Germany is not in the news at the moment, and you know why. The stories about the attempted assassination of Trump and Trump's selection of J.D. Vance as his running mate are dominating the headlines with good reason. But the world marches on, and what happens overseas matters here.
According to an article in The Publica, a court in Germany has ruled that members of the Alternative for Germany party can be banned from owning firearms.
From the piece:
In its July 1 judgment, the 22nd Chamber of the Düsseldorf Administrative Court explained that the AfD members and affiliates engage in “anti-constitutional activities” and are presumed ineligible to own weapons under the country’s strict gun control laws.
Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, has formally placed the AfD under suspicion of working to undermine the country’s democracy. That classification was upheld in May by an administrative court, which rejected an AfD lawsuit over the designation.
“Merely membership in a party suspected of anti-constitutional activities regularly leads to the presumption of ineligibility under gun law under the applicable strict standards of gun law, even if the party has not been banned by the Federal Constitutional Court on the grounds of unconstitutionality” reads an English translation of the Düsseldorf Administrative Court’s decision.
Left Party politician Martina Renner sharply criticized the government for not fulfilling its promise to crack down on right-wing gun ownership and for being too slow to remove gun licenses from far-right extremists.
According to Germany’s Basic Law, political parties have the right to be freely established. Still, the Federal Constitutional Court can determine if a party has failed to conform to democratic principles. (sic)
The AfD has been growing in popularity among young people and those opposed to inflation and immigration.
In May, CNN reported that the AfD is so right-wing that other far-right coalitions in the EU have disowned it. One of the causes for concern was a statement by party member Maximilian Krah:
Before I declare someone a criminal, I want to know what he did. Among the 900,000 SS men, there were also many farmers: there was certainly a high percentage of criminals, but not all of them were. I will never say that anyone who wore an SS uniform was automatically a criminal.
The AfD suspended Krah after the interview.
Germany has every right and reason to be suspicious and nervous when it comes to people who appear to be sympathetic to the Nazis. Efforts to downplay, justify, or eliminate their impact, whether in the US or overseas, are reprehensible. The legacy of Nazi Germany remains one of the most diabolic stains on world history. If, indeed, the AfD and its members harbor Nazi sympathizers, there should be the closest of scrutiny and the fiercest of opposition.
At the same time, using words such as "Nazi" and "fascist" as spotlights to find and subsequently destroy ideological opponents is also nothing short of dangerous. Not only is it dangerous, but it attempts to cheapen the lives of the millions of people who suffered and died under the Third Reich. Recklessly employing those terms at will robs them of their gravity.
No sane, sober, or compassionate person would support the idea of allowing Nazis to flourish or allowing them to arm themselves. But there is a question that must be addressed: what makes one a Nazi or a fascist? The Left has become adept at labeling anyone who is opposed to increasing inflation or unfettered immigration as a fascist or Nazi. Not long before the attempt to take Donald Trump's life, The New Republic featured a magazine cover that showed Trump's face morphed with that of Adolf Hitler. You can see the cover here. If you care to peruse the contents of the site, you will find links to articles that attempt to equate Trump with Hitler.
In the present day, the terms "Nazi" and "fascist" are used liberally by the Left to identify anyone with whom it disagrees. Said person may indeed be a Nazi, complete with a shaved head, a basement full of guns and swastikas, and being a card-carrying member of Stormfront. However, they may also be a person of an unpopular sex and race who is worried about unchecked immigration, the sexualization of children, and the amount of money he is losing to inflation. Such a person may vote for Trump. And in the Left's eyes, there is no difference between the two.
This, of course, is the same Left that has largely been perfectly content with the vicious anti-Semitic demonstrations and attacks across the nation and the globe. Just so we can all be clear: Nazism is bad, but anti-Semitism is good? And they're two different things? The people who want to tell us what to eat, where and how to live, when and if we can worship; and who tell us we cannot decide who enters our country, how much safety and freedom we may have, what we can say or teach our children, what to drive, what healthcare we may receive and how much money we need to give to the government -- these people are afraid of totalitarians? It's hard to tell the players without a scorecard. Those who have concerns about the AfD and Donald Trump, respectively, are likely not equally concerned about the rise of communism or socialism. Che Guevera is lionized. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, all of whose regimes have bloody histories that rank with that of the Third Reich, are conveniently overlooked. A person of conscience will not select one version of totalitarianism over another. That is something that you cannot get "right" if you try it enough times.
And one cannot be selective in the application of justice, social or otherwise. Here are excerpts from another Publica report from Germany:
A young man in Minden, Germany, had his life cut tragically short after being brutally attacked by a gang of “youths.” Police initially refused to release any descriptions of the attackers, but later admitted the main suspect was Syrian.
20-year-old Phillipos Tsanis, who is from a Greek-Polish family, was attacked on June 23 while coming home from a graduation ceremony in the early hours of the morning. While heading back to his residence, Tsanis was confronted by a group of approximately 10 men. Tsanis reportedly pleaded to be left alone, but the situation quickly escalated.
Witnesses to the attack recount seeing Tsanis lying on the ground, being kicked and punched in the head. His assailants continued even when his body went lifeless. After police were called and emergency personnel arrived, Tsanis was rushed to the hospital, where he was put on life support but died three days later of his severe brain injuries.
Following a hasty investigation, one 18-year-old suspect believed to be the one whose blows caused Tsanis’ death was arrested. The man was known to police for previously committing property offenses in the area.
While police initially refused to release details about the suspect’s origin, they later admitted he was a Syrian national and had been arrested at a refugee shelter. The man, named only as Mwafak A., reportedly arrived in Germany in 2016. He has been charged with manslaughter and grievous bodily harm.
None of the other perpetrators have since been arrested, but all were described as having a “Southern appearance.”
Suspicions have also arisen that the motive for the attack was anti-Christian hatred, as Tsanis was wearing a cross necklace at the time of the attack, and similar incidents had reportedly occurred in the area. Neither police nor prosecutors have speculated on the motive of the crime.
Phillipos' father commented:
He was such a peaceful person who thought more and more of the other people. If he only had ten euros in his pocket, he gave it to the needy. He just wanted to enjoy the graduation party with his sister and friends. His life was just beginning. The violence has to stop. This could happen to anyone’s child, and no parent should endure such a devastating loss.
Again, just so I'm clear, it is hateful and bigoted to oppose unchecked and unmonitored immigration into a country, even if attacks against its native-born citizens continue to mount. Did I get that right?
I will gladly stand with anyone against Nazism and fascism and will do so until the bitter end. But I cannot stand with anyone who uses the terms solely to achieve their ends. And I cannot support anyone who says they oppose hate and totalitarianism but only offers their version of both in exchange. Neither is acceptable. One is either opposed to hate, corruption, and fascism, or one is not.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member