Musk uses X livestream to amplify German far-right leader's views ahead of an election
Musk uses X livestream to amplify German far-right leader's views ahead of an election
Elon Musk livestreamed his chat with a leader of Germany’s far-right party, using the power of his social media platform, X, to amplify the party’s message ahead of an upcoming national election.
Summary
Elon Musk livestreamed a conversation with Alice Weidel, co-leader of Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, on his platform X, endorsing her and urging support for the AfD ahead of Germany’s February 23 election.
The livestream, which drew over 200,000 viewers, raised concerns across Europe about Musk’s influence in foreign politics.
AfD, under observation for extremism, has gained popularity amid discontent with Chancellor Scholz’s government.
Musk’s promotion of Weidel and controversial remarks on other European issues are being monitored for violations of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
You're viewing a single thread.
Why is Germany not just blocking Twitter? I don't get it.
The more serious issue is, why haven't they banned AfD. Where the fuck is the "Defensive" in "Defensive Democracy"?
After the actual Nazis banned a party, people made it far more difficult to ban parties.
You can try it, but it could fail. And the whole spectacle means more attention for them.
The afd is not the root problem and won't go away if it were banned
The problem is moderate politicians persistently ignoring (and patronising) the working class over serious reservations they have over immigration and cultural dilution
Same as everywhere else..
When I moves to Germany I saw the exact same propaganda lines used in the US against African Americans and Median Americans leveraged against Turkish immigrants. The same percentage bullshit, the same lazy / taking our job lines.
Cultural dilution is not an objective metric, it's a tool to rule up the uneducated and the racist. It's all culture warfare to hide the constant class warfare.
The problem is not the immigrant population in every country on earth, totaling hundreds of millions of people, it's the billionaire/millionaire class in every country totalling tens of thousands of people. The fuckin growing wealth disparity isn't happening because of skilled labor or asylum seekers, it's because of the rich.
There is absolutely a class war going on but it has many fronts. Globalised capitalists acting like one can simply pour population from here to there to satisfy the economic machine creates exactly the kind of cultural tension we see. Many people don't like the conservative values that come with Islam. That's ok. Moderate politicians acting like that's a totally invalid (even evil) opinion only patronises people and leaves them disillusioned with the democratic process altogether. In a democracy people will have different values to oneself, they'll even have a different idea over what's important. The idea that it would be ok for the country to be poorer by have less immigration is a democratic choice and urban elites acting like you can't even think like that is ultimately undemocratic.
The world is trending towards atheism bud. This Islamic fear mongering is horseshit. "Many people" who don't like the "conservative values" that come from Islam are likely the same people who don't like the conservative values that stem from Christianity or Catholicism and yet that's far more prevalent in the US or Germany - in same cases literally baked in to their government - than the number of Islamic migrants could ever reach. It's just smoke screen for blatant racism and xenophobia. Those two religions are more similar than they are different and yet one is tied to brown people and immigrants (looking for a better future). I bet if we looked at immigration statistics for the US the number of Islamic immigrants would represent a minority percentage of the total immigrant population. And that's not even considering the fact that some people label themselves as the religious group they grew up with but aren't practicing and possibly have even fallen out of faith.
I'm a Christian immigrant in Germany but I'm probably more likely agnostic at this point. Now tell me what my values are? Tell me what cultural pressure I'm putting on Germany? The reality is religion, except for heavy practitioners, is not necessarily indicative of their beliefs.
Immigrants bring skilled labor that societies need to survive. Its Not just Germany being poorer, it's Germany not having working infrastructure, hospitals and clinics having larger wait times, it's less organic and ethically produced products in your neighborhoods, it's worse education and more expensive housing. Populations are declining and the best way to ensure every job is still filled, for the betterment of society, is immigration. Culture is a horseshit political word for people who didn't grow up in my small town, which is most people.
Europeans and racist Americans talk about culture as if we're in a fantasy or sci-fi setting, like people across an imaginary border don't use money and don't like music and don't like good food. It's stupid.
The world is trending towards atheism bud.
this really doesn't have anything to do with the concerns caused by a minority of culturally conservative islamists
the same people who don’t like the conservative values that stem from Christianity or Catholicism
it's ok to dislike religious fascism in all its forms though? right? one might take the view that it's ok to limit it coming from abroad as it's hardly going to improve the situation.
It’s just smoke screen for blatant racism and xenophobia
this is patronising. there are racists and there are xenophobes and there are people who would prefer that immigration be slower or just less. these are overlapping groups of people but they are not the same. by making it impossible for moderate politicians to talk about immigration control on the basis of values, it leaves only the more exteme ideologues
I bet if we looked at immigration statistics for the US
we are talking about Europe..
but I’m probably more likely agnostic at this point. Now tell me what my values are?
are you homophobic? do you think being gay should be illegal? think gay teachers should be fired? want to see sharia law implemented? support violence against people for drawing offensive cartoons? stay silent when others express support for terrorism? i expect you would answer 'no' to most of this. it is not unreasonable to express some discernment over people who would answer 'yes' to any of these when they are seeking to enter the country.
Immigrants bring skilled labor that societies need to survive
the necessity of immigration is a consequence of class warfare. only immigrants will accept the poor conditions fostered by neglect of the working class. global capitalists want to shift workforces wherever it is profitable, urban elites agree because it's unfashionable to express any discernment over an immigrant's values. meanwhile it's the working class whose struggle is masked by all this and who bear the brunt of social problems when immigrants are funneled into underequiped areas of the country.
The problem is moderate politicians persistently ignoring (and patronising) the working class over serious reservations they have over immigration and cultural dilution
Was this problem something German people were concerned with when their government colonized Tanzania and other African counties prior to WW1?
Did they see the forced christianization and emigration to the colonies with the same distaste as their nationalistic descendents do immigration and islam today?
Not to mention the difference between top down colonization and bottom up immigration being fundamentally different. One revolves around cultural amalgamation and the other around forced cultural erasure.
Or do you think this only matters when it happens to white europeans?
Not to mention the difference between top down colonization and bottom up immigration being fundamentally different.
If they are fundamentally different, why bring it up at all?
The Afd, nor the people who vote for them, advocate the colonisation of Africa. Correct me if I'm wrong.
One can acknowledge evils in the past, even be in favour of redressing them financially. That doesn't invalidate the preference that conservative Islam be prejudiced against at the point of immigration.
Because it highlights the ideological continuity between colonial racism and current anti-Muslim sentiment - just with new targets and updated language.
Are you really trying to tell me that Germany exploiting African countries because of "national greatness" is ideologically different to claiming Islam is the bane of Germany's existence?
How come Germans are okay with immigrants and refugees coming into Germany to work and support their retirement - but are opposed to those people's cultures? (which ironically seems to be what drives the most technically apt ones away)
Even when research has shown that the influence of religion on integration is often overestimated with regard to people from predominantly Muslim countries of origin." you still get the same old racist views that religion is the problem and if only we could get the "good immigrants" and not the "bad ones" nationalistic (nazi) groups would accept them with open arms.
You can recognize issues with skill and employment of migrants (and advocate for inclusive solutions) without falling back on the anti-muslim dogwhistles.
Are you really trying to tell me that Germany exploiting African countries because of “national greatness” is ideologically different to claiming Islam is the bane of Germany’s existence?
no, I'm claiming that shoehorning people with serious reservations over conservative islam into a racial narrative is itself part of the problem
How come Germans are okay with immigrants and refugees coming into Germany to work and support their retirement
they aren't. the article itself mentions that such immigrants faced discrimiation and resentment. the necessity of immigration is an economic one arising from a class conflict between global capitalists who seek profitability at any cost and the working class who resent the local changes made to accomodate this while their ongoing struggle is ignored
the same old racist views that religion is the problem and if only we could get the “good immigrants” and not the “bad ones” nationalistic (nazi) groups would accept them with open arms.
nazis are a minority. they end up attracting the previous moderates when those people feel deserted by the political elite. shaming any discussion of preferring ones own cultural values (oftentimes just a placeholder for "human rights") to those espoused in large degrees by immigrant populations is the beginning of this. in fact we're far past it. any talk of needing discerement over immigration on the basis of a person's views or religious convictions is hardly possible without someone overreacting and crying "racism".
muslim communities have significant portions who i) do not support homosexuality being legal (82% with 52% oppose, 30% unsure) ii) think gay teachers should be fired (47%) iii) feel women should always be subservient to their husband (39%) iv) will not condemn violence as a response to insulting the prophet muhammad (32%) v) would not report someone to the police if they expressed a desire to engage in terrorism abroad (66%) vi) support the replacement of national law with Sharia Law (23%) vii) either support or are indifferent to stoning people for adultery (21%) viii) support polygamy (31%) (https://www.channel4.com/press/news/c4-survey-and-documentary-reveals-what-british-muslims-really-think)
and this is amongst settled muslim communities in Britain (I am more familiar with UK research, but I don't think it unfair to consider UK and German muslim immigants broadly similar) immigrants are typically far more conservative (see: your BAMF report)
pretending that having some objection to this is "racism" is only fueling the current problems seen across Europe as populations find the only parties sharing any of their concerns over this are lunatic far right groups
working versions of your links:
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-needs-288000-foreign-workers-annually-until-2040-study/a-70885279
I'm not arguing that anti-immigrant division isn't fueled by the ruling elite to cause class infighting - it is.
I'm arguing that infighting is nonetheless antithetical to class solidarity. Saying nobody listens to working class people about migrants inherently excludes working class migrants. Pretty much nobody is fully native to where they live - everyone has migrated at some point or another.
If you care about class consciousness - then I'd recommend you don't try and divide us further by claiming Muslims are "diluting the culture" because some (even if currently most) are not tolerant of LGBTQ+ people as if that's an inherent thing to people practicing Islam - it takes time for people to become more accepting - as if gay people in the UK were accepted by the majority of western Christians 20-30 years ago (and even now trans people are still being demonized) - that's less than one generation for people living in relatively stable material conditions - just give people time and be nice.
Also, immigration will become more and more common in the coming years whether you like it or not - be it due to aging populations, labour exploitation (from western oligarchs), war (in large part bolstered by the global north's war machine), climate change (again disproportionately caused by "developed" nations like Germany and the UK) - so crying about how you have a "preference that conservative lslam be prejudiced against at the point of immigration." - is not just xenophobic but fundamentally unjust - you can't have your cake and eat it too.
It's okay to have concerns about religious groups' acceptance of other people - but the only way to resolve that is by working with them and showcasing how we're not all that different.
And look you may not identify as racist - but the phrasing you use is indistinguishable from racist rhetoric - and I hope you aren't offended by being called out for racists remarks - as pretty much everyone has at some point been and said racist things - the point is to recognize it and actively engage in anti-racism whenever that happens.
Saying that people will adopt far-right views when called out for being racist were most likely already sympathetic to those views in the first place. We shouldn't coddle racist viewpoints out of fear they'll become more racist.
Integration challenges can be discussed without resorting to racism or xenophobia. Not by using prejudice and exclusion but through understanding and inclusion.
If you don't know where to start - go to pro-Palestine marches and meet and talk to Muslim people - I can guarantee you'll see we're all in this shit together and we're all just trying to survive.
In Germany, they view extremist politics as anything to do with Islam, so if you promote the expulsion of Muslims or their reeducation or forcing them to sign pledges to Israel to become citizens, you're just being German.
How about you stfu?
You seem to have no Idea what you are talking about.
Your foreign minister applauds Israel for mass killing children, your rising AfD party wants to deport Muslims and you now demand that anyone becoming a Germany citizen give the racist state of Israel a stamp of approval. Everyone watched half your politicians blame the Christmas ramming attack on Islam even though the perpetrator hated Muslims. You send a non-Jewish antisemitism commisars to bully Jews who criticize Israel. You are burying liberalism's corpse. So enlighten me.
And what has this to do with being German?
I'm as German as you can be. I voted for none of these Parties and are actively fighting Nazis on EVERY FUCKING CORNER ,for example, I just helped to publish an Article about Nazis in our Trade schools, will this get me expelled? Maybe! But I did it and would do it over and over again! And then you come along and say stupid shit like "you’re just being German."
"(...) you’re just being German."
This statement in itself is being an enormous generalization of ALL 83.500.000 Germans, which is racist in itself.
" (...) rising AfD party wants to deport Muslims"
Which was followed by the largest uprising in modern German history. And let me tell you the People on the Street were.... German :O
Why I know that? BECAUSE I LIVE HERE AND WAS WITH THEM!
If you want to criticize our Government do as you like, I have no stakes in this shitshow.
My Party is not (yet) in the Bundestag.
But I fight Nazis tooth and nail on every possible front I can reach. And I'm not going to take such an unreflected and uniformed Statement about what "German" is from someone who can't even read our language and pastes his worldview together from Global Press.
And I'm by far not the only one. Many Germans fight their Family, Friend and Colleagues about these topics EVERY FUCKING DAY.
How dare you to disrespect us like that?! WE are here! WE do our part! And WE are Germans!
So shut your racist mouth!
You seem to have misunderstood what I said. I'm not saying these terrible things are just being German. I'm saying that the current government and political class doing these terrible things view these things as "just being German" and define extremism as "being Islamic". I know that the majority of Germans are liberals, humanists, educated and anti-racist.
That might be a good idea, but I think that folks need to examine fundamental factors underlying the rise of the far right and the ways in which limiting speech may be a weak remedy.
Germany has never had a problem with it before (post-WWII).
What's the use of that information? They have that problem now.
It appears to be an internationally occurring problem.
No, I mean they have never had a problem limiting Nazi speech before.
Quite contrary, we have a big problem censoring Nazi speech.
We have some very specific rules when something can be censored and when it can't - and the far right has quite some training in "just not saying that, maybe only implicating it a little".
So any legal action outlawing then needs to rest on really solid legal basis or it will fail. Such a failure would be the propaganda the right wishes for.
Consequently they are always just shy of openly saying things but implying them. Like having election posters where their politicians can say "No we're not showing a Hitler salute in that image, we were just miming a roof of a house over a bunch of kids"
Sometimes a single politician gets caught with doing something too far, but then (of course) the whole party acts like they are shocked.
Getting rid of this shit is not easy, unfortunately. We can't censor what we don't like willy nilly.
Getting rid of a platform who's owner is trying to influence your elections even though he isn't even a citizen is not "willy nilly" by any means.
I personally absolutely agree of getting rid of that shit. I just said there are big hurdles, and you need to do so in a very organized and based on proof way.
You can't just outlaw them because you don't like them, that doesn't work. Germany having laws against hate speech doesn't mean there's not also a law about freedom of expression in the Grundgesetz.
You need to prove them to be against democracy in a watertight way. That's what I mean with not willy-nilly.
Or as I read it once: Democracy implicitly protects its enemies.
I'd like to just clarify a point which I think @[email protected] is making as well.
My concern about censorship is not based on "fairness" or being sympathetic to voices I disagree with. I'm strictly speaking about effectiveness.
Creating rules about what ideas aren't allowed to be expressed has a particular set of strengths and weaknesses that have to be understood in order for this tool to be used effectively.
The strength is that it can slow dissemination of dangerous ideas. Restrictions on certain types of speech can be very effective for that. The weakness is that it cannot eliminate the infectiousness of an idea. Additionaly: suppressed ideas which have appeal may spread widely without opponents knowing about it, and opponents of these ideas may not develop counter-messaging that diminishes the appeals of these ideas. Lastly, restrictions on speech can create an evolutionary pressure on words and ideas to specifically find the weaknesses in the restrictions. A ban on saying certain words inherently creates a list of things you can say instead.
Taken altogether, prohibitions on speech or ideas are a lot like antibiotics. They're very powerful and effective, but they lose their efficacy with use. And overusing them can actually lead to a complete breakdown in their efficacy. So they must be used in concert with a wide array of ecosystem health measures to limit their need.
You might say 'Why worry? They've worked so far.' But if you do, that over reliance can lead to a catastrophic failure.
If you block certain social media channels that you personally don't agree with while being in charge, you set a dangerous precedent for other people blocking things they don't agree with should they ever come to power.
And censorship doesn't address the root cause in the first place. Alt-right / far-right clowns know that they are often operating outside of the law or at the very least skirting a line that makes them prone to being observed, so they'll typically operate with VPNs or other obfuscation tech that will let them access Twitter regardless.
All a block achieves is that regular citizens can't inform themselves about the crap that is being spewed to invalidate claims made by the right.
Germany has never had a problem with censoring Nazis in the past. I see no reason why they should start.
And I have no problem censoring harmful propaganda. The idea that harmful propaganda should be allowed because of some nebulous concept of freedom of speech is nonsense.
The AfD is a legitimate political party. Legitimate as in, they haven't been caught with anything openly anti-constitutional.
Individual members have been, and were tried in court, and if found guilty were publicly expelled from the party, hence they operate under the guise of plausible deniability for the time being.
Nazi propaganda has been blocked once it's confirmed anti-constitutional, but you can't block a political party just like that.
And blocking Twitter as a whole is quite a big difference to blocking certain individuals or groups. No matter how much crap is on there, there are still a lot of legitimate postings, not least from legit government actors etc.
they haven't been caught with anything openly anti-constitutional.
The federal party is suspected to be anti constitutional and several state level partys have been declared as anti constitutional by the Verfassungsschutz, so that's not completely true.
Would you say that banning political parties is undemocratic? If so, should the NSDAP (Nazi Party) be un-banned?
No, where did I say that? All I said is that as long as they are a legitimately recognized party, they can't be censored.
I'm all in favor of banning the AfD, but only after this has been achieved, can their public channels, mouthpieces and whatever be censored, not the other way around.
Because they have their own problems which are real an not reality tv bullshit.
A world propaganda mouthpiece with millions of users is not "reality TV bullshit" and dismissing it like it has no effect is the wrong thing to do.
So what is the right thing to do homie?
See my very first post.