The Saxon Higher Administrative Court has rejected the AfD's appeal against being designated as far-right extremist, with the court finding the party's counter-arguments were insufficient. This means that the AfD's local party organisation in the state of Saxony can now be categorised as right-wing extremist by Saxony's Office for the Protection of the Constitution, which acts as the state's domestic intelligence agency. The Saxon State Office for the Protection of the Constitution had previously classified the association as a "confirmed far-right extremist organisation" for the first time in December 2023. https://openjur.de/u/2500408.html

Mit drei Urteilen vom 13.05.2024 hatte das Oberverwaltungsgericht nach sieben Ver­handlungstagen die Berufungen der Partei „Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)“ und ihrer Jugendorganisation „Junge Alternative für Deutschland (JA)“ gegen die Urteile des Verwaltungsgerichts Köln vom 08.03.2022 zurückgewiesen. Das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz darf die Klägerinnen damit als Verdachtsfall beobachten und die Öffentlichkeit hierüber unterrichten. Auch die Beobachtung des sogenannten „Flügel“ in der Vergangenheit - zunächst als Verdachtsfall, später als „erwiesen extremisti­sche Bestrebung“ - und deren Bekanntgabe war rechtmäßig.

Der Vorsitzende des 5. Senats hatte die Urteile zunächst mündlich begründet (vgl. Pressemitteilung vom 13.05.2024). Nunmehr sind in allen drei Berufungsverfahren den Beteiligten die schriftlichen Urteilsgründe übermittelt worden. Sie können im Voll­text auf der Internetseite des Oberverwaltungsgerichts abgerufen werden und wer­den in Kürze u. a. in der kostenfrei zugänglichen Rechtsprechungsdatenbank NRWE (www.nrwe.de) veröffentlicht.

Der Senat hat in allen drei Verfahren die Revision nicht zugelassen; hiergegen kann innerhalb eines Monats nach Zustellung der vollständigen Urteile Beschwerde zum Bundesverwaltungsgericht eingelegt werden, die innerhalb von zwei Monaten nach Zustellung zu begründen ist.

Aktenzeichen: 5 A 1216/22 (I. Instanz: VG Köln 13 K 207/20), 5 A 1217/22 (I. In­stanz: VG Köln 13 K 208/20), 5 A 1218/22 (I. Instanz: VG Köln 13 K 326/21)

VG Köln, Beschluss vom 05.02.2024 - 13 L 1124/23 https://openjur.de/u/2482047.html

Von diesem Treffen sollte niemand erfahren: Hochrangige AfD-Politiker, Neonazis und finanzstarke Unternehmer kamen im November in einem Hotel bei Potsdam zusammen. Sie planten nichts Geringeres als die Vertreibung von Millionen von Menschen aus Deutschland. https://correctiv.org/aktuelles/neue...ember-treffen/

If you want to proof me wrong come with evidence!

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me
This anarchistic anti fasist says "Nie wieder oder der tot!"

Correctiv is exactly that corrupted "investugative journalists" network I tlaked of. If you would really knwo the German media reports so good you wpuld know that you beat a dead horse, the stoy is dead, they were sued over their claim son what shoud, have been said, they lost several court battles initiated by the owner of that castle (for slander) and by visitors of that meeting. The meeting took place, but what was claimed they talked there and used in terms and voiced in plans was wrong. Several court sentences ruled this way, too. The political establishment however ignores it and treats the court sentences as if they dont exist and continue with agitating with these false claims. Again , its not me saying this: there were I think three cases negotiated at court, and Correctiv lost all three. What they "reported" what should have been said and planned there, simply is not true. The host of the meeting, a CDU man I am recall correctly, also sued them for slander, and won. He offered the place for rent for parties, events, meetigns, to every customer paying the roice. After the campaign against him, he nevertheless is ruined now, no matter that he won the court battle.

Pick the pieces together yourself, I don't feel like digging through all the examples that have accumulated over the past few years. This kind of crap is something you notice when the news comes out that Correctiv has once again let out a poisonous fart. They're constantly busy fending off lawsuits, and all too often unsuccessfully. Correctiv is now known in Germany for using dirty tricks and false allegations to stir up sentiment, for being associated with the radical left-wing, green milieu, which it receives significant funding from through several NGOs as an intermediary, and for being part of the aforementioned network of left-wing, woke, green NGOs that act as thought police and provide moral outrage on demand. And they lose the lion's share of the lawsuits brought against them. But they keep going. Of course, pro-government mainstream media love them because they endlessly repeat the desired narrative. In Germany, we know that by now. ;) Correctiv is notorious, and the opposite of what they claim to be. Or did you think the left didn't have outlets like FOX News?

If you argue with Correctiv, thats as if a Nazi argues with Der Stürmer to show how liberal and democratic Nazis are. ;) Very bad source you have there. Its a propaganda and agitation tank you fell for.

The former president of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Hans-Georg Maaßen, wrote in an essay for Tichys Einblick last year:


The Correctiv case demands that these quasi-governmental or private intelligence agencies, which serve to combat opposition members, be banned because they are in no way consistent with the free democratic order. They must first be exposed, and their subversive activities must be publicly denounced. And we must stop the funding of these quasi-governmental or private intelligence agencies.
(...)
For me, Correctiv is a secret service in the material sense, which, under the guise of being a journalistic and non-profit medium, pursues, at least in part, the goal of politically combating enemies in line with left-wing ideology. (...) Correctiv operates or supports campaigns in line with this policy, whereby the truthfulness of the content conveyed by the media is not important, but rather its external effectiveness. (...) This is a "typical subversive technique used by intelligence agencies in authoritarian or totalitarian societies, in which facts are freely fabricated or true facts are enriched with fabricated or falsified ones in order to combat political opponents.
(...)
A liberal democracy in which a government or governing parties operate quasi-governmental or private intelligence agencies against their opponents, or in which violence-oriented gangs like Antifa are tolerated or even supported to intimidate or destroy political opponents, is on a slippery slope. It is high time to end this practice."



The conservative Hans-Georg Maaßen (CDU) was president of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and was forced into retirement by the then CSU Interior Minister Horst Seehofer after he refused to comply with media pressure and describe a confrontation and scuffle between Germans and migrants, which developed in the wake of the knife murder of a 35-year-old German, as a "citywide manhunt," even though the left-wing state media had already adopted this term to deflect blame for the murder from the migrants and instead once again scapegoat the unrepentant, intolerant native Germans. However, when making his assessment, Maaßen already had access to the surveillance videos from the cameras in the public spaces affected by these scuffles, so he was far better informed than those who already knew better and were determined to push their ideologically corrected narrative. At the time, parts of these camera recordings were briefly made available on TV – and I clearly remember that there was nothing, absolutely nothing, that could be described as a "citywide mob manhunt for a migrant." Maaßen was absolutely right. When he later repeated his assessment before a conference of European intelligence chiefs, he was removed from his post and subsequently founded a conservative circle within the CDU, later his own party, committed to the original conservatism and Christian-humanist view of humanity of the former CDU from the pre-Merkel era. Since then, he has shared the fate of a certain Thilo Sarrazin (SPD) and is considered "right-wing extremist" and a "Nazi," and is persona non grata to many.

That's Germany: If you're not woke, you're a Nazi. If you're not left-wing or green, you're a Nazi. If you're against the euro or criticize the EU, you're a Nazi. If you critizise the bias in climate "science", you are a Nazi. If you want market economy, you are a Nazi. If you're against undiscriminated mass migration, you're a Nazi. In Germany, there's only left-wing-woke- green-red, and Nazis. Everything else is nonexistent.

Knife murders by migrants have multiplied in Germany since 2015, but to this day they are trivialized, concealed, minimized, normalized, or, through lying reinterpretation, transformed into culpable behavior by Germans, who are all potential perpetrators anyway. The cynicism, hatred of Germans, and contempt for humanity of the leftists who pursue this program cannot be surpassed.

Thank you, Mutti. May you burn in hell forever for the mess you've brought on us and all of Europe.


Forget Germany. Its done.

I knew you would do this, it shows you are no better than MAGA a perfect opportunity for me to warn of the mechanisms that led to the Holocaust, Holodomor, of the toxic effects of scapegoating, fascism, communism, racism, of the "own people first" Übermensch sentiment, of the dehumanisation that can lead a sizeable section of the population to applaud or condone the exclusion and extermination of another people. The least we can do is don't look away. Not condone. Not erase. Not set aside. Not make 'normal' what is not normal.You don't get much more explicit. Arnon Yasha Yves Grünberg is a Dutch writer of novels, essays, and columns, as well as a journalist. Grunberg comes from a family heavily traumatised by World War II. His mother Hannelore Grünberg-Klein (1927-2015) survived Auschwitz. His father, Hermann Grünberg (1913-1991), was in hiding at numerous addresses.

It is that part of the political spectrum that you defend and obviously go conform with, that brings plenty of antisemites and antisemitic violence into the west. By the hundreds of tosujand, and millions. You il.uustrate the ver yprobkem that I referred to: in today'S West, you either are pro migraiton, pro Green, poro EU, pro Euro, pro left, pro woke - or you get labelled a Nazi explicitly, or by implying it. Thanks for illustrating my point, I appreciate the cooperation.


Again, George Orwell:
"Oceanic society rests ultimately on the belief that Big Brother is omnipotent and that the Party is infallible. But since in reality Big Brother is not omnipotent and the party is not infallible, there is need for an unwearying, moment-to-moment flexibility in the treatment of facts. The keyword here is BLACKWHITE. Like so many Newspeak words, this word has two mutually contradictory meanings. Applied to an opponent, it means the habit of impudently claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts. Applied to a Party member, it means a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands this. But it means also the ability to BELIEVE that black is white, and more, to KNOW that black is white, and to forget that one has ever believed the contrary."


Censorship is not an act of external violence anymore. These days people get taught already in school on how to internalise censorship, and how to censor themseves, and how to be unaware of that one is doing this to oneself.

Maaßen has not even been fired, he just changed to the BMI. He was removed from the Verfasungsschutz because he had declared several immigrants as murderers that were indeed innocent. But in the public TV he blamed then despite having witness reports and videos that showed their innocence. He was "fired" or better moved to another position because his conduct damaged the agency, and had lost the trust of the people. Not really firing him was a scandal back then.

edit whether some party is indeed an enemy of democracy and has to be shut down is not the job of the Verfassungsschutz, but of the Constitutional Court, which is why I do not think the AfD will be 'forbidden'. And maybe the Verfassungsschutz will have to openly publish what they found, so everyone can decide what to think of it.
Not that there are not some right wingers who would love a party that has the death of democracy as (yet hidden) goal.

Oh, sure, let quote a revolutionary socialist that wrote a dystopian political satire in 1948 as a warning against totalitarianism after years of brooding on the twin menaces of Nazism and Stalinism. You fall for the same propaganda that Orwell warned us for in 1948. 1984 was not the future, it was his present and past Orwell wrote about. And certainly no secret coded Fing bible.

No, that was a follow-on debate. Maaßen got initially into trouble because he objected to the reframing of that there had been a manhunt through the city where as the videos showed there were confrontative situations, yes, but nothing qulifying for the sensational term of a manhunt by a mob through the city . For explicitly this he first came under fire. He later also dared to point out that the German man in his mid-30s who got assassinated by a knife stabber was murdered by an migrant knife stabber. As is predominantly the case now in Germany, migrants from certain countries are absiltuely overrepresented in this crime category. But it is "verboten" to say that openly. Thats why for several years according yearly police statistics were even hidden and were not allowed to be published in public. We shall not think racist, do we...

On the Bundesverfassungsschutz, it is important to understand its role, that it is unique in the description of its duties amongst all Western secret and intel services there are, in the West there is not a single agency that is equivalent to it. In authoritative regimes however - well, interestingly that is something different. Says something about the BfV, maybe.

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) has a very specific, unique task: the "protection of the free and democratic basic order (freiheitlich-demokratische Grundordnung FDGO)".

In many Western countries, domestic intelligence agencies primarily have traditional tasks of counter-espionage, counter-terrorism, or protecting national security. The BfV, on the other hand, is also explicitly responsible for monitoring political activities considered extremist, even if they are not necessarily violent or terrorist-related. This is a special and unique task of the BfV.

Protection of the "free and democratic basic order" (FDGO) means:
– The BfV is tasked with monitoring groups, parties, or individuals that attempt to undermine this order.
– This also includes legal political actors, such as certain parties (e.g., parts of the AfD, formerly the NPD, left-wing extremist groups).

In other countries, it would be legally or politically sensitive to subject a party to intelligence surveillance solely based on its political goals, as long as it is not violent. The BfV claims the right to monitor political opinions alone alraedy.

In Germany, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is not just a security agency, but also a kind of "early warning system" for threats to democracy – which also triggers criticism from many (keyword: "Gesinnungsschnüffelei" ("ideological snooping").

In short: The BfV has a constitutionally formalls sound, but politically sensitive role as guardian of democracy. This explicit task distinguishes it from many comparable agencies, for example, in France, Great Britain, or the USA. This role understanding typical for the BfV opens the door to the political ideological abuse that is now emerging. And this also explains why Faeser's man at its helm claims a re-educating and manipulative role for the BVS and even enjoyed to openly state this withotu havign to fear objection. For him, the BVS is no longer an executive, uncooperative agency, but an active censor, educator, prosecutor, and judge. I think this is very dangerous.

In the current case surrounding the AfD assessment, the BfV has still not presented any evidence and has so far refused to do so. Strangely enough, however, certain left-leaning mainstream writers have apparently been fed with detailed statements from the secret report. And they promptly used them to stir up public sentiment. But there is still no evidence.

Such a service only exists in Germany. In no other Western democracy would such invasiveness based on ideological and stance-based snooping be permissible for an intelligence agency.

[FOCUS] The Office for the Protection of the Constitution grants the AfD martyr status, thereby endangering our democracy.


The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution's ruling classifying the AfD as "certainly right-wing extremist" deepens Germany's divisions. Only the AfD benefits from this.

If the goal is to strengthen the AfD, to give it a unique selling point, and thus prepare for a right-wing populist takeover of government in 2029, then the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has done everything right.

But if the goal is to create a climate of understanding in which the migration issue can be discussed based on facts and resolved by the new government within the framework of what is legally permissible and what is humanitarianly required, then the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has done everything wrong.

With the public declaration that from now on, doubt is forbidden and that Germany's largest opposition party, with its nearly 450 elected representatives at the federal, state, and EU levels and 10.3 million voters in the federal election, is to be considered "certainly right-wing extremist," the political antagonist is de facto deactivated in public discourse.

What Willy Brandt said at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo on December 10, 1971, is no longer valid:

"Young people often expect an unwavering yes from me, a clear no. But it has become impossible for me to believe in a single truth. So I say to my young friends and others who want to hear it: there are several truths, not just the one truth that excludes all others. That's why I believe in diversity and therefore in doubt."

The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution – which still reports to the SPD Interior Minister – is leveling the ground for doubt. The new Chancellor's scope of action is being restricted. From now on, the area in front of and behind the firewall is mined and equipped with automatic firing devices – just like the inner-German border once was.

Anyone who, like the future leader of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, Jens Spahn, wants to see the AfD treated "like any other opposition party in the Bundestag" must expect a fatal coup de grâce in the political hunting grounds.

The state cannot serve democracy in this way. There are four solid reasons, widely researched in the "sociology of minorities," why this approach does not protect but endangers our democratic constitution:

1. Lack of transparency creates myths

Secrecy is the birthplace of every conspiracy theory. Consequently, the 1,100-page study by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution that led to this verdict should not be published. This is an attempt to immunize the verdict.

We are supposed to believe, not know. We are supposed to follow, not doubt. The aim is clearly not to convince AfD voters, but rather to stigmatize them. In this sense, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has hit the jackpot.

2. Persecution justifies martyr status

The AfD leadership's stance – against immigration and naturalization, for exclusion and deportation – is not weakened by the actions of a state authority, but rather strengthened. Especially since US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has come to the AfD's defense:

"Germany has granted its spy agency new powers to monitor the opposition. This is not democracy – it is covert tyranny. What is truly extremist is not the popular AfD, but the establishment's deadly open-border immigration policy, which the AfD rejects. Germany should change course."

This martyr status benefits the party, especially in acquiring new members and voters. Because this establishes a unique selling point in party competition. Look here: AfD voters are not voters, but resistance fighters. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution has launched the perfect branding campaign for the AfD.

3. Dog Whistle Politics: State Triggers Framing Effects

State discrimination against political groups does not lead to their disappearance, but rather to the establishment of a distinct language that – like the special dog whistle – is understood only by a certain species. Like the dog whistle, it is broadcast on a separate frequency that remains barely perceptible to others.

The framing changes, the meaning lives on: Björn Höcke describes himself not as National Socialist, but as socially patriotic, calls for remigration rather than expulsion of foreigners, and speaks not of race, but of identity. What was once considered Jewish big business, he now calls the globalization elite. He is a right-wing extremist in camouflage.

4. Strengthening Identity Through Victim Identity

According to psychologist Jack Brehm's 1966 reactance theory, persecuted minorities do not abandon their goals, but rather intensify their efforts. Bans and debates about bans generally lead to internal radicalization ("We are the last to know the truth") and simultaneously reduce external contact with liberal society.

This means: Polarization is increasing, not decreasing. The various segments of society now face each other like hostile armies, breaking off dialogue and closing their sights. The state has positioned itself between them – not as a moderator, but as a border policeman monitoring the demarcation line of discourse.

Conclusion: The 61 founding fathers and four mothers of the Constitution of the Parliamentary Council set the bar for a party ban extremely high because they knew the temptation to restrict political competition was great. Carlo Schmid:

"We want to create an order in which law prevails over power."

That's why, since Hitler's time, when he banned all parties, the legitimacy of a party has been monitored not by the Minister of the Interior, not by the Prime Minister, not by the Bundestag, nor by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, but by the Federal Constitutional Court, which is solely bound by the law.

That was the lesson of Hitler's orgy of party bans: German democracy is resilient, but not arbitrary. Or to quote Carlo Schmid:

"We want an order that can withstand the clash of opinions, because only in conflict does the truth become visible. Parliamentarism is not comfortable – but it is honest."
----------------------

I stick to it - you have to test them at least once, whether responsibility and being cofn rotned with reality teahces them some more reaosn or not. Mind you, they are for Russia and agaunst Ukraine in t beh war, I have no illusion and no sympathy for them - and still: all damages they are accused they will do if they came to power is thesis only. In case of the other parties, the dmages are fact. I think most likely they will fail (I assume this will surprise some people, here). And still - the monumental damages accumulated by 4 governments by Merkel and 1 by Scholz, the monumental treason of CDU and SPD, Greens and FDP against the german people is evident now, is historical fact, is not a theoretical option that may or may not materliase, but it has become real for sure. Tjhat the AfD also wpudl fial thisway, would fial in grpiwnjg up to governmentel repsnsibility and groewn adult, is a claim, a theory, an assumption, a thesis - but they never were tested.


And if they fail the test, you can be happy and I will fall silent: then they have disenchanted themselves once and for all. But you have to test them at least this one time.

The CDU knows why it does not want that. The AfD originally collected many CDU voters disappointed by Merkel's destruction of the conservative value canon the party once held up, but does no more, it is now an extension of the Brussels autocracy and socialism, is neither especially Christian nor especiallyy conservative anymore, but submitted to the woke and socialist Zeitgeist, completely. So, the AfD, seen this way, is the CDU's most lethal arch enemy, born on the grounds of what the CDU has given up. Thats why the AfD is so dangerous for the CDU. Its existence is the living proof for the CDU's big existential failure an Merkelian self-destruction.

The AfD was originally founded, in the words of the economics professor Bernd Lucke who founded it long ago, as an alternative to Merkel's claimed "no alternative" to the Euro currency, and in defence of the German and European national currencies. And how right he was with that intention! As such, the AfD was from all beginning on a threat to the party establishment that refines its power and serves to it's actors careers and personal ambitions directly on grounds of the contemporary EU-friendly context of politics that do not allow doubt and questioning of the intended EUcratic superstate, but enforce it more and more. Thats why they tried to defame and denounce the AfD already when not a single "Völkischer" and not a single Nazi had started to hijack the project of Lucke.The AfD was Satan from its founding day on. When Lucke said his party was against the Euro, he got my attention, but one half sentence later he already contradicted himself and said "but it is for the EU" , and that was when I already withdraw my attention again. Rejectign the Euro and ECB but supporting the EU is a self-contradiction, showing illusions.

They will now try to financially dry out the AfD, since a party prohibition is difficult and a process taking years. I think it will not work. Recently they reported a drop in the polls by one point for the AfD, but those polls were complepted already one and two days before the secret report of the Verfassungsschutz got not published. In other words: I see it as normal fluctuation in such polls, not already as a result of the new campaign. If they get stripped off federal funds, most likely orivate donators will replace and overcompensate them. This was what happened in case of the NPD.



Legally, form a jurisztic standpount, the new report and the assessment are practically non-relevant anyway. Its big propagandistic verbal mumbo-jumbo, but has no binding legal consequences allowed from it. Under surveillance the party was already before.


The only way to deal with the AfD is by forcing it into the political confrontation, there is no shortcut and no cheat to avoid this. And this is a risk for the etablished parties, it may demask themselves and deligitimise their claim to "speak for the whole people" (which they dont and never did). The SPD cannot hope to win majorities at elections any time soon and instea dmust fight against earning just one digit results in the future, they are an endagered species - but with a big mouth nevertheless, so cant the Greens have hpes tio win any time soon again, Habeck and Baerbock are too hard to be forgiven. But the "firewall", and the CDU being turned into a servile appendix to socialism itself, is their way to claim powers again and again - like we see since many years - although they lose and often lose big time at elections. The last time, the SPD got punished, was chased away, was thrown out with a kick in their butt and the voters told them they did not want them - and a few weeks later they already are back at the helm with 7 ministers, amongst them them the finance mistry, the defence and the social ministry which all three are the main pillars of any fiscal political ruling and move the by far biggest budgets of all ministries: social, and defence.

And then they wonder why people turn to the AfD...???



Not to mention gender gaga, dictatorial potlicval correctness, ultr-left state media and opinion censorship and undiscriminating mass migration and its desastrous consequences, and the corruption of the Brussels apparatus itself.

What hasn't been said about the "fascist" Giorgia Meloni? And what did she do with it? She proved all the fear-mongers and alarmists wrong.

https://www-welt-de.translate.goog/p..._x_tr_pto=wapp

I admit, there is a difference. Meloni was and is clever, a witty, pragmatic mind with pleasant manners. Not exactly what the party elites in the AfD are known for.

Runes carved in silent halls decree the wolf besmeared by branded flame,
Yet from the ashes of forbidden doubt the AfD’s red martyr’s horn proclaims.


- its like the Reformation throwing off the governing Global Papacy?

It's rather like some backwards medieval papacy trying to kill centuries of enlightenment.

Some thoughts on this topic AfD.

So this German intelligent service has said AfD. is a far right movement and a threat to the German constitution. Why haven't they classed far left and radical Islam as a threat to the German constitution, as well.

Religion isn't a race. It's an ideology.

Markus

In last elections, people vioted clearly for what they wanted: to have the red-green madness and gender gaga and climate policy terror and the SPD gone (SPD had its weakest result ever since WW2, they got their bottom spanked). And CDU told them they would get from them secure borders (which may or may not come), end of the "Heizungsgesetz", end of spending frenzy and respecting the debt brake.

People voted for a majority of seats CDU and AfD. They did not vote for Green and Red coming back to the thrones of powerk, they sent them home: FDP kicked out, SPD with a record loss and the worst result in its history, Greens with losses. Germans clearly said they do not want these to be in the government. Or even in Parliament FDP is out of parliament now).

What people now get is: no majority government for CDU and AfD. Avery fourth voter dispised and almost crminased. No respect for the debt brake (got already sacked days after the election and even before they new coalition was formed). No end of the Heizungsgesetz and climate policy horror, and no end of gender-gaga. And an SPD triumphantly returning to the helm of power: more powerful than under Scholz, they now hold the finance ministry (!!!!!), the ministries of social spending (the by far biggest share of the state budget),ministry of defence (second biggest share of the state budget), ministry for ecology (to make sure the madness of the past 3 years does not ge touched by the CDU).

People votes. Yes, we had elections But politicians do not respect the voting results. Polticians do exactly the opposite of what the yprimised. Politicians do not care for voting results. Politicians bend international treaties (violating the EU debt criteria), abuse state offices (Verfassungsschutz), and criminalise opposing views and criticxal oppinions of this (Faesers' multiple moves and laws of the past 3 years: Denunciation centers have been set up where dissenters can be denounced - without the burden of proof! - The law has been expanded to include a paragraph for lèsé majesté, the emotion of “hate”, which is not recognized anywhere in the Western legal canon as a legal object, is legitimized as a pretext to be able to impose social and legal sanctions on dissenters even below the threshold of a criminal offence of incitement to hatred, up to and including investigation, account blocking, loss of job, character assassination). None of this is an exaggeration, these are facts, and there are already many, many exmaples from the aost years, where all this has been practices, and ver yoften agaunst - university prfessors and tutors not consenting with the radical leftism in the German "education". Things get really are bad in Germany. Ideological attitudes and convictions are replacing competence, argument, evidence, discussion and research. Free speech only for those having the correct mindset and opinion: LEFT. Miond you, a research done by I think it was Berteklsmann Foudnaiton last years showed that over 90% of all workers in TV and paper media confessed to vote red or green. Those who do not, increaingly get mobbed, get pressed to "voluntarily" leave or end their prgams (like the newly foudned TV magazine KLAR, its maker just not expessing left enogh views and quesiutoning the left mainstream, and already after one bradcast is victim of a natin-wide media sh!tstorm trying to get her thrown out).

No, things absolutely do not go well in Germany.

Together, CDU and AfD in polls have now even more points than at election day in valid ballots. And back then already they had a - comfortable - majority already back then.

They make policy against the expressed will of the people. They do not honour the vote. They do what they wantk no matter election results. They do not let themselves getting voted out.

ITS POINTLESS TO VOTE.

Hence the growing willingness in the ordinary people to try radical experiments. Its a logical consequence of the ignorrance of the "elites".

Wer nicht hören will, muß fühlen.

---------

"The political parties have made the state their prey." - Richard von Weizsäcker

That exactly what the verfassungsschutz do, they investigate yearly all threats to the democracy:

Das linksextremistische Personenpotenzial ist im Jahr 2023 um
500 auf nunmehr 37.000 Personen angewachsen, darunter 11.200
(2022: 10.800) gewaltorientierte Linksextremisten. Die Zahl links-
extremistisch motivierter Straftaten stieg 2023 um 10,4 % auf
4.248 Delikte. Noch deutlicher ist der Anstieg bei den Gewalttaten
um 20,8 % auf 727 Delikte. Insbesondere die Gewalt gegen Polizei-
beamtinnen und -beamte nahm deutlich zu.
Im Mai 2023 wurden vier linksextremistische Gewalttäter um die
Hauptangeklagte Lina E. als Teil einer kriminellen Vereinigung zu
mehrjährigen Haftstrafen verurteilt. Die linksextremistische Sze-
ne reagierte bundesweit mit weiteren Straf- und Gewalttaten, da-
runter zwei versuchte Tötungsdelikte an Polizeibeamten in Leip-
zig (Sachsen). Weiterhin verübten gewaltbereite Linksextremisten
auch 2023 erhebliche Angriffe auf tatsächliche oder als solche
ausgemachte Rechtsextremisten im In- und Ausland. Mehrere der
mutmaßlichen Täter haben sich dem polizeilichen Zugriff entzo-
gen und sind untergetaucht. https://www.verfassungsschutz.de/Sha...ationFile&v=17