[KurtFF8]

Source

More than 100,000 people turned out across Germany on Saturday in protest against the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, which sparked an outcry after it emerged that the party’s members discussed mass deportation plans at a meeting of extremists.

In Frankfurt, about 35,000 people joined a call under the banner “Defend democracy – Frankfurt against the AfD”, marching in the financial heart of Germany. A similar number, some carrying posters like “Nazis out”, turned up in the northern city of Hanover.

Protests were also held in cities including Braunschweig, Erfurt and Kassel and many smaller towns, mirroring mobilisation every day over the past week. In all, demonstrations have been called in about 100 locations across Germany from Friday through the weekend, including in Berlin on Sunday.

Politicians, churches and Bundesliga coaches have all urged people to stand up against the AfD.

The protests began after it emerged AfD party members had attended meetings with neo-Nazis and other extremists to discuss the mass deportation of migrants, asylum seekers and German citizens of foreign origin deemed to have failed to integrate.

Among the participants at the talks near the east German city of Potsdam was Martin Sellner, a leader of Austria’s Identitarian Movement, which subscribes to the “great replacement” conspiracy theory that claims there is a plot by non-white migrants to replace Europe’s “native” white population.

News of the gathering sent shock waves across Germany at a time when the AfD is soaring in opinion polls, just months ahead of three major regional elections in eastern Germany where their support is strongest.

The anti-immigration party confirmed the presence of its members at the meeting, but has denied taking on the “remigration” project championed by Sellner.

Leading politicians including Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who joined a demonstration last weekend, said any plan to expel immigrants or citizens alike amounted to “an attack against our democracy, and in turn, on all of us”.

He urged “all to take a stand – for cohesion, for tolerance, for our democratic Germany”.

Friedrich Merz, the leader of the opposition conservative CDU party, wrote online that it was “very encouraging that thousands of people are demonstrating peacefully against rightwing extremism”.

Besides members of the AfD, two members of the hard-right faction Werteunion of the CDU were also at the meeting near Potsdam cited by Correctiv.

Amid the outrage over the Potsdam meeting, the Werteunion’s leader Hans-Georg Maassen said on Saturday it had decided to split from the CDU. The group said it has about 4,000 members, many of whom were originally members of the CDU or the CDU’s Bavarian sister party CSU.

Formed in 2013 as an anti-establishment, anti-euro force by academics and economists, the AfD has quickly morphed into an anti-immigrant party, ditching its original founders.

It gained particular traction in 2015 when about a million migrants and refugees arrived in Germany, and the party entered the Bundestag for the first time in 2017, initially as the leading opposition party.

Its popularity has risen again since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, on the back of disgruntlement over high energy bills, food inflation, and what it sees as the high moral and financial cost of defending Ukraine.

With Agence France-Presse

Great to see the people of Germany send a strong message against fascism.

[JohnRawls]

Source



Great to see the people of Germany send a strong message against fascism.

Mostly in Western Germany right? The bastion of AFD is East Germany though.

[Istanbuller]

Germany has a huge refugee/ migrants problem.

There was a deal between Turkey and Germany to share refuge burden and later it was planned to allocate refugees all across EU members from Germany. But it didn't happen. Germany ended up with millions of refugees just like Turkey.

[Verv]

There's something really off about saying you are defending democracy by essentially marching to remove the right of a political party to exist and to be able to speak their goals freely...

Moreover, the rights of anyone to free association. I do not support Nazism in the slightest, but using it as grounds for the banning of a party that they have allegedly met with "Neo-Nazis" is a threat to democracy, especially when it seems to be part of a smear campaign. In today's day and age, you don't have to say much to be called a Nazi by the media - people have done this for the sitting President of the USA who has a bunch of Jewish grandchildren.

The protests began after it emerged AfD party members had attended meetings with neo-Nazis and other extremists to discuss the mass deportation of migrants, asylum seekers and German citizens of foreign origin deemed to have failed to integrate.

... Isn't it the right of a nation to

- deport migrants that violate the law
- control its own policies concerning migration and asylum
- remove citizenship from dual citizens who have grossly violated local law and custom and are foreign origin?

Britain attempted to strip citizenship from one of the ISIS brides.

I would definitely oppose stripping citizenship of a duo-national for misdemeanors and such, but ... sending a man who attacked children or women sexually or a murderer so they have to spend their days kicking rocks in East Armpit, Traschcandia is not something I would oppose.

[ingliz]

Britain attempted to strip citizenship from one of the ISIS brides.

The decision to remove Shamima Begum's British citizenship was unlawful.

Shamima Begum was not a dual citizen.

In international law, withdrawing nationality from any person so as to render him or her stateless is unacceptable.

Also

Trafficking was a mandatory, relevant consideration in determining whether it was conducive to the public good and proportionate to deprive her of citizenship.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission acknowledged there was credible suspicion that Begum was recruited, transferred, and then harboured for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

[Verv]

The decision to remove Shamima Begum's British citizenship was unlawful.

Shamima Begum was not a dual citizen.

In international law, withdrawing nationality from any person so as to render him or her stateless is unacceptable.

Also

Trafficking was a mandatory, relevant consideration in determining whether it was conducive to the public good and proportionate to deprive her of citizenship.

The Special Immigration Appeals Commission acknowledged there was credible suspicion that Begum was recruited, transferred, and then harboured for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

That's correct - they had argued that since she would be eligible for naturalization without any question if she merely applied due to bloodline, it would be valid for her to be stripped of UK citizenship. Which, of course, is against the letter of international law - only a dual citizen can be stripped of a citizenship.

I have no idea as to the circumstances behind the Crown's case, but perhaps they had thought she maintained dual citizenship...

It's actually very tricky for countries to track these things - I am aware of cases of people claiming they have canceled their other citizenship while obtaining Korean citizenship, but in reality, they appealed to the embassy and had the application for citizenship terminated or even had someone on the inside that just knew to hold it for a minute and then drop it.

One of the things they often also say is that you need to only travel on one passport - do not re-enter this country on your other passport, etc.

So, I would not be surprised if the Crown simply didn't know and then just decided to go through with throwing up a rather questionable argument about how she'd get it anyway when they were confronted with that reality. Also would not even be surprised if she had had Pakistani citizenship and canceled it - it's very common for children to go throught he process of acquiring dual citizenship after birth in Korea, so why not in the UK...

It's a fascinating story.

[Rich]

What's so amusing about the Shamina Begin case is that the Liberals are so full of narcissistic self entitlement, that they really are genuinely surprised when the likes of Vladimir Putin and Narendra Modi are not interested in listening to the Liberals moralistic lectures on international law. This is the Liberal all over. If he wants to kidnap, torture and cage people without trial or due process, well than of course he's entitled to do so, but God Forbid that anyone else should take that liberty, with out the liberal's seal of approval.