On November 13 2012 04:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote: Just curious to what extent are they Neo-Nazis? Just embracing the political ideology of fascism or is this including all of the racist eugenic nationalism?
A Neo-Nazi is kind of like a Neo-Conservative, a label largely invented by journalism, and doesn't really help in pinning its members down to some kind of historical precedent. According to the F-E-Stiftung, the core qualities surveyed by their questions were ones trying to sniff out people with the following attitudes:
-Sympathy for Dictatorships -Chauvinism -Hostility against foreigners -Anti-Semitism -Social Darwinism -Apologetic of National Socialism
As previously mentioned, the actual survey questions are so crude and full of innuendo, that it's really possible for a normal person to be labeled an extremist.
German Neo-Nazis, as far as I am aware, are anti-EU, anti-American, anti-immigrant, and have a range of domestic positions from liberalism in freedom of speech to left-of-centre economic views. I think generally though, if you admire Hitler and the Third Reich, you're a Neo-Nazi.
On November 13 2012 02:40 Dagobert wrote: Give people a decent education as well as a job (or for kids: a safe place to grow up and play) and extremism will not be an issue.
a safe place to grow up so no muslim immigrants in the neighbourhood? That would confirm my personal experience. The far left are mostly from well off suburbs while the the "right" are the people living with the immigrants.
not at all, exactly the oposite is true, if you look at regional distribution you will see, that it's almost always the parts with least immigrant rates were the far right has get the best election results. This is btw almost comical...
IMO, as others pointed out, the economical situation in the regions in question is far more important to explain the succsess of national parties. Another point seems to be the trend by so called "protest voters". That are mainly people with a rather diffuse agenda, main point is probably to be "against the guys in power". A view years ago a lot of protest voters went for right wing parties like npd or dvu, in the last years there has been a shift to left wing parties or most recently to the pirate party. Therfore, in the moment I don't the much danger from npd and others, even if there is enough trouble by neonational organisations like "kameradschaften".
On November 13 2012 04:20 DeepElemBlues wrote:go ron paul etc because he cares for us
Couldn't really have put it better, politicians in this country try so very, very hard to look like they can connect with the populace and fail just as hard. If they put as much effort into actually giving a fuck who knows what they could achieve...
it's not only politicians who see fringe parties as fringe.
On November 13 2012 03:28 schaf wrote: I think in Germany the whole WW2 education backfired a bit. I agree it has to be done and it's good that we get it in school a lot. But when I was growing up (mid 20s now), it felt like being German is actually a bad thing. You get constantly confronted with the horros and of the past and their guilt. My parents were not a particular help in that regard either as they were heavily influenced by the hippie movement. So, if you grow up in that environment every identification with your nation is basically taken from you (might seem a bit extreme, but with me that was the case) and if you want to be a non-conformist or a rebel in school, you look for things that are 'forbidden'.
The NPD is a joke. But they actually have a good strategy. They do offers for young people in areas where there is nothing else, do free jurisdictional advice for unemployed people, do community festivals - and the people buy it. It works.
All in all, I wouldn't call all followers of the NPD as Neo-Nazis.
And there are countries who have a much more severe problem with this, for example Russia (yes!):
When I first visited Berlin several years ago, I stood under the Brandenburger Tor, with a plaque detailing the glorious events of March 1848, supposed to remind us of the best political traditions of Germany's ancestors, in contrast to 1870 and 1933. The plaque commemorated Germany's first liberal-democrats, how they rose up for their rights against an authoritarian regime, how they for a wrinkle in time seized the destiny of the nation and seemed to propel it to a hopeful future.
This is the kind of dogma, half naive, half ridiculous, which is being commonly propagated as "History" in Germany today, in classrooms, media and the popular imagination. The National Assembly which assembled in Frankfurt in 1848 eventually perished under the duress of its own national radicalism, and was forced to prostitute itself out to Frederick William IV, who wound up protecting his "democrats" from the people, but rightly refused to pick his crown up from the gutter. No one today will teach 1848 as an object lesson in the failures of historical German liberalism and constitutionalism, an episode whose multifaceted complexities, by the way, would have been more profoundly understood under the classical curricula of such authoritarian regimes as Bismarck's Prussia or Hitler's National Socialist Germany than by the historically tone-deaf people of today.
It is being trumpeted as a milestone event in the progress of Germany because national curriculum of self-censorship has practically eradicated all other political achievements from German memory. It has painted the sweep of Germany with a broad brush and, while subscribing to the Sonderweg theory that all of Germany's history must be read under the dim shadow of the Third Reich, occasionally pretends to promote Germany's Western legacy by citing and mis-citing such episodes as the March Revolution or Operation Walküre. This kind of post ex-facto ideological manipulation exists all over the place. The German Biedermeier is more properly the teleological Vormärz, the War Credits vote of the SPD in 1914 is now seen as an departure from political norms in German history, rather than its conformity to it.
This is all perhaps only ephemerally relevant to the issue at hand. Looking at the OP, however, and reading the report by the Friederich-Ebert-Stiftung, it's obvious that some things are being misrepresented. In the Spiegel-polls, the NDP does not command enough support to enter any State parliament in Germany apart from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, where the polls show them at 6%. The Survey of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung has a list of questions so leading, that sometimes an answer which reveals a discerning historical understanding will be registered ideologically as “Rechtsextrem”
i.e.
Question 1:
Im nationalen Interesse ist unter bestimmten Umständen eine Diktatur die bessere Staatsform
Quite apart from the fact that this question betrays a lack of understanding as to what Dictatorship is, a classical scholar who admires Sulla might agree to this statement, and be labelled an extremist. The leading clause is the stipulation “unter bestimmten Umständen,” which vastly inflates the number of people who will be labelled inaccurately.
Question 2:
Ohne Judenvernichtung würde man Hitler heute als großen Staatsmann ansehen.
The leading aspect of this question is raised by its very hypothetical nature. You might as well ask if Hitler behaved as Mother Theresa, would he be seen as a saint today? The question is deliberately drawing on the great Hitler-biographer Joachim Fest's assertion in the introduction of his 1974 biography: Shall we call him great?
Fest asserted in his biograhpy that had Hitler died in 1938, he would have gone down in history as the greatest of German statesmen, surpassing Bismarck. These are debatable, but not trivial postulations. Yet under the consideration of the F-E-Stiftung, a lifelong bourgeois conservative like Fest would have been labelled an extremist.
The list goes on and on, deducing folly from folly. Finally all this “information” is reduced to a number ready for publication. After a long, exhaustive, methodological study, the final results conclude that the percentage of people holding extreme-right attitudes in Germany have grown from 6.6 percent to 15.8 percent. People are shocked. New resolutions are made from the left to accelerate the social and mental terraforming of the nation. We have to make German history even more mendacious and crude. We have to educate people better. We have to address socio-economic inequality.
Call me old-fashioned, but I have a better thermometer of measuring the presence of extremism in modern life. I go on the internet and see which people are going into a crazed frenzy calling everything else extreme.
This post was a highly enjoyable read, I recommend everyone read this before thinking too hard on the "evidence" presented in the OP.
disagree. the more 'thoughtful' the more pernicious when it comes to a defense of reactionary thinking. on a tactical level there may be an argument of turning to a more content based examination of the ideas and histories, rather than using sanctions and labels. however, at the same time the shadow of those ideas and histories is quite concrete no matter which approach.
for people who think it's okay, or even glorious, the examination has already been done and they are overruled. they should be condemned with pleasure, and that's all.
that particular post fail to address the intent of these educational efforts. no reference to the banality of evil etc.
Germany is far from the only country in the area where the extreme right has grown a lot. Of course this will lure the Neo nazis in. Especially in Germany I would expect a bit larger growing of the nationalist extremists. There has been the air of remorse and repent for WW2 in policy, diplomacy, almost all aspects(correct me if i am wrong here). Combine that with the current economical difficulties, a growing EU influence and the role Germany plays in EU politics and economy and a rising of the extreme right, but also extreme left are kinda expected. Any movement away from the current state seems quite logical to me, where barely out of/near/in a crisis.
OP, you are saying "despite comprehensive educational matters". I think that because of comprehensive educational matters and the conflicting image with current Germany this results in the neo nazis might grow a bit faster/larger then in surrounding countries.
On November 13 2012 04:20 DeepElemBlues wrote:go ron paul etc because he cares for us
Couldn't really have put it better, politicians in this country try so very, very hard to look like they can connect with the populace and fail just as hard. If they put as much effort into actually giving a fuck who knows what they could achieve...
it's not only politicians who see fringe parties as fringe.
On November 13 2012 03:28 schaf wrote: I think in Germany the whole WW2 education backfired a bit. I agree it has to be done and it's good that we get it in school a lot. But when I was growing up (mid 20s now), it felt like being German is actually a bad thing. You get constantly confronted with the horros and of the past and their guilt. My parents were not a particular help in that regard either as they were heavily influenced by the hippie movement. So, if you grow up in that environment every identification with your nation is basically taken from you (might seem a bit extreme, but with me that was the case) and if you want to be a non-conformist or a rebel in school, you look for things that are 'forbidden'.
The NPD is a joke. But they actually have a good strategy. They do offers for young people in areas where there is nothing else, do free jurisdictional advice for unemployed people, do community festivals - and the people buy it. It works.
All in all, I wouldn't call all followers of the NPD as Neo-Nazis.
And there are countries who have a much more severe problem with this, for example Russia (yes!):
When I first visited Berlin several years ago, I stood under the Brandenburger Tor, with a plaque detailing the glorious events of March 1848, supposed to remind us of the best political traditions of Germany's ancestors, in contrast to 1870 and 1933. The plaque commemorated Germany's first liberal-democrats, how they rose up for their rights against an authoritarian regime, how they for a wrinkle in time seized the destiny of the nation and seemed to propel it to a hopeful future.
This is the kind of dogma, half naive, half ridiculous, which is being commonly propagated as "History" in Germany today, in classrooms, media and the popular imagination. The National Assembly which assembled in Frankfurt in 1848 eventually perished under the duress of its own national radicalism, and was forced to prostitute itself out to Frederick William IV, who wound up protecting his "democrats" from the people, but rightly refused to pick his crown up from the gutter. No one today will teach 1848 as an object lesson in the failures of historical German liberalism and constitutionalism, an episode whose multifaceted complexities, by the way, would have been more profoundly understood under the classical curricula of such authoritarian regimes as Bismarck's Prussia or Hitler's National Socialist Germany than by the historically tone-deaf people of today.
It is being trumpeted as a milestone event in the progress of Germany because national curriculum of self-censorship has practically eradicated all other political achievements from German memory. It has painted the sweep of Germany with a broad brush and, while subscribing to the Sonderweg theory that all of Germany's history must be read under the dim shadow of the Third Reich, occasionally pretends to promote Germany's Western legacy by citing and mis-citing such episodes as the March Revolution or Operation Walküre. This kind of post ex-facto ideological manipulation exists all over the place. The German Biedermeier is more properly the teleological Vormärz, the War Credits vote of the SPD in 1914 is now seen as an departure from political norms in German history, rather than its conformity to it.
This is all perhaps only ephemerally relevant to the issue at hand. Looking at the OP, however, and reading the report by the Friederich-Ebert-Stiftung, it's obvious that some things are being misrepresented. In the Spiegel-polls, the NDP does not command enough support to enter any State parliament in Germany apart from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, where the polls show them at 6%. The Survey of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung has a list of questions so leading, that sometimes an answer which reveals a discerning historical understanding will be registered ideologically as “Rechtsextrem”
i.e.
Question 1:
Im nationalen Interesse ist unter bestimmten Umständen eine Diktatur die bessere Staatsform
Quite apart from the fact that this question betrays a lack of understanding as to what Dictatorship is, a classical scholar who admires Sulla might agree to this statement, and be labelled an extremist. The leading clause is the stipulation “unter bestimmten Umständen,” which vastly inflates the number of people who will be labelled inaccurately.
Question 2:
Ohne Judenvernichtung würde man Hitler heute als großen Staatsmann ansehen.
The leading aspect of this question is raised by its very hypothetical nature. You might as well ask if Hitler behaved as Mother Theresa, would he be seen as a saint today? The question is deliberately drawing on the great Hitler-biographer Joachim Fest's assertion in the introduction of his 1974 biography: Shall we call him great?
Fest asserted in his biograhpy that had Hitler died in 1938, he would have gone down in history as the greatest of German statesmen, surpassing Bismarck. These are debatable, but not trivial postulations. Yet under the consideration of the F-E-Stiftung, a lifelong bourgeois conservative like Fest would have been labelled an extremist.
The list goes on and on, deducing folly from folly. Finally all this “information” is reduced to a number ready for publication. After a long, exhaustive, methodological study, the final results conclude that the percentage of people holding extreme-right attitudes in Germany have grown from 6.6 percent to 15.8 percent. People are shocked. New resolutions are made from the left to accelerate the social and mental terraforming of the nation. We have to make German history even more mendacious and crude. We have to educate people better. We have to address socio-economic inequality.
Call me old-fashioned, but I have a better thermometer of measuring the presence of extremism in modern life. I go on the internet and see which people are going into a crazed frenzy calling everything else extreme.
This post was a highly enjoyable read, I recommend everyone read this before thinking too hard on the "evidence" presented in the OP.
disagree. the more 'thoughtful' the more pernicious when it comes to a defense of reactionary thinking. on a tactical level there may be an argument of turning to a more content based examination of the ideas and histories, rather than using sanctions and labels. however, at the same time the shadow of those ideas and histories is quite concrete no matter which approach.
for people who think it's okay, or even glorious, the examination has already been done and they are overruled. they should be condemned with pleasure, and that's all.
Shadows are not concrete. And there is always the most compelling argument of all for having the full picture of history. Sanctions and labels are simply a way to make the shadow you prefer as "concrete" as possible, with regard for the truth being a secondary concern if a concern at all.
Yes, thoughtful criticisms are more dangerous to an interpretation or opinion than those that are not, I don't see what your point is besides saying that what you think is so true and right that people should just turn their brains off and enjoy the sanctions and labels they're being fed.
On November 13 2012 05:02 ain wrote: 9% is far from alarming. It's far below international average supporters of nationalist parties.
No offence, but it hurts in my head a bit if I see that 9% thing. If you can afford to put the time in, it would be nice if you have a look for yourself how they came to these 9%.
First chauvinism gets used as an indicator for rightwing extremism, like really?
3% of the participants would support á dictatoric rightwing government. 5% of the foreign participants would do the same. Puts things in perspective and shows the big discrepancy to this ominous 9%.
4% of the participants show signs of social darwinistic thinking which could be attributed to both ends of the political spectrum. Again large discrepancy to the mentioned 9%.
On November 13 2012 05:02 ain wrote: 9% is far from alarming. It's far below international average supporters of nationalist parties.
No offence, but it hurts in my head a bit if I see that 9% thing. If you can afford to put the time in, it would be nice if you have a look for yourself how they came to these 9%.
First chauvinism gets used as an indicator for rightwing extremism, like really?
3% of the participants would support á dictatoric rightwing government. 5% of the foreign participants would do the same. Puts things in perspective and shows the big discrepancy to this ominous 9%.
4% of the participants show signs of social darwinistic thinking which could be attributed to both ends of the political spectrum. Again large discrepancy to the mentioned 9%.
On November 13 2012 04:36 lahara wrote: im a dedicated nazi and i have evry right to be (freedom of opinion, belief or ideology or whatever). the thing is how you define a nazi and what exact criteria must be fullfilled to qualify as a nazi. i consider myself a nazi but im not rasist or prejudiced. i go to an international school and have jewish friends. im a survey i would say im a nazi which i conside rmyself to be simply cause of the fact that a) it gives me a sense of belonging and b) im hoping to one day lead germany to former glory but this time with peaceful means and alot of flowerpower
not sorry for my bad engliush because fuck you
also an uprising is something different from a rise in the number of "nazis" in germany.
stupid attention seekr thread -.-
You're not a Nazi, you're a fascist/nationalist.
are you trying to restrict my freedom of belief?
No, he's attempting to understand why you are so infatuated with a word as opposed to the ideas that word might represent to you.
oh ok thats cool then. so how does it help him understand when he simply states i am not what i am convinced i am?
you must have alot of conflict not being a racist (as you claim) and your own political party going head hunting on immigrants illegally.
On November 13 2012 04:36 lahara wrote: im a dedicated nazi and i have evry right to be (freedom of opinion, belief or ideology or whatever). the thing is how you define a nazi and what exact criteria must be fullfilled to qualify as a nazi. i consider myself a nazi but im not rasist or prejudiced. i go to an international school and have jewish friends. im a survey i would say im a nazi which i conside rmyself to be simply cause of the fact that a) it gives me a sense of belonging and b) im hoping to one day lead germany to former glory but this time with peaceful means and alot of flowerpower
not sorry for my bad engliush because fuck you
also an uprising is something different from a rise in the number of "nazis" in germany.
stupid attention seekr thread -.-
You're not a Nazi, you're a fascist/nationalist.
are you trying to restrict my freedom of belief?
No, he's attempting to understand why you are so infatuated with a word as opposed to the ideas that word might represent to you.
oh ok thats cool then. so how does it help him understand when he simply states i am not what i am convinced i am?
What you're doing is the equivalent of German saying
"I'm a dedicated Chinese and I have every right to be (freedom etc). The thing is how you define and what exact criteria must be fullfilled to qualify as a Chinese. i consider myself a Chinese but I don't have any Chinese blood. i go to an international school and have Chinese friends. im a survey i would say im a Chinese which i conside rmyself to be simply cause of the fact that a) it gives me a sense of belonging and b) im hoping to one day lead Germany to its former glory but this time with peaceful means and alot of flowerpower"
i.e. : You're not being logical.
Nazism was the ideology of the Nazi Party and Nazi Germany.t is a variety of fascism that incorporates biological racism and antisemitism.
Der Nationalsozialismus ist eine radikal antisemitische, rassistische, antikommunistische und antidemokratische Weltanschauung politische Bewegung.
On November 13 2012 05:18 Yuljan wrote: On a related note from the funny pictures thread:
I'm like 95% sure that is not in Germany, but rather in the UK (or somewhere else)
Totally different style of clothing, we hardly have any Indians (Sri Lankans), and that blonde chick looks British as well. And architecture is different, never saw that kind of grille in Germany.
On November 13 2012 04:36 lahara wrote: im a dedicated nazi and i have evry right to be (freedom of opinion, belief or ideology or whatever). the thing is how you define a nazi and what exact criteria must be fullfilled to qualify as a nazi. i consider myself a nazi but im not rasist or prejudiced. i go to an international school and have jewish friends. im a survey i would say im a nazi which i conside rmyself to be simply cause of the fact that a) it gives me a sense of belonging and b) im hoping to one day lead germany to former glory but this time with peaceful means and alot of flowerpower
not sorry for my bad engliush because fuck you
also an uprising is something different from a rise in the number of "nazis" in germany.
stupid attention seekr thread -.-
You're not a Nazi, you're a fascist/nationalist.
are you trying to restrict my freedom of belief?
No, he's attempting to understand why you are so infatuated with a word as opposed to the ideas that word might represent to you.
oh ok thats cool then. so how does it help him understand when he simply states i am not what i am convinced i am?
you must have alot of conflict not being a racist (as you claim) and your own political party going head hunting on immigrants illegally.
nononono look: im not a member of the NPD i dont sympathize with the NPD. im simply a nazi. its just like saying ure only a muslim if you blow up skyscrapers. its simply false. the huge majority of muslims are not extremist and are decent people. same with nazis just that the ratio of extremist nazis to non extremist nazis is higher than in the given example of muslims. during the third reich a majority of germans was "nazi" but not all of these considering themselves nazis were extremists
On November 13 2012 04:36 lahara wrote: im a dedicated nazi and i have evry right to be (freedom of opinion, belief or ideology or whatever). the thing is how you define a nazi and what exact criteria must be fullfilled to qualify as a nazi. i consider myself a nazi but im not rasist or prejudiced. i go to an international school and have jewish friends. im a survey i would say im a nazi which i conside rmyself to be simply cause of the fact that a) it gives me a sense of belonging and b) im hoping to one day lead germany to former glory but this time with peaceful means and alot of flowerpower
not sorry for my bad engliush because fuck you
also an uprising is something different from a rise in the number of "nazis" in germany.
stupid attention seekr thread -.-
You're not a Nazi, you're a fascist/nationalist.
are you trying to restrict my freedom of belief?
No, he's attempting to understand why you are so infatuated with a word as opposed to the ideas that word might represent to you.
oh ok thats cool then. so how does it help him understand when he simply states i am not what i am convinced i am?
you must have alot of conflict not being a racist (as you claim) and your own political party going head hunting on immigrants illegally.
It's fine.. I'm actually a cow (during daytime, at night i wear a cape and fight crime). Telling me otherwise would be you trying to restrict my freedom of belief.
On November 13 2012 05:18 Yuljan wrote: On a related note from the funny pictures thread:
I'm like 95% sure that is not in Germany, but rather in the UK (or somewhere else)
Totally different style of clothing, we hardly have any Indians (Sri Lankans), and that blonde chick looks British as well. And architecture is different, never saw that kind of grille in Germany.
Its just a funny picture and its actually pretty accurate for my school. Until 11th Grade we were exactly 3 Germans out of 30 students.
On November 13 2012 04:36 lahara wrote: im a dedicated nazi and i have evry right to be (freedom of opinion, belief or ideology or whatever). the thing is how you define a nazi and what exact criteria must be fullfilled to qualify as a nazi. i consider myself a nazi but im not rasist or prejudiced. i go to an international school and have jewish friends. im a survey i would say im a nazi which i conside rmyself to be simply cause of the fact that a) it gives me a sense of belonging and b) im hoping to one day lead germany to former glory but this time with peaceful means and alot of flowerpower
not sorry for my bad engliush because fuck you
also an uprising is something different from a rise in the number of "nazis" in germany.
stupid attention seekr thread -.-
You're not a Nazi, you're a fascist/nationalist.
are you trying to restrict my freedom of belief?
No, he's attempting to understand why you are so infatuated with a word as opposed to the ideas that word might represent to you.
oh ok thats cool then. so how does it help him understand when he simply states i am not what i am convinced i am?
you must have alot of conflict not being a racist (as you claim) and your own political party going head hunting on immigrants illegally.
It's fine.. I'm actually a cow (during daytime, at night i wear a cape and fight crime). Telling me otherwise would be you trying to restrict my freedom of belief.
EPT![[image loading]](http://6.asset.soup.io/asset/3868/8470_9404_500.jpeg)
