site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1430 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for September 6, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I see Twitter throwing a fit over AfD winning or almost winning in Germany. Can somebody please loop me in about the drama of it all?

AfD is the national-populist party in Germany, that is, they favor socially reactionary and economically redistributive policies. Germany has coalition governments at both federal and state levels, and all other parties have agreed on a "firewall" against AfD: no matter how much they win, they won't join their coalition. The biggest sin of AfD in their eyes is that it's openly tolerant of ethnonationalists all the way to "Hitler couldn't have done everything wrong".

Saxony-Anhalt is a state in former East Germany, which has a different approach to the legacy of the Third Reich, and AfD has just won a plurality of the votes there, almost a majority. What makes West Germans run like headless chicken is that BSW (a splinter Left party that favors economically redistributive and socially reactionary policies) is willing to enter into a coalition with them, threatening the integrity of the firewall.

Which, in my opinion, would be the best outcome. By being locked out of the government, populist parties like AfD are free to criticize the mainstream parties as much as they want, earning free points with the electorate. "We would show them, oh, we would show them how it's done, but they are afraid of our methods working and losing their popularity forever!" they keep on saying. Well, now they get a chance to show everyone how it's done in a single state; they run it into the ground without affecting the rest of the country, and their popularity craters. Or, suddenly thrust into the driver's seat, they self-moderate their populism and become much closer to other mainstream parties in actual policies, obviating the need for a firewall.

IMO the AfD can only lose. They didn't outright lose the election, good on them, apparently they managed to sway the voters. But the voters aren't their biggest problem. Now they need to wheel and deal in parliament to make things happen, with partners all of whom hate their guts and will do everything in their power to make them fail. And even if that were not the case, they would have to work against the strict resistence of all institutions public and private, of the federal government, of the EU, and of everyone else who gets to interfere. Regardless of how well they do in the election, they're set up for failure in any case, and will come out of it looking bad.

obviating the need for a firewall.

Doubt. The AfD has the black spot. They're the designated target that everyone can legitimately direct their hatred at. In the public consciousness, they inherit all the detestability of the OG Nazis. Associating with them is a surefire way to get unpersoned in polite society. If they moderate now, become closer to the mainstream, then all that will do is lose them their popular support since "not part of the mainstream" is pretty much all they have going for them. Thus weakened, any incentives to remove the firewall will be similarly weakened, and the AfD remains more valuable as the socially agreeable punching bag than as a coalition partner.

I think the bigger issue for the long-term trajectory of the AfD is that it, just as the populist-left-leaning parties, is riding a general wave of discontent with the current state of affairs for which immigration, the main thing that distinguishes it from its competitors, is just one aspect among others. That current state of affairs is over-determined though, so to speak, by factors that no party, even the AfD in a hypothetical win with a solid supermajority and no institutional resistance, can fix. For example, what is the AfD going to do about German demographics before the welfare state that a large majority of the population worships comes crashing down? In this particular regard, they're actually worse than the mainstream parties, their commitments with regards to e.g. pension spending are only ever so slightly less insane than those of the far-left parties. Or how will they spur competitiveness and cost reductions among the German industrial giants before China grinds them into dust?

There are plausible approaches to both these and the other problems Germany faces, but they're extremely unpopular because they either go against the direct self-interest of the voting population, a majority of which is retired or will be soon, or violate cultural dogmas that have been in the groundwater for so long that to directly reveal their falseness is akin to heresy. The AfD deserves credit for being a large part of why one of those dogmas, the one around migration, has started to dissolve, but they're IMO just as blind as the mainstream parties on many others.

No to defend Merz or anything, but this general idea applies to him as well. He has the bad luck to be the face of government at a time when historical trends that he personally has little to do with have finally come to a head and have begun to enforce themselves on political reality. No doubt his constant gaffes and affinity for offending every single interest group is fairly unique, but I feel like everyone, especially far-rightists and -leftists who seem to particularly hate him, uses him as an easy scapegoat to avoid thinking too hard about the fact that their personal political program would probably fail just as hard, given the material and more importantly cultural constraints he has to work under.

I fully agree with your assessment.

Just one quibble: I don't think the AfD failing to fix the country's actual issues will be held against the AfD any more than the current government's attempts to fix some of the symptoms will be held in the current government's favor. Voters don't respect work on fundamentals. Voters go for vibes and handouts.

Now they need to wheel and deal in parliament to make things happen

What's the sort of thing that they could (theoretically) make happen on the state level, by the way?

There's a handful of things that are actually still up to the states in this heavily centralized pseudo-federation:

  • Education: Replace leftist propaganda with rightist.
  • Policing: Attempt to more strictly enforce laws against immigrants and leftists.
  • Culture: Defund leftist projects. Possibly try to build pro-German ones.
  • Local Affairs: Block lefist initiatives, and maybe help along prosocial ones where they can.

And there's a good bit of culture warring to be done in all of those. But as with everything in Germany, it's all secured by lightyears of red tape, so what little they can do there will take disproportionate amounts of effort and time, and always against the resistance of the establishment in each of those areas, and is likely to be swiftly undone by the next government that actually has the deep state on its side.

As for the big issue, immigration, they can't really do much. Maybe redirect some immigrants to other states, maybe inconvenience immigrants here and there, but ultimately the incentive structures are created at the federal level and the enforcement failures are at the EU level. Sachsen-Anhalt, being a Binnenstaat, isn't even at the German borders.

Question because I legitimately don't know- is the AFD likely to have access to the human capital to start doing any of this stuff? That's been a problem for controversial right wing governments in very established, procedurally suffocating countries. Germany's cordon sanitaire has seemed unusually effective until now.

Or, suddenly thrust into the driver's seat, they self-moderate their populism

What do you think they would need to moderate to become more functional? There was a time when the mainstream had a credible claim on just being normal, and populists could be portrayed as whipping up greviances to grift their way to power, but these days are long over. Nowadays it's populism that's based on just being normal, and the mainstream that needs to be forced to moderate through the threat of populists taking power.

As I understand, AfD is the only non-woke, non-pro-civilizational-destruction party in Germany, and the only one with chances of winning something in Western Europe in general. Which of course makes them literally Hitler, as anything that threatens woke powers is. Every single Republican candidate has been literally Hitler since literally Hitler, and every non-woke European party will get the same treatment. Especially one that has any chances of winning any votes. This is just how it works.

That said, it's only one state, and they didn't even get the majority - they are the largest party, but only 39 out of 83 seats. I am not sure what could they do with such setup - likely, a lot of heat but not sure anything could change. Most of Germany's problem will need federal policy change, as I understand, and a plurality in one state does nothing.

Minor quibble- Italy's actually governed by the Fratelli d'Italia, FN will probably win the next French elections, and Spain may well have a right-populist government in the near future. And who even knows UK politics.

Spain may well have a right-populist government in the near future

We'll see. It doesn't yet. If that happens, I'll be happy, the current state of Spain is extremely sad.

Every single Republican candidate has been literally Hitler since literally Hitler,

Was Eisenhower ever accused of this? His, uh, "punching Nazis" bona fides are effectively unquestionable. I'd buy it for every other one, though.

Looks like you are right, while Dewey has been compared to Hitler all the time, with Eisenhower it was more like "he is a great man but since he's a Republican, he's still a captive of the right wing, who as we all know are literally you know who, so..." But yes, Eisenhower is an exception, but both before and after him everybody has been.

From Grok: From communists and the far left: This is where associations with fascism occasionally appeared. East German Communist leader Wilhelm Pieck in September 1952 attacked Eisenhower’s call for a “crusade against communism” (in a speech to the American Legion) as repeating “the program devised by Adolf Hitler” and using “the language of Hitler and Goebbels.” U.S. Communist Party materials from the period sometimes warned that the Eisenhower administration represented a “sharpened war and fascist danger,” linked McCarthyism and anti-communist policies to fascist tendencies, or framed the Republican victory as heightening fascist risks.

So yeah, same same. The center libs were too circumspect to accuse Eisenhower of fascism directly, but the far left wasn't.

I'll go further and say neither you nor I will ever see a Republican candidate for important office anywhere, ever, who isn't called a Nazi/Fascist/Hitler. Nor will we ever see such a candidate fail to garner some vague rape claims, often by large numbers of anonymous women. The only question is how far toward the center believing such things extends.

I suppose you're probably right on a literal level here, but it seems like there needs to be some level of notoriety to the claims, or it's almost trivially true of any public figure. It's probably true for every member of Congress. It might be true for most city council persons nationwide, even.

Ken Paxton doesn't seem to be accused of any of this stuff- he's receiving perfectly accurate accusations(that he's an adulterer who takes bribes) instead.

The normal corruption is easier and thus a more common tone, but it's still present.

And the local AfD leader says he wants either the absolute majority or to repeat the elections, but no compromises.

Ah well. Salvini again.

I mean, if there's no party they could ally with that would allow them to do anything meaningful - which seems to be the case right now - then what's the point of forming a coalition which would continue more of the same and prove AfD is as incapable of delivering on their promises as everybody else? At least staying outside allows them not to accept responsibility for the shit that's happening, once they are nominally in power, the responsibility is theirs, and will be used against them next time when nothing changes.

They should really hammer on the immigration issue. That is their winning card. And yet no one was talking about it. People in Europe really want some foreigners gone.

Also Salvini got to power.

They should really hammer on the immigration issue. That is their winning card. And yet no one was talking about it. People in Europe really want some foreigners gone.

It's almost illegal to talk about it. Say the wrong words and your entire party gets blasted as unconstitutional.

Also Salvini got to power.

And gave it up because he refused to compromise, certain that a fresh election would get him the free hand he desired instead.

And then he was gone.

OTOH, the AfD, widely regarded as either the second coming of the NSDAP or as the only pro-German party in Germany, stands to win a state election for the first time.

OTOH, they can only lose. Either they don't get the absolute majority and will be cockblocked in parliament, or they will get it and be cockblocked by the deep state.

Disregard the hissyfits; as @ToaKraka points out, one might wish for the AfD to be what its detractors claim it is, but in the end this is all just hot air on all sides.

Article from right-wing commentator

The lunatic progressive-left Amadeu Antonio Foundation has formulated a horror scenario of all the deeply troubling and antidemocratic things the voters of Sachsen-Anhalt may be on the verge of enabling, which I am happy to present to you via the breathless histrionics of The Atlantic:

Imagine that it’s October 2026, and one of Germany’s 16 federal states has come under the control of a far-right government for the first time since the Nazi era. With an absolute majority in the state Parliament and one of its own installed as state premier, the Alternative for Germany, or AfD, quickly begins implementing its agenda. The interior minister announces an emergency remigration program: abolishing asylum, revoking the residence permit of any foreigner convicted of a crime, pledging to review all naturalization decisions made during this century, and incarcerating those designated for deportation. The government stops classifying Ukrainians as war refugees and ends their social benefits. European Union flags disappear from public buildings. The mainstream press is shunned in favor of influencers aligned with the party’s ideology. The government authorizes vigilante groups to act as an auxiliary police force in regions with high crime rates.

You could be forgiven for wondering whether the Amadeu Antonio Foundation is running some kind of deep-cover pro-AfD campaign. All mainstream press coverage, activist whining and cartel-party rhetoric seems dedicated to the singular goal of constructing the AfD as a genuine alternative to the present dysfunctional political order of the Federal Republic. The enemies of the AfD want nothing more than to convince voters that the party will prove powerful and effective if given access to the levers of power. They will remigrate the migrants, fold up the rainbow flags and restore order. “Please don’t vote for the AfD, they might well just fix something.”

…

The possibilities that await us tomorrow are therefore these:

(1) A three-party Landtag, with SPD and Greens both failing to get more than 5% of the vote. In this case, there is no doubt that the AfD will have a clear majority of Landtag seats and that Ulrich Siegmund will be the next Minister President Sachsen-Anhalt.

(2) A four-party Landtag, with SPD scraping in but the Greens falling short. In this case, the AfD will need to outperform the polls just slightly and capture 43% or more of the vote. This is conceivable but it will be close.

(3) A five-party Landtag, with SPD and Greens both achieving representation. In this case, the AfD will almost certainly not win the vote share necessary for a parliamentary majority.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats