Comments by "soundscape26" (@soundscape26) on "German lawmakers want to ban the far-right AfD party | DW News" video.

  1. They can if the party is found to be against the constitutional principles of the country. This is not even new, Germany has banned parties before.
    36
  2. They've been under constitutional surveillance for a while now
    23
  3.  @f.e.5691  90% of people commenting here didn't watch a single second of the video
    21
  4. What economic measures does the AfD support that will lead Germany to that prosperity?
    8
  5. Well, if they had banned a certain party 100 years ago certain tragic events wouldn't have happened.
    7
  6. Why not?
    7
  7.  @inupisjg  The Constitution is the basic law of a country, how can you even have a functional country without a set of basic rules?
    5
  8.  @azizsakr5565  Then it's a case of the tyranny of the majority. So if the majority of the population decides we should put a specific group of people in cages hey... it's the just the majority bro? That's why countries have Constitutions that are obviously hard to change and often require supermajorities.
    4
  9. What if a party is anti-democratic?
    4
  10.  @inupisjg  Yes of course but you can make amends to constitutions for which you usually need supermajorities I.e. the broadest consensus possible.
    3
  11.  @NicolasHaufe  They did a bad job keeping it banned
    3
  12. I'm sure you don't come of place that allows you to give any lessons on how Europe conducts its democracy
    3
  13.  @azizsakr5565  Taking my chance here... Germany ranks 12th in the world's democracy index and is categorized as a full democracy. Incidentally that category is populated mostly by European countries.
    3
  14.  @Okiejayjay  I think the vast majority of people appreciate having a stable constitution... constant political instability doesn't bring prosperity
    2
  15. If the party goes against the basic law of the country... it's not a "don't like it" thing.
    2
  16.  @Lav-v9c  It matters in a sense that I'm curious that's all
    2
  17.  @safeprisonoffice6259  Related to what? What if people democratically decide you belong to an undesirable group and should be shunned from society?
    2
  18.  @BonsaiBlacksmith  But some of its members have said quite the questionable things... so we should dissociate them from the party?
    2
  19. What free speech? Germany has laws against hate speech for very good reasons.
    2
  20.  @ExactlyNotGoodGuy  Yeah, that's a no from me and from most people.
    2
  21. More radicalised? Then it's banned even faster.
    1
  22.  @PeterJohnson87  Also, the Constitution is fairly neutral, it allows for both right wing and left wing parties to govern, which is clearly obvious by checking the various German governments throughout time.
    1
  23.  @Snowfall26  Say what?
    1
  24. ​ @traumvonhaiti It's very unlikely they'll ever get to power, they're very far from a majority
    1
  25.  @aktob316  Apparently none yet, otherwise they would've been banned by now. Some of their members say very questionable things though.
    1
  26.  @varoonnone7159  So? I'm glad for Mauritius.
    1
  27. ​ @varoonnone7159 "Your"? I was addressing the OP, not you
    1
  28.  @hyperion447  Speech not thoughts, you cannot control what people think... you can control the dissemination of hateful ideas, and rightly so.
    1
  29.  @jerrygudknecht6066  Countries have Constitutions, if you form a party that goes against most of its laws of course you will get banned. Imagine a party that considers people like you, (whatever your characteristics are), unworthy and that you should be kept away from society?
    1
  30. It's the Constitution that decides these matters.
    1
  31.  @Okiejayjay  Germany's Constitutional Court is comprised of 16 judges selected by the Bundestag with a 2/3rd's majority approval. This gives enough room for ample plurality among the judges.
    1
  32.  @ExplosiveSalami  So where do you draw the line? Some ideas are forbidden by the Constitution for a reason.
    1
  33.  @ExplosiveSalami  Yes, that's what Constitutions are for... so that you cannot have parties for instance openly advocating for beating a certain group of people on the streets from campaigning.
    1
  34.  @ExplosiveSalami  I said advocating as in defending/inciting, not necessarily committing the act itself. Inciting to violence is most often a crime as well.
    1
  35.  @Deargodwhat  Yes you can, that's why countries have Constitutions that protect human and civil rights.
    1
  36.  @Deargodwhat  How do you suggest writing the constitution then, asking people on the street?
    1