- cross-posted to:
- mastodon@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- mastodon@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
right-wing party
Extremist right-wing party. With substantial parts legally being called Nazis.
Even though nowhere in their rules it says anything about this even being any offence.
3: […] Support for violent groups or events is prohibited.
And which later turned out to be completely unsubstantial as many people suspected.
It’s not. “Many people”, aka. AfD supporters and the AfD themselves.
Oh, did he? He just stood there and claimed something. There was supposedly a great report with all the hard facts, but no one was allowed to see it. That’s not much different from “Yes, I did my homework, but then she (sic) ate my dog.”
(The original toot, translated from german)
Thing is, all contents were openly collected and sorted by 3rd parties already. The report is as relevant to anyone aware of any politics as the Principia Mathematica’s Section 54.43 is for thinking humans in order to prove that 1+1=2. The only usefulness lies in AfD supporters being unable to deny the obvious.Isn’t being a nazi illegal in germany? How are there “legal” nazis in a major party?
Being a Nazi is not illegal. As no person themselve is illegal. Saying nazi stuff is illegal tho, so eg. Höcke (party leader) was sued for 13k€ for saying “alles für Deutschland”/“everything for germany”
Is that a Nazi slogan? I am not familiar.
Jup.
banned slogan of the NSDAP’s paramilitary “Sturmabteilung”.
That slogan was originally coined in 1848 by King Ludwig I. But as with many things, the nazis severely tainted it. (Even though it was used by the socialist party after WWII, too.)
There’s a whole German Wikipedia article about this.
These are quite some mental gymnastics going from my toot:
Oh, did he? He just stood there and claimed something. There was supposedly a great report with all the hard facts, but no one was allowed to see it. That’s not much different from “Yes, I did my homework, but then my dog ate it.”
(Correctly translated, btw.)
to:
3: […] Support for violent groups or events is prohibited.
Wow! Just wow! You should sign up as a moderator on mastodon.social. You’d fit right in.
Isn’t this the group whose leaders publicly stated “Germany was safer under Hitler,” then both invited and hosted Elon “Sieg Heil 2x” Musk at a campaign rally?
If you want a more complete list, check the mentioned “secret report” in readable form here, or in original form (hand scanned from paper as to be expected by an official german government body in 2025): part A and part B. The original leaker article is actually largely hidden behind a paywall (https://www.cicero.de/innenpolitik/cicero-veroffentlicht-das-gesamte-geheimgutachten-des-verfassungsschutzes-zur-afd). And it’s 02:00 CET so i’m not gonna search for the original direct links to the files.
Edit: first link being an old version, other two links being the recent version. Both reports being relevant though.
Just for transparency: The first link is the “old” report from 2021 which was public IIRC. The partA/partB links seem to point to the newer one - clearly showing the “VS - NUR FÜR DEN DIENSTGEBRAUCH” (“Verschlusssache” - confidential, official use only) at the top.
I should’ve included more context:
“Someone on mastodon.social reported me for supposedly supporting the German right-wing party.” […] Even though nowhere in their rules it says anything about this even being any offence."
3: […] Support for violent groups
They, openly for years, and now officially, are extrimists and their members systematically violent.
And I just noticed that, as so often with deepl, it first detected the german text as english, therefore translated (english)german to german, and malformed it, so in my working copy it read “meinen” instead of “mein”. Should have double checked that, but >01:30 CET demands its tribute.
Keyword: supposedly
Because that’s what it said in the report my instance has received. Somebody on the moderation team made the same mental gymnastics you did. Just because I’ve questioned the stated conclusion of a report that was kept secret from the public. Nothing else. Nowhere did I say that I support that party. I just don’t like blindly trusting what politicians (and their government institutions) announce without giving any challengeable proof.
Their status as extremist as per that report mentioned in my toot has been revoked/put on hold until a proper court case: German news article
If it was as crystal clear as you make it out, why revoke it?
(These days, the constitutional courts of all the states try to get that status reinstated in their respective states. But that wasn’t a thing back when I did this toot.)
They say/write “they banned for X, but I didn’t do X”, instead of “they banned me for X, but X isn’t even forbidden”, even though it clearly is.
As I said, the report itself is just a compilation of publicly known and collected information. You’d be essentially distrusting that 1 + 1 = 2, because the 5 page mathematical proof is no open to the public. Of course, the actual proof that 1+1=2 is open, but you hopefully get the point.
The VS is completely independent. There are no politicians behind it. Otherwise, the whole thing wouldn’t make sense. Even your source says so.
The status hasn’t been revoked at all. That’s a common misconception. It’s not being taken back, obviously. They are just not calling them extremist openly, until there is a first decision in the lawsuit. Just as any other lawsuit for eg. defamation, no matter which side is on the right - you’ll first be ordered to stop openly calling the other party a liar or similar, or stop doing that by yourself. Again, your source literally states this.
The VS is completely independent.
§7 BVerfSchG:
Die Bundesregierung kann, wenn ein Angriff auf die verfassungsmäßige Ordnung des Bundes erfolgt, den obersten Landesbehörden die für die Zusammenarbeit der Länder mit dem Bund auf dem Gebiete des Verfassungsschutzes erforderlichen Weisungen erteilen.
or in English:
The federal government can, if there is an attack on the constitutional order of the Federation, give necessary orders to the highest Federal State authorities for working together with the Federation in terms of protection of the constitution.
Being limited isn’t that big a deal. My instance has them limited because of their lax moderation and an excess of reply guys. All it means is that I get a notification saying “Someone you might know sent you a notification” and I get to review and accept or deny the notification depending. Plus they have to request permission to follow me so I get to check them out before accepting.
I still have tons of mutuals on
.socialand I get new ones all the time. While each person making the choice about whether to accept notifications or follows from a particular user is going to make their own choices, I don’t think it’s particularly inconvenient.AfD sidebar
For their lack of adequate moderation capacity / interest,
.socialhas one topic they tend to over-react to. AfD sympathizing isn’t that one thing. Not to suggest they’re right here. I’d need the thread context and a better understanding of German to weigh in on that. Moderators are human and they’re going to make a bad call eventually. I’m not in a position to guess whether they made a bad call here. AfD aren’t just some normal political party, though.Maybe send the follow-up mail to the moderation team anyway, including full username. And maybe a explanation that you were just questioning the unavailabily of the report, not intending to endorse the wannabe nazi party. So they get what this is about.
How many days did you wait for an answer? Sometimes people are just very impatient and this week thursday to sunday might have been days off for some German people.
They claim “usually within 24 hours”. 2 days later I still have no reply. But yeah, I might try the follow-up email… although I don’t have much confidence that it’ll do anything. It’s more important that people get to know the risks of these huge monolithic instances.
welcome to mastodon
Sucks for you but, such is the fediverse working as intended. Moderators can’t be expected to have a deep conversation with every moderation decision.
I will agree that Mastodon is not as decentralized as it should be but I’m also not sure how it could be improved. Ideologically there would be a round robin style sign up for approved instances but I’m not sure if that’s technologically feasible.
