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.
Why are we just letting Nazis take over again? Seems like we had a solution to them before.
Money and power..... And propaganda.
The elites don't want immigrants, they want wage slaves. Who will come when they are told to, live like they are told to, work in any condition they are given and leave when they are told to.
So the goal is to deport these pesky immigrants with rights and import those slaves, then those slaves will work for extremely cheap cuz the threat of deportation and how their home countries are beyond fucked anyways.
Who benefits from slavery? Is it the working class (poor and middle) or the elites who will have cheap labor?
Not to mention this will reduce the salaries for everyday Germans, and then elites gets to claim 2 things to fellow germans:
-
look at all the immigrants who are stealing your job and driving your wages down.
-
look at how much our economy is growing (it will be the elites who will be getting all the wealth not the working/poor class)
Btw you can replace the whole scenario in USA as well with the whole H1B visa stuff.
And because people are too wimpy to kill the rich, they’ll go after the next best thing, the slave.
We need less fascists and more Mangiones.
-
When large parts of the population say they'd like less islamic immigration and, instead of listening, politicians patronise them, what you end up with are Nazis..
Don't politician have to serve their country? In Germany's case that means promoting immigration, to have any chance at keeping up the pension and welfare system as it is, because Germans don't get anywhere near enough kids. Being against immigration right now means being for less pension, higher medical costs, worse infrastructure etc. Merkel realized that (more than) ten years ago. The average afd dumbo is still too fucking thick to think further than from wall to wallpaper. There would be other options, of course. Consuming less, getting rid of the thought of eternal growth, but not even worth a thought as long as sexy Christian is still alive and foamy.
I would further and say just immigration is not enough. We need to provide equal rights and opportunities to immigrants as well. Because as long as immigrants can be exploited for lower labor, Germans will also be exploited indirectly.
Whether its about crimes, poverty leads to crime not immigration. Which immigrants tend to be.
Or if it is about equal pay, cuz if immigrants don't get equal pay that will just lead to lower pay for everybody industry wide.
AfD knows this because they serve the rich not the people. They want the threat of deportation to immigrants so they work for cheaper and rich get richer.
And at the same time, when Germans get angry, AfD tells them to direct it towards immigrants not the rich.
Its crazy how many of the world's problems can be solved by having empathy and humanity.
Obviously the way Merkel and CDU did immigration and the way it is still done is far from ideal. Germany needs to change the way it looks at immigrants in general. But I doubt Fritzl sees it that way so yeah, tough times to hope for a better future...
While I don't disagree that there's a serious class battle going on people are also allowed to want there to be less immigration, especially of islamic culture, no? That's democracy. Steamrolling over this, as if it's a totally invalid thought to have, is what leads to the disconnect between urban elite politicians and the mass of people who are frustrated that the border seems to be porous to objectionable social values. You could have a moderate solution, but by ignoring people you end up with them feeling they're only understood by more extreme ideologues.
While I personally don't agree with them, what you are doing here is exactly the kind of patronising I was talking about. The choice between poorer services and immigration should be a democratic choice. People should be allowed to be ok that the country will be poorer but less culturally diverse. If that's important to them. That's that point of having democracy at all- it's not obvious which matters are the more important ones. You may have you own opinions, they may in fact be thoroughly based on data and utilitarian greater good, but as soon as you say 'this whole mass of people must be thick because of what they value and I'm going to ignore them' you're engaging in the exact kind of behaviour that you think you're fighting.
IF(!) people were voting AfD while acknowledging that it will result in less money, general quality of life etc. for them: fair enough. If they made an informed decision to live a shittier life by voting against immigration because that's their priority: all right (he he). But we both know that this is not the case. They fall for the dumb and blatant lies of the populists, telling them they will have more money, better social security, better infrastructure, a better life in general.
No. This is the fundamental of democracy, it's weakness we have to bear with (but only because all the other options are worse). Despite all the bullshit (and there is a lot of bullshit) democracy has to rest on the fact that a population of adults can make a decision. That en masse their bullshit detectors work good enough. Else we become anti democratic ourselves and start favouring a vanguard of the insightful, educated, tasteful, moral, high thinkers "such as ourselves!" that get to patronise everyone else and disregard their opinions.
A lot of people thoroughly dislike conservative Islam. Both as a concept and from firsthand experience. There are other things wrong with the country too. But acting like people have no right to want there to be greater discernment at the border, and in fact call them churlish and mentally deficient for expressing anything of the kind, is what leaves them (and the are many of them) disconnected from the political process, frustrated, and open to the rhetoric of more extreme ideologues.
I myself dislike conservative Islam, same as all religions and ideologies that want to govern other peoples private lives. So fair enough. I'm not acting like people have no right to worry about immigration as it is, those are words that you putting in my mouth. But there has to be a difference between worrying about who comes to this country and calls to expell every brown person from Germany.
In the world of today, don't you worry about democracy, when you look at how easy it has become to influence people based on the vast amount of data collected on every single person, by companies headed by people like Elon Musk? Are you not afraid of the accuracy of algorithms, that can form and modify the opinion of people without them noticing? Are the bullshit detectors really that good? Do you think most people have an accurate idea of what huge amounts of information they generate just by browsing the web and using a smartphone? I think the goal should be to help more people to make informed decisions, as free of external influences as possible. If you think that's patronizing and that we should let things just run their course, I'm pretty sure you'd have to also accept the possibility of the end of democracy in a not too distant future.
those are words that you putting in my mouth
apologies that wasn't my intention
But there has to be a difference between worrying about who comes to this country and calls to expell every brown person from Germany.
who actually is "calling for the explusion of every brown person in germany?" isn't casually referring to this whole block of complex views in such an offhand way part of the problem? can people not express a desire for some who have entered the country with repugnant views to now leave without this being taken as a pogrom against all of a certain ethnicity? i don't think this is what you are saying. i'm just pointing out how easy it is to generalise and mask views that might be different to our own liberal laissaz faire ones but are not in themselves that extreme.
In the world of today, don’t you worry about democracy,
i do. but it survived when the country was dominated by people listening to the pulpit every sunday. and it survived when everyone decided to dispense with "christian" morality at all in the 60's and 70's. it survived when literacy was below 50% in the early 20th century. and it survived when your only news from a handful of paper broadsheets and radio stations controlled by press barons. the problems we have now are definitely problems but they are not entirely new, just a different kind.
there have always been ideologues and fascists. what has played into their hands is refusing to allow very common and very popular concerns to a part of moderate political discussion. when a good proportion of immigrant muslims will express a desire for homosexuality to be illegal* and also express a willingness to stay silent when others support terrorism* then wanting their to be some discerement at the border is surely something that should be discussed. instead we fret over the kneejerk reactions of do-gooders who cry racism. which leaves the problem unsolved and the only people talking about it the exaggeraters and fantasists of the far right.
* https://www.channel4.com/press/news/c4-survey-and-documentary-reveals-what-british-muslims-really-think (UK based)
who actually is "calling for the explusion of every brown person in germany?"
I'm sorry, but are you serious? That is quite literally what the AfD does! https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67948861.amp
"Much discussion allegedly focused on so-called "remigration" - the removal of people with non-German ethnic backgrounds, even if they are citizens of Germany."
Do you not see how this is a far cry from a civil discussion about who enters the country and pretty fucking close to a pogrom? They want people born here, people with German citizenship out of the country because of their ethnicity. And it's not like this is secret information. People know about it when they vote for AfD. Three regional AfD chapters in the states of Thuringia, Saxony, and Saxony-Anhalt have already been reclassified as proven right-wing extremist by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV).
I would also argue that democracy in Germany did indeed not survive the first half of the 20th century, in part due to populism and media propaganda.
I can see your problems with Islam. But feel free to ask the majority of AfD-Voters what they think of homosexuals and start to wonder they wouldn't match with the views of Grey Wolfs just fine...
I’m sorry, but are you serious? That is quite literally what the AfD does!
I was asking quite specifically "who" because it is not an official policy of the AfD. There are certainly large racist elements in AfD but I do not believe all of their voters are frothing at the mouth irrational xenophobes. The voting public are generally less ideologically committed than the parties they end up voting for (again, notwithstanding that there are certianly racists among them). And this is the tragedy of the current discourse; one cannot currently question the wisdom of allowing conservative islam populations into the country without being accused of being "extreme" and of being far more to the right than one actually is. The result is that moderate politicians find the discussion unsafe and have deserted the popluation who are, in no small measure, concerned about the unchecked immigration of those who favour violence as a response to criticism of the prophet muhammad and would in large part remain silent if an associate expressed the desire to engage in terrorism* (The research in this area is UK based but I don't think it's unfair to consider muslim immigrants to the UK and Germany as being largely similar)
The shunning of any talk of "cultural superiority" in polite, liberal, university educated society is what results in the only people talking about it being the far right, and then in exaggerated, fantastical terms. It is trivial for them to pull a veneer of respectability over their possible true intentions (as the AfD are no doubt doing), the result of which is they win votes. And a country that could have had more moderate solutions ends up sliding into insanity.
All because there is an overreaction any time someone suggests that immigration should be controlled on the basis of a persons views or religion or that ones ongoing immigrant status should be conditional on one's behaviour or assocation. Instead a country ends up with little control in this area and the rise of extreme parties that begin to suggest the only solution is to deport generations of migrants..
Banning such parties will not change anything. Starting to talk in moderate terms about how immigration might be far slower and more discriminating is the only thing that will rob the far right extreme parties of their saviour narrative.
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.
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.
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.
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.