in the street multiple times.
However the problem is massively overrated IMO. In their best times (1990-2000) the neo-nazis only murdered about 100 people. Immigrant gangsters kill more people every year. Surely some of the worst areas of East Germany are total no-go areas for colored people, punks, ******s, leftists etc. but nobody wants to visit these miserable places anyway.
Moderator Action: Trolling, language - warned
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Provolution]

I agree, the real scourge of Europe is immigrant gangsters taking advantage of a less than capable police force and legal system as well as welfare benefits.
Stopping immigration from a select countries is a larger priority than kicking some confused nazi kids around. The average education of the neo-nazis is so inferior, compared to the terrorist cells of Al Queda. The leader of 911 had a degree in urban planning and an aviation certificate, and compare this to the largest nazi atrocity since 1945? Rote Arme Fraktion is another group and so on. It is pretty easy to kick these neonazis around, we even got a socialist punker movement, private security as well as vigilante organizations and secret police to supplement feeble regular police efforts.

 

[Neomega]

Thanks Mario, that was more of the explanation I was looking for.

Why do you suppose this article was written. I believe it is for an American investor audience. I can't figure why the alarmism?

 

[Provolution]

Alarmism

Easy

Jewish investors or PRo-Jewish investors investing in order to create jobs, otherwise they
will see more nazism in the region OR this is a really good bargain as the market underestimates the value due to these problems.

 

[Neomega]

I agree, the real scourge of Europe is immigrant gangsters taking advantage of a less than capable police force and legal system as well as welfare benefits.
Stopping immigration from a select countries is a larger priority than kicking some confused nazi kids around. The average education of the neo-nazis is so inferior, compared to the terrorist cells of Al Queda. The leader of 911 had a degree in urban planning and an aviation certificate, and compare this to the largest nazi atrocity since 1945? Rote Arme Fraktion is another group and so on. It is pretty easy to kick these neonazis around, we even got a socialist punker movement, private security as well as vigilante organizations and secret police to supplement feeble regular police efforts.

It appears both of you think immigrant gangsters are a problem. Does this mean you support a part of the German hard-right agenda?

Also, the hard right the article is referring to, do you two consider them to be actual extremists, or just getting tagged as such?

BTW I am asking out of curiosity only, as this article came up for a particular chip company I have stock in that has some powerful plants in Dresden. (note my avatar ) The article seemed to have the syntax of alarmist partisanship, but was directed at American investors, and not German voters.

 

[Marla_Singer]

There are twice more voters for the Far-Right in France than in Germany. And Le Pen has simply no chance to get elected in anything one day. So no, that means strictly nothing, there's no threat at all.

 

[Provolution]

There seems to be more gangsters coming from Russia, yugoslavia, Albania, Iraq and Somalia according to EEA crime statistics. I am more for immigration from India, East Asia, Subsaharan Africa (the non-Islamic part) and Latin America. I am not hard right, but I am for limiting immigration from countries supplying us with a larger burden than the social welfare system can handle. I am biassed on country cultures yes, but not racist and not isolationist, I am just for picking on the upper shelf like the US does.

Look at Japan and Saudi Arabia, do they invite immigrants. EEA can not be mankinds conscience in upholding naive immigration policies for the matter of principle.

I would especially pinpoint Albanians, Iraqis and Somalians as the "worst" immigrants, where we have no real problems with Pakistanis, Turks, Ghanese and Vietnamese on the other hand. I am just referring to crime statistics. It is our, not some American liberals choice of we want to live with this problem or not.

the hard right is against ALL immigration, I just deselect unwanted people.

 

[Neomega]

There seems to be more gangsters coming from Russia, yugoslavia, Albania, Iraq and Somalia according to EEA crime statistics. I am more for immigration from India, East Asia, Subsaharan Africa (the non-Islamic part) and Latin America. I am not hard right, but I am for limiting immigration from countries supplying us with a larger burden than the social welfare system can handle. I am biassed on country cultures yes, but not racist and not isolationist, I am just for picking on the upper shelf like the US does.

Look at Japan and Saudi Arabia, do they invite immigrants. EEA can not be mankinds conscience in upholding naive immigration policies for the matter of principle.

I would especially pinpoint Albanians, Iraqis and Somalians as the "worst" immigrants, where we have no real problems with Pakistanis, Turks, Ghanese and Vietnamese on the other hand. I am just referring to crime statistics. It is our, not some American liberals choice of we want to live with this problem or not.

the hard right is against ALL immigration, I just deselect unwanted people.

I see. How "Hot" would you say the immigration issue is? Is there more pressing issues, or is it looking like it may be the issue?

 

[Mario Feldberg]

@Provolution
The Rote Arme Fraktion (RAF, Red Army Faction) wasn't a nazi group. They were communist terrorists and they no longer exist.

@Neomega
Well as I said (I mean the lab example) racism is a factor you've to consider if you want to invest in certain parts of Germany. So this article has a rational base.

The parties mentioned in the article are totally insane extremists, not better than Al Qaeda.

I want the government to stop all kinds of "bottom-up" immigration (I mean poor, uneducated people coming to Germany). I'm not against immigration of high-skilled labour so I don't support the far-right agenda at all. They want to keep other ethnic groups out. I just want to keep the scum out (skin color doesn't matter).

 

[Provolution]

Neomega

Nothing can be hotter than the balancing act of UN human rights conventions only EEA follows and the demographic composition herein cultural, justice, economy, national security as well as reproduction ratios balanced to pension schemes, taxation of middle class singles to subsidize massive large migrant families from the third world and so on.
Smaller nations cannot handle the demographic impact as well as the US does, English is an excellent language for assimilation and integration. Again, France and Germany, as well as UK can handle larger minorities without jeopardizing national integrity.

Yet, immigrant crime is reshaping Scandinavia and Benelux, and to some extent larger European nations, which has lead policeforces to upgrade from pistols to assault rifles, Americanizing the Justice System to become more fierce and harsh.

Third worlders with respect for chauvinism and violence above all (their cultural training) despice and misunderstand the humanity and civic nature of European police forces and exploit that. Scandinavia is turning out to look like Switzerland, which is a model I prefer to Yugoslava. Human trafficking is another problem as well, a migration industry where migration is a money machine for unscrupulous groups.

Some of us are sick and tired of paying the tab on others extragavanza.

 

[Neomega]

Neomega

Nothing can be hotter than the balancing act of UN human rights conventions only EEA follows and the demographic composition herein cultural, justice, economy, national security as well as reproduction ratios balanced to pension schemes, taxation of middle class singles to subsidize massive large migrant families from the third world and so on.
Smaller nations cannot handle the demographic impact as well as the US does, English is an excellent language for assimilation and integration. Again, France and Germany, as well as UK can handle larger minorities without jeopardizing national integrity.

Yet, immigrant crime is reshaping Scandinavia and Benelux, and to some extent larger European nations, which has lead policeforces to upgrade from pistols to assault rifles, Americanizing the Justice System to become more fierce and harsh.

Third worlders with respect for chauvinism and violence above all (their cultural training) despice and misunderstand the humanity and civic nature of European police forces and exploit that. Scandinavia is turning out to look like Switzerland, which is a model I prefer to Yugoslava. Human trafficking is another problem as well, a migration industry where migration is a money machine for unscrupulous groups.

Some of us are sick and tired of paying the tab on others extragavanza.

So you say it is the hottest issue, but the hard right cannot gain any ground from it? Is it because the "ban the scum immigrants only, take the cream immigrants" parties are more palatable to the German public?

Or is it possible this hard right is not as "extreme" as the article portrays. Again, I foud the article confusing, on one hand it is calling these parties extreme, on theother hand it is talking as if they might actually sieze power. How can they be extreme in a democracy, and get power?

So either 1) they are extreme in ideology compared to some more liberal european norms, or 2) they are extreme in a democratic sense, because their following is small.

If it is 1, then they actually may have a chance of gaining ground, right?
If it is 2, the article would be a bunch of non-sense.

I ask because I know that "moderate" positions as your own, have extremist edges, and I consider your view, In my Libertarian ethics, to be pretty extreme. Take no offense please, but do you see what I am saying?

You may not vote hard right, but then again, you do show some sympathy with the hard right, and if you show sympathy, other Germans are bound to show support.

 

[Provolution]

I agree Mario

The film "Scarface" with Al Pacino is a good example to my thoughts.

I want the many Tony Montanas of Albania and Yugoslava to drown at the hands of the Italian Navy in the Adriatic Sea. We do not need their drugs, their heists, their schemes, their prostitutes, their illegally run restaurants or their esoteric foods, not to mention their traditional dances and customs. Mario, I just mentioned the RAF as a case reference, not mixing these with neonazis (yes I know what "Rote" means).

I agree, keep the scum out, and the passport partition is the way to go.

 

[Provolution]

Neomega, it is both, they create instability and friction, but never get enough votes.
However, the destabilizing influence has some impact on teh investment climate, yet, businesswise, it is worth the risk as you know the development.

 

[Hitro]

Also, is it right American right? Like less taxes, chrstian conservatism, or is it European right, like more taxes and state control of economy?

The German political spectrum (like those in most European countries) is usually defined:

Communist - Socialist - Social Democrat - Liberal - Conservative - Fascist/Right Wing Extremist

The focus of the political far right is mostly on social issues, in particular ethnic relations and immigration. The different far right parties have different views on the economy, some like the NPD have semi-Socialist ideas basically aiming at "getting big foreign corporations out", others, like the Republikaner, are more liberal (i.e. Capitalist) when it comes to the economy.
But generally they tend to have not much of a clue about it and mainly use it for populist reasons, thus when the public seems to oppose Capitalist elements of the economy they jump on that just to later do the same when people oppose Socialist elements.


However, most people who vote for those parties do that for protest reasons. As it is highly politically incorrect to do so and as those parties are therefore (officially) shunned upon by the political establishment on all sides people tend to see it as a way to rub it in to the established parties that they are fed up with what they do.

Currently this is mainly about the present federal government's social reforms, which are opposed by quite a big part of the population who then either don't vote or give protest votes.

According to all studies about it the potential of truly convinced voters of those parties is even less than the five percent needed to enter a parliament.

Still it is undeniably so that many people have lost almost all trust in the established parties, leading first and foremost to extremely low voter turnouts, and only secondly to protest votes.