Talk:Political parties of Germany

Great work, UHM!--^talk 16:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, what the fuck?

"Political parties of Germany" Really? Off-topic, irrelevant, just a list of political parties of a singular country. Delete. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 11:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

All of this too, then? --84.158.95.56 (talk) 12:14, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, keep. Тy^{Not updated with a witty slogan this week} 12:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey dipshit, those are all categories - this is a standalone article. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 21:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

A standalone article is better than making 5-6 separate ones on the specific parties. Osaka Sun (talk) 22:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Also: Political parties of Canada; Political parties of the United Kingdom... the rot runs deap! Peter ^{Rapidly running out of marmite} 22:03, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Thos two articles are far more informative and have many links to individual pages. This is a list and almost exclusively a list. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 22:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Moron, the individual articles in the categories... Seriously were you born this stupid or did you had to fall on your head a few times to get that stupid? And hey, if that list bothers you we can make a long article for every single one of these parties! Oh if I just think about the history of the SPD that's a 5.000er... --84.158.77.228 (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey fuck you asshole. Let me explain something to you as your extreme mental retardation (compounded by what I assume is a grotesque cleft-palette which would explain why you'd have difficulty with even sounding out the words I am typing to help with your understanding) seemingly can't grapple with. Those categories list individual articles about individual parties. This is an article which lists individual parties. It is not comparable to a category. A category is not an article but a reference list. This is an article which is a reference list. I hope this has been enlightening for you...you vacuous waste of human excrement. Fit only to be cast aside as a useless quivering mess not unlike the spunk you fill a sock with every night while imagining what could have been if only you were not held back by your revolting personality. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 23:36, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh my god! I am so enlightened right now! Thank you for all your benevolent wolrd Saint Ace!

Nah, let's stop pretending about dialogue, I don't give a shit about your opinion on anything, go fuck yourself and take another sip from that drink so the world can get rid of oxygon thiefs lieke you a bit earlier. Majority opinion tells you to fuck off, so fuck off you liquor bag. --84.158.77.228 (talk) 09:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks champ! Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 09:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Serously though, does anyone else wanna weigh in here? Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 09:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

You're poking it with a stick. Osaka Sun (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't poking anyone with a stick - it was the worthless ballbag that rode in here and suggested I nominated for deletion because of some kind of vendetta when in actually fact I hit this page via the random page link and thought it looked like nothing more than a list. Ace^{The Rep Grows Bigger} 20:49, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

(EC)We have similar for Britain and Canada, so why not this? It could be a more entertaining read, though. It's too much like an encyclopedia entry at the moment, with nothing to make you want to read the whole thing. A few jokes and curious factoids should liven it up. Rennie McGreet (talk) 10:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

MOARR HITLER!? Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 10:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

If anybody wants to put some jokes in, go ahead. --84.158.77.228 (talk) 10:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

AfD - the party, not the process

I'd say the batshit right wing party is definitely on mission. Not least because they oppose wind energy due to "infrasound" and have a thing or two to say about gays and "gender-mainstreaming". They might even deserve their own article... What do y'all think? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 13:20, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

SPD

"In the early post-WWI days, the SPD faced a violent rebellion by the aforementioned far-left groups and, due to the Treaty of Versailles, was forced to use the Freikorps to prevent a communist coup d'état in Germany." This should definitely be rewritten into "In the early post-WWI days, the SPD faced conflicts with the aforementioned far-left groups and, due to the Treaty of Versailles, let itself be forced to use the Freikorps to prevent an alledged communist coup d'état in Germany. This lead to still prevaling deep conflicts with several left-wing groups and to a deep split in the labor movement of the Weimar Republic, helping to pave the way to the Nazi takeover." There was never a risk of a communist coup d'état, the communists lacked all ressources to do so. However, the leading forces of the Communist fraction, namely Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, provided a thread to the system envisioned by the leading Social Democrats Ebert and Noske. Louxemburg and Liebknecht still had many admirers also inside the SPD and in the unions. Thus the (in hinsight very not so good) decision to use the newfound power to dispose of them. Rolly (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

I don’t think it matters that the odds against a communist coup succeeding were long. The communists did attempt a coup, directly inspired by the October Revolution and arguably the odds against the Bolshevik coup in Russia had been pretty dubious as well, hence why the threat was taken seriously and the (over?)reaction was prompt and violent.

My suggestion would be a phrasing along the lines of:

”In the early post-WWI days, the SPD faced conflicts with the aforementioned far-left groups and, due to the Treaty of Versailles, let itself be convinced and co-opted to use the Freikorps to crack down on the communist and other far-left uprisings. This was justified as necessary to prevent a communist coup d'état in Germany along the lines of the Russian Revolution.”

However, this is just a suggestion, so feel free to revise, add or bring your own versions to the table. On a related note, Friedrich Ebert’s “rule by decree” set a really bad precedent as well, however expedient or justified it might have been in the short term. ScepticWombat (talk) 15:57, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The so called Spartacist uprising was never planned and would never have acted out as anything being close to the russian October revolution. Its goal was to really secure democratic rights the Revolutionary Stewards of the November Revolution demanded and these rights were also demands in the programm of the SPD. I do not want to defend the later KPD during the Weimar Republic, the Social Facism theory is as much to blame for the downfall of Weimar as the actions of the SPD. Both led to the split in the labor movement which Hitler used perfectly.

add or bring your own versions to the table. I did bring up my own version, but will not add it in. I am too biased on this matter and hold a firm believe that biased text should only be add in to articles which already adhere to the RW bias and not to mere "reports". I can agree to your version if it adds in my last sentence.

On a related note, Friedrich Ebert’s “rule by decree” set a really bad precedent as well, however expedient or justified it might have been in the short term. Fully agree and this backfired with Hindenburg using the same tactic in the last years of the Weimar Republic. However, remember that despite the now obvious flaws of the Weimar constitution, it is viewed as a quite modern constitution for its time. In hinsight, it is easy to blame faults in the constituion for the fall. But in my opinion, it was a combination of three factors. 1. The above mentioned split of the workers movement 2. That the November revolution was not allowed to carry through to at least dispose of the military elite of Ludendorff and his ilk, instead allowing the planting of the stab-in-the-back-theory 3. That conservatives and liberals betrayed the democracy without batting an eye when voting for the Enabling act of 1933. And I honestly fear that they will do it again if they have the chance to get away with it, at least in Germany. See the part on the AfD. Rolly (talk) 21:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, the world would be in a much better place if Luxemburg was the face of the communist movement and not Lenin. Vee^Meow? 16:04, 23 February 2023 (UTC)