A group of eight Holocaust survivors drew parallels between the current political climate and that of Germany in the 1930s. Some of them condemned the far-right Alternative for Germany party (AfD).
Eight Holocaust survivors have urged young people to shun far-right parties and vote to protect democracy at the upcoming European Union elections.
“For millions of you, the European elections are the first election in your lives. For many of us, it could be the last,” read the open letter, unveiled in Berlin on Tuesday.
“We couldn’t stop it back then. But you can today,” the eight authors wrote.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Eight Holocaust survivors have urged young people to shun far-right parties and vote to protect democracy at the upcoming European Union elections.
The letter was published by rights group Avaaz and signed by eight men and women aged between 81 and 102 who witnessed the Holocaust first-hand.
“I know that there was a similar development back then as there is today: a weak democratic government and a party that rallied the people who were dissatisfied,” 99-year-old Walter Frankenstein said in a video statement.
Ruth Winkelmann, who hid from the Nazis in a shed with her mother and sister after her father was deported to the Auschwitz concentration camp, said she signed the letter “because the AfD is becoming too strong.”
She told the AFP news agency that the far-right party has “quite a lot in common” with the Nazis in the 1930s.
"As a democrat, you should recognize everyone, whether green, white or black, it doesn’t matter.
The original article contains 282 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 44%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
The “left” German party banned free speech and smacked down people protesting against Genocide. Even banned people that came to speak up for Palestinian rights from all of Europe illegally (got overturned by judge) to prevent people from speaking up against israel. And the Germans proceed to equate Zionism to Judaism as much as possible to use the Jews as an excuse for their war crimes once again.
We’re doing the Genocide thing already. Nazi Germany is in full force this very day providing 30% of the weapons for it.
You can’t say “never again” while it’s happening in front of your eyes.
By <the “left” German party> do you mean the SPD or Die Linke? Die Linke literally means “The Left”.
The Social Democratic Party sounds pretty left to me. Scholz was supposed to be a “left wing” move compared to Angela Merkels CDU. We’re not seeing much “Left winging”.
This in turn will not motivate people to vote left wing. Thus boosting the right wing.
Maybe dont comment on another countries politics if your analysis doesnt go deeper than “the party is called ‘this’ so I recon they stand for ‘this’”. The spd is a centrist party, everyone in germany knows that
Well no.
he SPD is a far right party as they have proven by destroying the German democracy in order to bow down to israel. Everyone with eyes can observe this.
“Far-right”? yeah im really curious about the scale you are using. What would you call the AfD if they said tomorrow that they will suppport palestine?
The one with the examples given above about how they arrested and banned people from the country people for supporting Palestine and abolished freedom of speech.
What would you call the AfD if they said tomorrow that they will suppport palestine?
I would call a perfect example of whataboutism to not have to engage with the examples I mentioned above.
They’re just asking you to explain the metric you’re using.
lol imagine spamming “allow trump to win to make a principled stand against genocide joe” articles to every community so much that people see your username and immediately downvote lmao
Or how about, and hear me out now, because I know it sounds crazy…
How about you stop shunning people because you perceive them as “far” right or “far” left?
How about voting for politicians that seek compromise?
How about you stop contributing to polarization and start treating those with opposing views with respect and work to find a common ground upon which you can build mutual trust and cooperation?
What do I know? I’m just a middle class dude who loves hearing everyone’s perspectives when they can treat me with respect, hear mine, and then discuss the reasons why we see the world differently.
I’m also married to a woman who disagrees with me constantly on political matters, and we love each other even more because we can challenge each other to see the world differently.
While understand that these people have experienced trauma, division is not the answer. Division is the foundation upon which hate is built.
Edit: seeing a downvote trend without further comments. To be totally honest if you disagree I would absolutely love to hear your thoughts. I can’t grow or learn from others’ perspectives without being challenged.
Not sure if you’ve seen this.
I have not seen that, but I don’t think I agree with it. But maybe I’m misinterpreting the image because I’m admittedly feeling a bit defensive?
So that I can better understand, I ask a completely innocent question. Do you perceive my comment as encouraging people to tolerate intolerance?
For some clarification, I put “far” in parenthesis because I feel the term “far”, in this age of “outrage culture” is relative and influenced largely by propaganda, social media, and rhetoric. Additionally, the term “shun” means to keep away from or take pains to avoid.
These people should not be shunned. You can and absolutely should have a conversation with someone you perceive as intolerant. Because I feel the term “far” is relative these days, I believe we are often quick to label people based on their emotional expressions, short sighted social media posts, or impulsive comments. So if you find yourself suspecting that someone is intolerant, I would encourage you to have a conversation. If your conversation further confirms that someone is expressing intolerant beliefs, you owe it to yourself and the other party to respectfully challenge them and express your interpretation of their perspective.
My personal experience is that if you are fortunate enough to find yourself engaging with someone open to debate, you should stand fast on your perspective. If you can respect each other, the words you speak are more likely to resonate. If you disrespect the opposing party, then you will almost certainly be dismissed, no matter how morally right you are, or perceive yourself to be. The other person will almost certainly see your disrespect as some sort of confirmation of their own perspective.
Seeking common ground puts you in a position to build trust and credibility, so that you can offer an alternate perspective as an ally and without being dismissed as an opponent. Don’t avoid. Engage and change. If you ignore a weed, it continues to grow and pollinate. It must be effectively uprooted.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Edit: I am observing a trend of down voting this without further engagement. That’s unfortunate. I would love to hear other’s opinions. I’m honestly not a hater or troll, and do love to hear opposing opinions! Use your voice to share your thoughts!
I hate to sound cynical but when I read the replies here, I see more close mindedness that won’t do anything to affect change. You can’t change a culture if you’re so hateful or resentful that you refuse to engage.
My opinion is that if you’re not picking up the hammer and building the bridge, then you’re part of the problem.
That’s my experience as a once hyper conservative whose perspective only changed because someone approached me with respect and engaged me to change my perspective.
But it’s clear that many here don’t want to be true agents for change, but prefer to inflame division. You will never change a culture through hatred. You’ll only cause them to “dig in”.
But y’all keep doing you and post your hate so you can your upvotes.
It’s difficult to compromise with people who want to kill you for what you are.
Your definition of “far” seems to be “people who want to kill you for what you are”. But others’ definition of “far” is “people who disagree with you and vote against your cause”. Those are not the same. And conflating the two only exacerbates the division.
Removed by mod
Nazi detected
Yet I’m the one who’s removed for disagreeing with the mandatory opinions
You’re not removed. But you are in the victim complex, like all of ya
Stop right there Adolfsson. You really showed those 90 year old holocaust survivors who’s the man with your comment on a platform mainly used by mid 20 - mid 30 men working in IT.
