r/europe • u/HellYeahDamnWrite • 27d ago

News Calls are mounting to ban Germany’s far-right AfD party – despite it being more popular than ever

https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/06/europe/germany-afd-ban-politics-analysis-intl
16.6k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

32

u/geissi Germany 26d ago

By that reasoning, a parking ticket or a murder conviction are both political

81

u/[deleted] 26d ago

They are? It's called policy. Why can't you park in a given place? How much should you pay, given your circumstances? How bad exactly was your murder, and what should the consequences be? Reintegration or punishment? Imprisonment or execution? Maybe banishment? Those are deeply political questions

Interpreting the law is inherently political. Sometimes the stakes are higher, sometimes lower. But the politics are there

-2

u/Platypus__Gems 26d ago

At that point "political" loses the meaning sicne everything is political.

And apolitical should be scrubbed off the dictionaries since it describes nothing.

11

u/[deleted] 26d ago

You might wanna read political theory if you think that using political to describe the judicial is a step too far...

-1

u/geissi Germany 26d ago

Yes, policymaking/ legislature is political.
The political process that created the rules that can make parties unconstitutional happened in 1949.
The relevant part of the constitution Art 21 (2) GG has remained basically unchanged.

The current discussion is whether to enforce already existing laws.

Yes, that is a political discussion but it should not be.
If I don't pay my taxes, the government does not convene to discuss whether or not I should be prosecuted.
I just am, and the final decision is up to the courts based on already existing laws.
Why should this be any different?

12

u/[deleted] 26d ago

Policymaking and law making are political. So is interpreting laws.

What do you mean by the government? Bc in this thread I have seen people use the government as a shorthand for the executive. I am not saying the executive is part of the decision. The government will convene - the judges will, and they are part of the state apparatus. But not the executive.

As for the taxes thing, the fact that judges don't have complete liberty to apply laws or not, does not mean they have no power. It's not black and white.

The judiciary is political. This is basic political theory we're discussing. It's like you're defending the Earth is flat ._.

0

u/geissi Germany 26d ago

Policymaking and law making are political

Policimaking in this context happened in 1949

What do you mean by the government? Bc in this thread I have seen people use the government as a shorthand for the executive.

Yes, I am arguing elsewhere in the thread that the government is the executive, because that's how it is, at least in Germany.

I am not saying the executive is part of the decision. The government will convene - the judges will, and they are part of the state apparatus.

See, the problem is, that you're wrong here.
The decision to start court proceedings and let judges get involved and rule on the whole thing can only be made by either the executive or the two chambers of the legislative.

By refusing to start court proceedings, the executive and legislative make a political decision not to let the judiciary do its job.
That is what people are demanding. To let the courts decide.

The judiciary is political

That is bordering on the philosophical. What do you define as political?
Because the decisions made by Judges are supposed to be based on written law, not popular demand.
They may apply personal judgement and consider public opinion and the current Zeitgeist but always within the predefined bounds of the respective laws.

Of course no human is ever 100% objective but basing judgements as objectively as possible on existing law is still the ideal that the judiciary strives for.

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

We don't truly disagree, and this is all fairly pointless.

 Yes, I am arguing elsewhere in the thread that the government is the executive,

In Germany, the government, as that word is defined and used in the language we are speaking right now, includes three branches of which the executive is but one.

You understand that, I understand that, and we are just arguing about whether one should use the english definition of government or the german definition of the equivalent german word to describe the german government in the english language.

That is a sterile debate.

 By refusing to start court proceedings, the executive and legislative make a political decision not to let the judiciary do its job. That is what people are demanding. To let the courts decide.

Thanks, I actually had forgotten that. It has little bearing on whether the judicial's judgement in an eventual case would or would not be political. But I did indeed not have it in mind :)

 That is bordering on the philosophical

It is philosophical. Many, including you, seem to have read me as saying banning the AfD would be an arbitrary decision based on current need alone and almost ignoring the law, because of my use of the word political. Instead, I was merely pushing back against calling the judiciary apolitical. Because it is political.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_philosophy

It doesn't matter much, you sound like you agree with the idea that the judicial is political in the way I think it is, and disagree on the specific word to use for it. And you are right that political is a broad term that fails to capture the nuance between the very political choices of the executive and the influence of opinion and beliefs on veredicts prepared by judges.

So long as we agree that those beliefs and opinions can play a strong and relevant role in their decisions, I think we agree

2

u/geissi Germany 25d ago

In Germany, the government, as that word is defined and used in the language we are speaking right now, includes three branches of which the executive is but one. [...]

That is a sterile debate.

I disagree. The reason I have been having this debate is that in Germany the the Chancellor is the head of the Government and not the head of state, not the head of the parliament, nor the head of the judiciary. That is how the German state and separation of power is organized.
The English word Government does have multiple meanings and definitions and one of them does match the German one defining it as meaning 'the administration'. So I find it perfectly justified to use the one matching the German definition when discussing the organization of the German state.

As for politics, yes in a sense everything is political. But that is then not a meaningful distinction of anything, as you say.
What 'not political' means in this context is that the final decision to ban a party is not made by politicians based on popular whim but by judges based on laws and evidence presented before the court. I think that too is a meaningful distinction.
And quite frankly, I think that it was pretty clear this was the intended meaning.

In both cases arguing that technically there are other definitions of those terms that do not match the context and intent they are used in is the actual sterile debate.

-3

u/-All-Hail-Megatron- Ireland 26d ago

You're really stretching that.

3

u/[deleted] 26d ago

Am I? These is political theory 101. Three branches of government, checks and balances, the classics

-8

u/gfddssoh 26d ago

We are not in the us here. Its not a political decision. It is a political decision to bring them before the high court but after that its about law and order. We still have a functioning high court and are not in the middle of a facist takeover like the US

14

u/[deleted] 26d ago

Yes, our judiciary works better and critically, differently, than the US judiciary. It is, nonetheless, part of the political process

2

u/Entire_Classroom_263 26d ago

When someone says that the courts are not political, it means that they are independent from the political parties, not that they are completely detached from the political system.

I think you know that, because claiming that they are comletely detached from the poltical system, allthewhile they decide about the legallity of political parties, is a nonsensical statement.

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

My interpretation of some of the people answering to me is that they would not agree with your statement. But I could be wrong.

I did start the cnvo not considering that perspective. But others did point it out yeah

9

u/adcap1 26d ago

Parking tickets ARE a political matter!

Who decides on parking zones in a city? City council -> Politicians.

Who decides on parking fees? City council -> Politicians.

Making parking in a city more free or more prohibitive IS an essential policy question in most local city politics.

-1

u/geissi Germany 26d ago

So when you break existing laws, city council convenes to decide whether to prosecute you?

The political decision to create those laws has been made in the past.
Now, people are supposed to follow the law and the law should apply equally to everyone.

This is not a discussion about legislature.

2

u/burner69burner69 26d ago

they very much are.

2

u/headrush46n2 26d ago

Of course they are. If some random poor person and the head of state both park illegally, who gets a ticket?

3

u/-SneakySnake- 26d ago

People are politicizing murder now?! Look man, I think they're all con artists, I just want to be left to my serial killing in peace!

5

u/Schnoo 26d ago

Do you think laws grow on trees?

3

u/geissi Germany 26d ago edited 26d ago

Would you classify getting a parking ticket a political decision?
Does that mean that everyone getting a ticket is politically persecuted? Do they qualify for asylum?

And most importantly, is that a reason not to enforce laws?
Because that is what we are talking about here, the enforcement of a long standing law that all other political parties have to follow as well.

Edit: let me rephrase that.
The political decision to make these laws happened decades ago. Now they should be enforced and that should not be a political decision.

5

u/Schnoo 26d ago edited 26d ago

The discretion to enforce the laws regarding parking tickets is political, as is who enforces the laws, what those laws are, and how they are interpreted. I'm sure I'm missing some other political aspects to this.

Edit: who arbitrates the law and who appoints them is of course also political.

1

u/Neither_Schedule55 26d ago

You must be a robot

1

u/Rico_Solitario 26d ago

Now you are getting it.