Germany’s internal intelligence agency – allegedly to protect Democracy – has ruled that Alternative for Germany (AfD) is an extremist party. This sets it on the path to being banned – and a ban on any of its adherents being employed by the German government.
Currently AfD holds 152 out of 630 seats in the Bundestag and is the official opposition to the ruling CDU/CSU/SPD coalition. That right there tells you what the problem is: the CDU/CSU is the nominal Conservative party in Germany while the SPD are the Socialists…but there they are in coalition. Why? Because they are all Establishment. So, too, are Greens and the Left – two pretty much outright Communist parties. Essentially, what you have is the entire German establishment determined to keep AfD out of power. And they thought after the election this past February that this was accomplished…AfD was held to a distinct minority of seats and everything could calmly go on as the Establishment imported Germany’s replacement population. But the most recent polling shows AfD tied with or slightly ahead of the CDU/CSU…and in the old east Germany, the AfD is starting to run away with it. The next election isn’t until 2029…but with AfD rising there is always a risk that the German government could lose a vote of confidence in the Bundestag and that would trigger an election…and as the SPD starts to drop down to political insignificance (after being one of Germany’s two major parties since WWII), they might decide it is better to roll the dice in a new election (polling in eastern Germany – you know, former Communist Germany – has them as low as 10%).
To be fair, the German laws which allow political parties to be banned stem from the reaction to the Nazi era – and we must note that the old Communist Party of Germany was banned in 1956, as have many small parties heavily influenced by Nazi ideology. The claim is made that because the AfD doesn’t like mass immigration they are striking at the heart of Democracy…which is drivel because Democracy doesn’t have anything to do with immigration. They are two entirely separate species of issues. But by casting up the shadow of Hitler they want to turn public opinion against AfD. I’ve mentioned the AfD platform before and it hasn’t anything remotely Nazi in it – in fact, if it is anything compared to the USA, it is a Libertarian ideology (though with generous welfare structures because Germany). They want a decentralized government made up of citizen-legislators and bureaucrats who don’t remain forever entrenched in the realms of power. This is very un-Nazi. Heck, its pretty much un-anything. No nation puts any real restraints on those who grasp for political and economic power. They’re not even anti-immigration – they just want it controlled, an end to bogus asylum claims and the full integration of the immigrants into German society…that is, make them Germans. If anyone can spot Nazism in here then I’m all ears.
Secretary of State Rubio and Vice President Vance issued strong condemnations of the move against AfD – seeing it for what it is: a desperate attempt by a dying political order to remove its opposition. In my view, if Germany goes forward with this ban, then we should not only withdraw from NATO, we should break off diplomatic relations with Germany. The United States cannot afford to be allied with tyrannical regimes.
Trump posted an AI picture of himself dressed up like the Pope and this has caused a lot of outrage…all of it bogus. And I include here some of the official Catholic outrage. After all, the Bishops fussing about this haven’t gotten around to addressing the public scandal of pro-abortion Catholic politicians. A joke picture by Team Trump is hardly something to get all upset about. Sure, it was in poor taste…but not exactly the most important thing going on at the moment, both in secular and religious matters.
I guess some white girl on social media used the N word and then some go fund me type thing raked her in half a million dollars. This has also generated a lot of outrage. But one smart guy I follow on X has noted that if we have different sets of rules for different ethnic groups then there will be a reaction to this. Nobody likes unfair things. If the N word is wrong, then it is wrong. It can’t be wrong for one sort of person to say it but right for another sort. I personally hold to the view that it is a vulgar and insulting term and its best left in the past. But as the word is routinely used by some, I’m not going to call out its use by others.
One set of rules, guys. Pick the rule you want and then everyone has to adhere to it. No special breaks.
Another story that crossed the time line is the arrest of an alleged 5 year old (who is clearly not 5) who was accused of stealing – when arrested, the shouts of racism came fast and furious (the accused being black, the victim being white). This has caused a bit of a social media kerfuffle. There is the real chance that the whole thing was a set-up: that is, some Left pressure group wanted to get a race story and so got one kid to steal from another and had a person handy there to video the interaction. But outside that, people are chiming in with stories of feral youngsters prowling around neighborhoods and businesses just looking for things to steal – and shouting racism when caught. This, I’m confident, is organized crime. It is like the people who go into stores and steal things…this isn’t random. These places are clearly cased in advance and the people doing the stealing pretty much know what they’re looking for (ie, high value, easy resale items). This is the long-term effect of the destruction of societal norms…most notably that theft is bad.
Keep in mind Leftist ideology here: all crime is the result of our unjust system. They sincerely believe this – and, so, their response to crime has been to systemically reduce penalties. This has taught people that they can easily get away from it – theft is a low risk/high reward occupation. Assault or killing is still a no-no (for now), but the Leftist judicial system will look benevolently upon your thievery. But what is forgotten here is that the police don’t exist to protect the honest – they are there to protect the thieves. To ensure they get a fair trial rather than a back-alley whipping or, in more extreme cases, hanging from the most convenient spot. Our Leftist urbanites will put up with a lot…and they’re rich enough to barely be inconvenienced when, say, their car is broken into. But working class and middle class people will only endure it for so long…and after they’ve been robbed a hundred times and the police continue to do nothing, they will take matters into their own hands. There will be curbside tribunals which will dispense rough and ready justice.
And when it happens, I didn’t see a darned thing. Sorry, sun got in my eyes.
There is a way out of this, of course. Start severely punishing petty crime. It actually does the thieves a favor as it will convince a large percentage of them to find something else to do for a living.
Blogs For Victory 
The last history course I took in college, the last quarter of my senior year, was the the history of Europe Post WW2. Keep in mind, this was 1967, so it only covered a couple of decades, but a lot transpired during those two decades. At some point during the course the professor made the off-hand comment that if there was ever a WW3, it would likely be started by Germany – in his humble opinion. I was never quit sure if he was serious, but I suspect that he was.
Well, there IS that history of the last world wars being started by Germany….
The urge to dominate still seems to exist there…but its weirdly working out to dominating the Germans so they may be replaced.
OTOH, this could trigger a very nationalist German backlash…and that could spell trouble.
I’ve known a handful of people of German descent over the course of my life, and I’ve always had the sense from talking to them, even when they didn’t come right out and say it, that they thought they were special, and better in just about every conceivable way, that people of other nationalities and ethnic groups. I don’t think that mindset started with Hitler; he just exploited it.
I spent a week in Berlin in 2019 and I found the same kind of attitude in many of those I met there. I was at a conference so I didn’t interact with a lot of people, but just in exchanges regarding things like buying a new phone charger or basic shopping this is how most came across to me. I know a couple of people who love Germany but they traveled in the south, and it is possible that Berlin has a different vibe, but I disliked the city and from my experience have had no desire to go back to Germany.
I was surprised to see Germany being so accommodating to the influx of people from the Middle East. It always struck me as a nation that, as Spook said, felt superior to everyone else, and all of a sudden they welcomed these newcomers, literally with open arms. There were video clips of women meeting trains of immigrants with food and gifts, and giving interviews about how happy they were to bring these people into their communities. Then I realized it was the same script I have been seeing in American Leftists—that same smug assumption of moral superiority. The virtue signaling was overwhelming.
It led to electing officials who echoed this frenzy of performative super-morality, and now the country is stuck with them as they legislate to protect the immigrants and against their own people. Germany might very well have a populist backlash, but they are hamstrung because I think the flood of military age Middle Eastern men were given some kind of official permission to move to Germany so they can’t be expelled, the way we can expel illegal aliens here. It is their problem, and I think it is finally starting to sink in that it is a problem they are going to have to address—and that might mean taking on thousands of military age men who, for all the Germans know, are trained to some degree.
I think it is time to retire the outrage over the “N-word”. It’s a WORD, people. Its power is wholly dependent on the choice the hearer makes about how to take it.
One day I started to mentally think of all the somewhat insulting words used in my lifetime in my admittedly small part of the world, and of all of them—-and there are dozens—only one has people melting down, freaking out, considering it the most heinous hate crime imaginable, blah blah blah.
There is a slur for every ethnicity, and I’m sure I don’t know them all. Some are merely abbreviations—Paki for Pakistani, Newfie for Newfoundlander, But Irish, Germans, Italians, Jews, all have had slightly insulting names attached to them, or hurled at them. So any of them might bristle a little at hearing mick, kraut, wop, kike, etc. and in some circumstances such a word might lead to a fight—but total emotional collapse and a call to war? Not hardly.
And the thing is, blacks identifying with the word are engaging in cultural appropriation. I don’t know the origin of the word but the Brits used it about Indians during the Raj and American pioneers used it about American Indians. Aussies used it to refer to aborigines.
Slurs are also not reserved for ethnicities, as there are dozens about women and even a few about Catholics. In the United States the “c-word” is considered to be pretty vulgar (and it is) but in England, for example, it’s a pretty common mild insult to men, too, and pops up pretty often. I don’t like it when I hear it here applied to a woman, but I don’t clutch my pearls and look for a fainting couch. My reaction to most of these slurs ranges from “meh” to “what a jerk”.
As a mackerel-snapping broad with a lot of kraut and bog-trotter in my heritage, somehow I manage to get by without a lot of hysteria and wonder why black people are so determined to be so selectively sensitive.
Selectively sensitive while they use it all the time – which is basically a way of trying to assert social dominance.
That just won’t fly.
Well, it IS a shortcut to victimhood, and its use gives an excuse for violence and hatred.
There are two Leftist political ideologies about crime. One, going back to Marx, is that it is just a natural reaction to oppression and poverty. But the other, which I think is more insidious, is that crime acts to destabilize society, and the Left needs a chaotic and destabilized society to gain and then hold power.
I don’t think George Soros, et al, have spent one minute pondering injustice and concluding that their support of crime, via their support of “law enforcement” that does not enforce laws, is actually support of “social justice” or removing the bootheel of the Establishment from the necks of the oppressed. No, I think they have a cold-eyed and callous understanding of the destabilizing effect uncontrolled crime has on society and the supporting role chaos plays in accepting rigid consolidated power if it is presented as an alternative to the dangers of uncontrolled crime.
In other words, the use of crime as a bludgeon to scare people into accepting tyranny is nothing but a political tactic. And in 2021-22 we saw how effective fear can be in turning people into meek sheep acting against their own self interests if they believe this will protect them.
I have never heard of Charlstone White but ran across this clip when I read a short article about a black Leftist going to Africa and hating it. This guy hits some hard truths and it’s a fascinating clip.
I had a shipmate in the Navy who was quite the Left guy…a bit of a complex life story for this man but suffice it to say for this that he had been a Chicano activist in his youth (that tells you how long ago it was!) and he hated black people. Most anti-black person I’ve ever come across. Why? Because he felt that black people had let his people down in The Struggle. So, the brothers here have hit upon a truth – that black Americans do feel they’re a breed apart with inherited special privileges…and it does irritate other people.
I also like his point that back in the 1950’s black people were intellectually head of the pack…there is probably something to that, too, because at that time the George Washington Carver/Booker T Washington side of things was still predominant in the black community. To boil that down it was “don’t let whitey slow you down”. While hating racism and working for political equality, this school of thought was that by education and hard work black Americans would compel white Americans to accept them as equals…this was basically how a population with less than 10% literacy in 1865 was producing first-rate doctors, scientists and lawyers within 25 years of liberation. And racial barriers were breaking down; black people were becoming ever more integrated into mainstream American life. It was all wrecked when it was replaced by the W. E B. Du Bois school – of which MLK was a proponent – of forcing social acceptable via political muscle. In other words, demanding entry regardless of quality. The current wreckage in the black community stems from this rejection of education + work in favor of political agitation.
That is also the era that produced Thomas Sowell and Vernon Jordan—very different philosophically and politically but at the top of their fields.
The success of the scorched earth policy that Democrats employed against the black community and the black family reminds me of the classic definition of tact: the ability tell someone to go to hell and make them anticipate the trip.
With the cooperation of the black leadership!
This is why I don’t consider MLK to be all that heroic. It was him and his people who ultimately destroyed the black community. I read this comment from a Civil Rights “leader” some years back where he said, “if we waited for the (black) middle class, we’d still be at the back of the bus”. This reveals a total lack of understanding of how political and social power is created. As cynical as it might sound, it is all based on money. This is why, IMO, Jesus advised us to render unto God the things that our God and to Caesar the things that are his – there is a distinct difference between what is morally best in the community and what will be calling the shots. The two things influence each other, but they are not the same thing. Maybe it would be better if the moral right always dominated, but given human nature, it is going to be money.
Will Durant, recording the history of the English Civil War – Parliament vs Charles I – toted up all the advantages the King had…more popular support, more experienced officers in his army, better equipment and on and on…and then Durant merely said after all that, “the Money was with Parliament”. And that was that. The whole thing is dressed up as a fight between Democracy and Monarchy but it was really about who was going to exercise power in England…the King or Money. Money won. Money always wins. It is said that Napoleon once cynically asserted that God is on the side with the biggest battalions…but it was the biggest battalions which climbed aboard HMS Bellerophon and were sent into exile. The war had gone on nearly uninterrupted from 1793 until 1815 and it ended where it had started…with the Royal Navy, paid for by money from the trade of the world, dominating the seas. It was all quite useless…the Money was with the British.
What was going to make black America the equal to white America was money. It was happening fast. It started happening ten seconds after Lee surrendered. The founder of the KKK – Nathan Bedford Forest – stopped being a Klansman because he could make money treating black people with respect and entering into business deals with them. He didn’t have to like black people – in fact, he might have gone to his grave hating black people – but Money told him to spend his time doing other things besides hating black people. Money was starting to be built up in the black community. Black donors were starting to call some shots, as political donors always call shots.
And then it was all thrown away because people who couldn’t make money decided to agitate in politics…because that way they got in charge of government money.
This is interesting. I will add that Chuck Schumer should be included in this considering he threatened Alito and Kavanaugh on the steps of the court
“For several years, the media and enterprising lawmakers have launched an onslaught to destroy the impartiality and political neutrality of Article III courts and, particularly, the Supreme Court. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh have all faced political and physical threats because of the politicization and weaponization of the law.
This lawfare has been led by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative Hank Johnson, relying upon an ideologically favorable legacy media to falsely accuse Justices Thomas and Alito of ethical improprieties. Their aim was simple: to chill the judicial independence of these Supreme Court Justices.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/05/boom-stephen-millers-america-first-legal-drops-bombshell/