Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Alex Starling's avatar

When you say "it is worth remembering the historical origins of this firewall in Germany: erected to keep fascist forces out of power after the fall of the Nazi regime", isn't the point he is making that "who watches the watchers?" - do I get to call a party 'far left' and then pour state funding into suppressing them? Of course not.

But in Germany, that's what's happening to both the right wing parties. During a key debate earlier in the month, Antifa stormed the HQ of the CDU, the party of both Merkel and Adenauer that has been at the centre of German politics since 1949 - but they don't get banned. And Welt reports here how the state funds the protests against the CDU and the AfD (supported by c. 50% of German voters).

https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/plus255383550/Finanzierung-Demos-gegen-rechts-Der-Staat-darf-nicht-mit-Steuergeldern-auf-die-oeffentliche-Meinungsbildung-einwirken.html

Surely this is what JD Vance is getting at? Freedom of speech is important, and it is not for out of touch politicians and a civil service that have mismanaged the last decades to pour taxpayers' money into suppressing 'revolting' voters just because they are fed being told what to think by elite rulers who are not exactly exhibiting competence.

Expand full comment

No posts