Will they ban AfD?
Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2024 5:37 pm
Reports on the BBC of allegations that the AfD held a meeting that discussed mass deportations of German citizens who didn't meet the party's definition of German. And that the government is considering banning them in consequence. They've struck me as a dangerous menace for a while, so perhaps it's about time.
Of course, here, we don't have a constitution, let alone one that allows the government to ban a political party. Think about it - various British governments have helped places from Germany to Hong Kong draft their own constitutions (or Basic Laws, as in both those cases), but have never got around to suggesting we have one! But anyway, the closest we come to Germany's power to ban political parties on the basis that they oppose freedom and democracy is the power to ban an organisation on the basis that it supports terrorism. The UK definition of terrorism is basically use or threat of violence to people or property for an ideological cause, so that could include some of our far-right groups, but sadly it's never been used against them. On the other hand, given who Suella Braverman would have happily banned if she'd thought she could get away with it and that others like her are waiting in the wings to go for being the next Tory leader, possibly the less it's used here, the better.
Oh and I smiled at the claim that German intelligence had used Stasi-like tactics to infiltrate the meeting. A popular right-wing stunt. Schätzchen, a democratic government is allowed to spy on people it has reason to believe are literally fascists. It's not allowed to spy on just anyone it doesn't like, but it can - and should - keep an eye on people who seek to undermine democracy. "Protection of the Constitution" - the clue is in the name. One could wait until they actually hold an armed uprising - but wait, Germany tried that approach in the past and it didn't work out too well.
Of course, here, we don't have a constitution, let alone one that allows the government to ban a political party. Think about it - various British governments have helped places from Germany to Hong Kong draft their own constitutions (or Basic Laws, as in both those cases), but have never got around to suggesting we have one! But anyway, the closest we come to Germany's power to ban political parties on the basis that they oppose freedom and democracy is the power to ban an organisation on the basis that it supports terrorism. The UK definition of terrorism is basically use or threat of violence to people or property for an ideological cause, so that could include some of our far-right groups, but sadly it's never been used against them. On the other hand, given who Suella Braverman would have happily banned if she'd thought she could get away with it and that others like her are waiting in the wings to go for being the next Tory leader, possibly the less it's used here, the better.
Oh and I smiled at the claim that German intelligence had used Stasi-like tactics to infiltrate the meeting. A popular right-wing stunt. Schätzchen, a democratic government is allowed to spy on people it has reason to believe are literally fascists. It's not allowed to spy on just anyone it doesn't like, but it can - and should - keep an eye on people who seek to undermine democracy. "Protection of the Constitution" - the clue is in the name. One could wait until they actually hold an armed uprising - but wait, Germany tried that approach in the past and it didn't work out too well.