Dieser Bereich kann Inhalte enthalten, die nicht für alle Nutzer geeignet sind. Dazu können unter anderem Texte, Medien oder Diskussionen gehören, die als beleidigend, extremistisch, gewaltbezogen oder anderweitig belastend empfunden werden. Wenn du solche Inhalte nicht sehen möchtest, nutze bitte die jeweiligen Filter- und Meldeoptionen der Plattform oder meide entsprechende Threads/Communities.
I’m familiar with both, and the nazi bar equivalency is a false parallell.
The antidote to anti-establishment movements in democracies (which AFD & their related parties across Europe are at this point) is strengthening public trust and legitimacy, not creating the tools to dismantle it.
That’s like saying that since crime is mostly a symptom of a systemic issue, we shouldn’t prosecute it.
No, it’s like saying the police shouldn’t fight crime by breaking the law, because it undermines trust in the legal system.
For a prime example of that in action, see the US.
That’s… not at all equivalent.
How so?
Because long term policies require short term patches, so problems don’t get out of hand too early.
Policing crime and implementing mechanisms so people don’t need to resort to it in the long term, are complementary, but without the former, chances of the latter to work are slim.
From your point of view, it’s fine to let nazis win now as long as we set out to fix the root cause later, which is naive at several levels, most importantly because if they find their way to office, they will fight any policy that could make them irrelevant. Even more, since they are purely reactionary parties with no real policies, they are incentivized to manufacture more enemies and false issues. And if you don’t believe me, look at pretty much any reactionary cabinet in the world from the past 20 years, from the US to Russia to Hungary.