5 ms·

Caldwell is a Claremont guy, which is key to understanding where he's coming from. First Things is an christian nationalist / natcon outlet funded by (among oth

by RGS1811 11d ago

Caldwell is a Claremont guy, which is key to understanding where he's coming from. First Things is an christian nationalist / natcon outlet funded by (among others) Peter Thiel. That doesn't prevent him from being correct about things in this article, but it's worth noting the outlet and source. Caldwell systematically elides the völkisch-nationalist character of the AfD and their adjacency to neo-Nazism. He underplays Höcke's extremism, ignores the Potsdam meeting, and leads us to believe (falsely) that the identification of the AfD as rechtsextrem was somehow a biased political stunt. It wasn't, there is plenty of backing for the classification, and it would not have been undemocratic to apply the Verfassungschutz and ban them permanently. edit: typo

sp527 11d ago
I'm not German and knew little of this subject, but I read the piece word for word and I can say with certainty you have not offered enough of a counterargument here. I looked up the Potsdam meeting you mentioned and there were literally members of CDU (Merkel's party) present as well. It's utterly laughable to try and use that to then exclusively castigate a different political party for having had some of its members present. By your illogic, we would be forced to infer that the CDU is also "extremist". So far, I'm left feeling like AfD has indeed been misrepresented by the liberal western media. And, I say this as someone who certainly does not agree with some of their positions. For example, being "skeptical" about climate change in 2026 is sheer idiocy. But what is very clear to me is that Germany has a democracy problem. The system as described has not been truly democratic. It instead sounds approximately 'left-leaning authoritarian', right down to your insinuation that a political party should have been banned for its speech. In case anyone in Germany is interested in rediscovering democracy, please note that THIS is what it looks like: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
- RGS1811 11d ago
  There's a big difference between "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it" and "I disapprove of your stated objective to expel german citizens who don't meet your ethnic/cultural standard of German-ness, but will defend to the death your right to govern." A century ago, Germans tolerated a völkisch-nationalist party that wanted to expel non-german ethnic groups as well. They did; they expelled millions of them to Poland and liquidated them there. The Verfassungschutz was implemented after WWII to prevent that element in society from taking power again. I find the vociferousness with which clueless Americans have decided to defend the AfD bizarre. You don't know the political context, you clearly don't know the history, but you've decided that "Germany has a democracy problem." Why are you so entitled to an opinion?
  - sp527 11d ago
    > "I disapprove of your stated objective to expel german citizens who don't meet your ethnic/cultural standard of German-ness, but will defend to the death your right to govern." I can't believe you're still insisting on this complete straw man. AfD's stated position on immigration is very easy to look up and it's NOT this. At all. You are parroting a leftwing lie. They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians. You're free to disagree with that position, but lying about it and then descending into such an absurdly histrionic spiral over the matter does your argument absolutely no favors. That only supports what people like Caldwell are saying and, ironically, precisely bolsters AfD's argument about suppression of the discourse and an honest discussion of Germany's problems. In fact, you've offered a perfect demonstration of what Caldwell covered in the first section of this very essay. > you clearly don't know the history Are you seriously trying to imply I'm not aware of the Holocaust?
    - RGS1811 11d ago
      By your own admission, (top of your first comment) you don't know what you're talking about. I never implied you aren't aware of the Holocaust. Thinking that the Holocaust is the only history to know here is indicative. You don't seem to understand the history of the BRD or how its constitution is structured, and you clearly don't know the internal history of the AfD, which started as a mixed center-right libertarian anti-EU party and has become more and more extreme over the past decade. You being angry doesn't make anything I've said wrong.
    - kuerbel 11d ago
      You just said: >I'm not German and knew little of this subject Yet now you know their party stance by heart and come to their rescue? That is Sus, with a capital S. >They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians. This is not what they really want, is it now? They also want to deport Germans with attained citizenship. It's what they said out loud. There are records of this. Anything else is >parroting a right wing >lie.
      - 11d ago
- esseph 11d ago
  > “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” This has not led to positive outcomes currently in the US. I agree with it in theory, I truly do. I think it also gets used as a tool for politicians, companies, and governments to say unhinged shit not based in fact to drive emotional reactions that actually hurts other people in various ways.
  - sp527 11d ago
    > This has not led to positive outcomes currently in the US. I can't disagree. But, paraphrasing Churchill, (true) democracy is indeed 'the worst form of government except for all the others.' And Americans will be given opportunities to remedy their mistakes. Both this year and especially in 2028. We might find that MAGA having the freedom to speak their mind will turn enough of the electorate against them. Or we will continue to choose poorly and suffer the consequences. But those consequences will have been arrived at honestly. And that matters.
    - xethos 11d ago
      > But those consequences will have been arrived at honestly The problem with that is that Republican voters will not be the first, and certainly not the only, people to experience those consequences. Nor will they be the ones to suffer the majority, and especially not the worst, of them. The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless
      - sp527 11d ago
        > The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless The problem with this statement is that, in context, it clearly only prioritizes the interests and suffering of particular groups. MAGA emerged because an altogether different group was completely disenfranchised by neoliberalism and ignored for a very long time. But it turns out they were still a major part of our country and they still had voting power. So did the system actually break or did it work precisely as intended?
- sph 11d ago
  “I'm not German and knew [sic] little of this subject, and here are my opinions for why you’re wrong.” Participation is not mandatory, you know. What is the agenda you’re trying to push at all cost through your misinformation?
  - sp527 11d ago
    The agenda is TRUTH, which apparently doesn't matter anymore because almost everyone has become a tribal extremist. I consider myself an accidental moderate. I look for the best answer. I don't turn off my brain and bow down to any specific party or platform.
    - owebmaster 11d ago
      Every extremist thinks their ideas are moderate and so are the ideas of the rest of extremists they support. Elon Musk also thinks his agenda is truth. Trump created a social network named Truth Social
      - sp527 10d ago
        If we were to examine your political views, I'm quite certain that your positions would correlate highly with those of the Democratic Party, and likely rather closely to its most polarized incarnation found in San Francisco. By contrast, I make up my own mind on each individual issue. I believe strongly in restrictive and controlled legal immigration, orchestrated in a manner that maximally benefits the citizenry to which a government is beholden. I support anti-trust enforcement. I am in favor of legalized abortion. I am opposed to wealth taxes that might trigger capital flight. I am in favor of progressive property tax levies on luxury homes. I am strongly in favor of solar geo-engineering as a solution to climate change (unlike progressives). I am deeply opposed to tariffs as a mechanism to remedy the woes of the disenfranchised. I support right to work laws. I do not have a political home. I choose what I see as good sense and it aligns with no party. THAT is what a true moderate is.
        huurtehoog 10d ago
- illiac786 10d ago
  What about them being right extremists, as the Verfassungsschutz has demonstrated, looking at hundreds of pieces of evidence? The party, meaning the people composing the party, are extremists. And either they are crazy (possible, like with all extremism) or they want to destroy Germany (maybe a mix of both). You can look at their carefully phrased statements all you want, they are all about leaving a doubt. These are politicians. But sometimes they slip: What about leaving the EU and the Euro? Shouldn’t that worry anyone? How is that not in the Programm yet their leader states it is her position? Not really a detail. Political parties all lie, but this one is at the far end of the spectrum.

by RGS1811 11d ago

sp527 11d ago

I'm not German and knew little of this subject, but I read the piece word for word and I can say with certainty you have not offered enough of a counterargument here. I looked up the Potsdam meeting you mentioned and there were literally members of CDU (Merkel's party) present as well. It's utterly laughable to try and use that to then exclusively castigate a different political party for having had some of its members present. By your illogic, we would be forced to infer that the CDU is also "extremist". So far, I'm left feeling like AfD has indeed been misrepresented by the liberal western media. And, I say this as someone who certainly does not agree with some of their positions. For example, being "skeptical" about climate change in 2026 is sheer idiocy. But what is very clear to me is that Germany has a democracy problem. The system as described has not been truly democratic. It instead sounds approximately 'left-leaning authoritarian', right down to your insinuation that a political party should have been banned for its speech. In case anyone in Germany is interested in rediscovering democracy, please note that THIS is what it looks like: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

RGS1811 11d ago
There's a big difference between "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it" and "I disapprove of your stated objective to expel german citizens who don't meet your ethnic/cultural standard of German-ness, but will defend to the death your right to govern." A century ago, Germans tolerated a völkisch-nationalist party that wanted to expel non-german ethnic groups as well. They did; they expelled millions of them to Poland and liquidated them there. The Verfassungschutz was implemented after WWII to prevent that element in society from taking power again. I find the vociferousness with which clueless Americans have decided to defend the AfD bizarre. You don't know the political context, you clearly don't know the history, but you've decided that "Germany has a democracy problem." Why are you so entitled to an opinion?
- sp527 11d ago
  > "I disapprove of your stated objective to expel german citizens who don't meet your ethnic/cultural standard of German-ness, but will defend to the death your right to govern." I can't believe you're still insisting on this complete straw man. AfD's stated position on immigration is very easy to look up and it's NOT this. At all. You are parroting a leftwing lie. They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians. You're free to disagree with that position, but lying about it and then descending into such an absurdly histrionic spiral over the matter does your argument absolutely no favors. That only supports what people like Caldwell are saying and, ironically, precisely bolsters AfD's argument about suppression of the discourse and an honest discussion of Germany's problems. In fact, you've offered a perfect demonstration of what Caldwell covered in the first section of this very essay. > you clearly don't know the history Are you seriously trying to imply I'm not aware of the Holocaust?
  - RGS1811 11d ago
    By your own admission, (top of your first comment) you don't know what you're talking about. I never implied you aren't aware of the Holocaust. Thinking that the Holocaust is the only history to know here is indicative. You don't seem to understand the history of the BRD or how its constitution is structured, and you clearly don't know the internal history of the AfD, which started as a mixed center-right libertarian anti-EU party and has become more and more extreme over the past decade. You being angry doesn't make anything I've said wrong.
  - kuerbel 11d ago
    You just said: >I'm not German and knew little of this subject Yet now you know their party stance by heart and come to their rescue? That is Sus, with a capital S. >They want to deport undocumented migrants and remigrate certain refugee groups, such as Ukrainians. This is not what they really want, is it now? They also want to deport Germans with attained citizenship. It's what they said out loud. There are records of this. Anything else is >parroting a right wing >lie.
    - 11d ago
esseph 11d ago
> “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” This has not led to positive outcomes currently in the US. I agree with it in theory, I truly do. I think it also gets used as a tool for politicians, companies, and governments to say unhinged shit not based in fact to drive emotional reactions that actually hurts other people in various ways.
- sp527 11d ago
  > This has not led to positive outcomes currently in the US. I can't disagree. But, paraphrasing Churchill, (true) democracy is indeed 'the worst form of government except for all the others.' And Americans will be given opportunities to remedy their mistakes. Both this year and especially in 2028. We might find that MAGA having the freedom to speak their mind will turn enough of the electorate against them. Or we will continue to choose poorly and suffer the consequences. But those consequences will have been arrived at honestly. And that matters.
  - xethos 11d ago
    > But those consequences will have been arrived at honestly The problem with that is that Republican voters will not be the first, and certainly not the only, people to experience those consequences. Nor will they be the ones to suffer the majority, and especially not the worst, of them. The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless
    - sp527 11d ago
      > The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless The problem with this statement is that, in context, it clearly only prioritizes the interests and suffering of particular groups. MAGA emerged because an altogether different group was completely disenfranchised by neoliberalism and ignored for a very long time. But it turns out they were still a major part of our country and they still had voting power. So did the system actually break or did it work precisely as intended?
sph 11d ago
“I'm not German and knew [sic] little of this subject, and here are my opinions for why you’re wrong.” Participation is not mandatory, you know. What is the agenda you’re trying to push at all cost through your misinformation?
- sp527 11d ago
  The agenda is TRUTH, which apparently doesn't matter anymore because almost everyone has become a tribal extremist. I consider myself an accidental moderate. I look for the best answer. I don't turn off my brain and bow down to any specific party or platform.
  - owebmaster 11d ago
    Every extremist thinks their ideas are moderate and so are the ideas of the rest of extremists they support. Elon Musk also thinks his agenda is truth. Trump created a social network named Truth Social
    - sp527 10d ago
      If we were to examine your political views, I'm quite certain that your positions would correlate highly with those of the Democratic Party, and likely rather closely to its most polarized incarnation found in San Francisco. By contrast, I make up my own mind on each individual issue. I believe strongly in restrictive and controlled legal immigration, orchestrated in a manner that maximally benefits the citizenry to which a government is beholden. I support anti-trust enforcement. I am in favor of legalized abortion. I am opposed to wealth taxes that might trigger capital flight. I am in favor of progressive property tax levies on luxury homes. I am strongly in favor of solar geo-engineering as a solution to climate change (unlike progressives). I am deeply opposed to tariffs as a mechanism to remedy the woes of the disenfranchised. I support right to work laws. I do not have a political home. I choose what I see as good sense and it aligns with no party. THAT is what a true moderate is.
      - huurtehoog 10d ago
illiac786 10d ago
What about them being right extremists, as the Verfassungsschutz has demonstrated, looking at hundreds of pieces of evidence? The party, meaning the people composing the party, are extremists. And either they are crazy (possible, like with all extremism) or they want to destroy Germany (maybe a mix of both). You can look at their carefully phrased statements all you want, they are all about leaving a doubt. These are politicians. But sometimes they slip: What about leaving the EU and the Euro? Shouldn’t that worry anyone? How is that not in the Programm yet their leader states it is her position? Not really a detail. Political parties all lie, but this one is at the far end of the spectrum.