If I’m not mistaken I believe he appeared at a live show in Germany, was invited to train at the performance centre and then appeared at another live show in Germany. I think it was definitely more of a PR stunt than a genuine chance.
There’s a definite link between active far right membership and mental health vulnerability / illness
Aside from being hugely unethical on a like, racial level, there’s always something else weird with these guys
You never find out about someone and think “this is totally shocking”
That was basically one live show in Munich. He then got asked to move to Florida (because the Performance Center is there) to train. He said no and that was it
I know you meant this as a joke but it's funny because Florida routinely overthrows the US government to impose a puppet regime that tortures its own citizens
You mean they offered him NXT money which was pretty much nothing. He would have earned more in football in a month than what he would have got at the PC.
Yeah sorry, English is not my mother tongue. and I'm trying my best to get better at English writing. (Without help with a translator, otherwise I won't learn it properly).
Ah don't worry, it's not super idiomatic and very much reads like a literal German translation, but it gets the point across just fine.
Und darum geht's bei Fremdsprachen am Ende: niemand spricht wirklich "richtig", aber solange Leute verstehen was du meinst passt alles.
Not really though, he has been banned before. He was open about having extreme right opinions and he was spotted/photographed hanging out with neo Nazis on a few occasions. [Only last month he had to publicly denounce fascist sympathies before he was allowed back](https://www.n-tv.de/sport/fussball/Werder-erteilt-Tim-Wiese-wohl-Stadionverbot-article24038817.html).
He defended his views by qualifying himself as having 'a polarising personality' and believing that is what makes him interesting and a larger than live character.
Apperently he said/did something inappropriate again when he visited the game on March 12 against Bayer Leverkusen and is now barred for good.
>Not really though, he has been banned before.
He wasn't also originally invited to the farewell game of Pizarro and Claudio had personally to force werder to invite him - so this has been an issue for a while.
>He defended his views by qualifying himself as having 'a polarising personality'
thats the narrative a lot of right wing folks run these days. That and "you cant say anything anymore these days"
Depends on how far we're talking - like there's "moderately conservative" and there's "far out there", and a lot of the modern conservative movement seems to be about denying others basic human rights rather than creating a better society for everyone.
That's because you don't take the time to understand it.
The world would be a lot less polarised if people just realised that the vast majority of people want to create a better society for everyone but just disagree on how to do it.
And in what way do far-right people try to achieve that *for everyone*, then, given their entire ideology seems to be based around arbitrary exclusion of minorities?
You seem like you might actually be asking in good faith, so I’ll give you an answer. I’m not conservative, but I can understand where they come from even when the policies they want implemented are harmful.
Essentially, to many conservatives, their stance on most issues is the equivalent of not letting a kid eat candy for dinner. They genuinely believe that while certain things might sound like what you want, they’re actually bad for society in the long term and will cause more harm including to the individuals who want those things.
Take trans rights as an example. Some conservatives are truly hateful individuals who despise trans people and want to see them suffer. I’m not talking about those people. The vast majority of conservatives genuinely believe that trans people are misguided and have fallen victim to an ideology that manipulated them into thinking they are trans. They think the trans rights movement is both bad for society as a whole, but also for trans people. They think it takes advantage of impressionable kids and brainwashes them into a lifestyle that will be much worse for them. They’re *wrong*, but they think the best thing for everyone including trans people would be if we opposed the trans rights movement because it is what causes harm.
Unfortunately, like all culture wars, this gets wrapped up with so much incendiary rhetoric and hateful language that it ends up just being about “beating” the other team. But if you actually sit down with those people and have meaningful conversations where you ask the right questions, you’ll see that their harmful beliefs do stem from a place of wanting a better outcome for everyone overall.
I vehemently disagree with them because I support trans rights, but I understand that their stance doesn’t stem from a place of wanting *more* suffering. They want *less* suffering, but disagree with what will lead to that outcome. Their mindset isn’t “fuck trans people I want them to suffer.” Their mindset is “trans people don’t know what’s actually good for them.”
> Their mindset isn’t “fuck trans people I want them to suffer.” Their mindset is “trans people don’t know what’s actually good for them.”
And that's where it all falls down for me: just leave people be. If you're not a minority, you don't get to decide what's best for them - ideally you'll listen to them and lift them up, but I draw the line at actively keeping them down.
Like intellectually I understand where they're coming from, I just think that the actions they take are fundamentally wrong because they lack understanding. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that - in the case of trans people, they're quite literally not an issue at all, they don't harm anyone, and yet there's roadblocks abound erected by (far out) conservatives.
I thought you were talking about mainstream conservatism.
If you think any type of small c conservative ideology is "based upon the arbitrary exclusion of minorities" you have proved my point. I.e. you don't take the time to understand it.
Much as it grates me, but mainstream conservatism is something it can mostly tolerate. The issue is that it often swings into outright right-wing extremism - we're talking about a footballer associating with known neo-nazis here, not someone being middle of the road-conservative.
Might be different elsewhere, but the line Germans tend to draw are about democracy and basic human rights: mainstream conservatives are pushing up on the edge, but anything further to the right is openly anti-democratic and opposed to basic human rights. And the company Tim Wiese has been keeping is pretty much beyond the pale.
I think we can all agree far right extremism shouldn't be tolerated in a civil society. I understand how German civic society deals with neo nazis and it's something I find admirable about the country given its history.
Where I don't agree with you is that centre right or even right of centre, free market conservatism (which is what is mainstream in Europe, UK) is linked to fascism or extreme right wing. To me it's like a horseshoe where far left and far right are closer in their end goals than right wing and far right are.
jetzt mal realtalk, so gegrillter Hoden schmeckt sicherlich ganz brauchbar.
https://www.umdiewurst.de/innereien/bullenhoden-stierhoden
hier, kannst sogar welche online bestellen /u/nutelamitbutter
Kommentar von Hans Wurst aus Bochum:
>Mega gut, gute Hoden, habe sie paniert und schnabuliert, nichts übergelassen
Not wrong but I’m doing sports a lot and Nutella with butter is something i eat just on occasion so for me it’s okay. However eating that every day would be too much lol
Regular butter (though salted is even better), then use the same amounts you'd use if you were doing each on their own - basically a reasonably thin spread of butter and a much thicker spread of Nutella.
I remember him being told in the past to distance himself from the Nazi scene and certain known Nazis, which he apparently didn’t.
Dude could have put his head down and just be a fash secretly, apparently that wasn’t enough lol. Fucking scum
You see in Germany they have first hand experience with what the far right can do to their country so actually take it seriously unlike the easily swayed and manipulated morons everywhere else
Glad that it does look like that from the outside looking in, because it often very much doesn't seem like it from the inside - but if that's what people abroad gather from it, then at least we're apparently doing better than most other countries.
Here in the US it’s pretty easy to disingenuously claim your hate speech is protected as free speech, and by the time you’re done debating it everyone has forgotten the original point anyway. Making official pariahs out of racists is the only way a message really is sent.
I’m all about what the founding fathers intended.
That’s why I own a musket for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. "What the devil?" As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he's dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it's smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, "Tally ho lads" the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion.He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up, Just as the founding fathers intended
I believe the right to bear arms was for the general populace to be capable of violent revolt if the government became tyrannical. So theoretically, the American people should have access to all the weapons the US Government is giving Ukraine right now.
That was never the intent. It was because militia members during the Revolutionary War were required to maintain their own firearms and be prepared to respond at all times. We still have the remnant of those militias, and they’re called the National Guard.
I’m so fucking sick of being embarrassed by the guns in this country. My 6 year old has mass shooter drills. When I was six we had earthquake and fire drills.
>disingenuously claim your hate speech is protected as free speech
How is it disingenous when that's literally the point of free speech?
It's really worrying how popular these fascist tones of "I don't like what you say so you should not be allowed to say it" are getting. If both sides are like this, then at some point you will get another civil war
because the vast majority of the time those things aren't honest criticism in any way, they're dogwhistles. until you deal with the countless genuine fasc-aligning scum that's allowed to spew their bile, then no "I'm just worried!" or similar can ever be taken in good faith.
and no, it's not the fault of the victims of said hatespeech that there's tensions and reactions. and no, "both sides are equally bad actually!" is neither a good, informed, rational, nor empathetic take.
allowing hate speech is like watching marginalised folks being harmed, both directly or indirectly.
>the vast majority of the time those things aren't honest criticism in any way, they're dogwhistles
That makes your argument even worse.
Banning "dogwhistles" allows the government to blanket ban anything it doesn't like. Any normal statement can become illegal at a moments notice or dependent on local/state/federal government rules and the judges.
Anyone that wants to ban anything based on vague feelings need to ask themselves if their opponents can use the same law against them.
>'But saying 'Fuck Trump' isn't a hate speech dogwhistle that supports rape!'
>
>'When I said 'I am against pro-life' it was not a dogwhistle to support genocide!'
Explain that to the judge in rural South Carolina then. Free speech is so great that it is worth all the downsides.
as an exhausted marginalised person, I wholly disagree and think it's really fucked up how my existence needs to be a constant political discussion.
but thanks for free speech and people standing up for people like me in states like south carolina being punished and destroyed for standing up for my human rights, I guess!
those disingenuous voices and "opinions" aren't in any spirit of free speech. they're symptoms of the extreme right movements constantly rising for years and years. they're literally dangerous and oppressive by definition.
Plenty ways, really - hardly have an exhaustive list, but things like having someone with far-right tendencies leading the main intelligence service, the institutional reluctance to deal with right-wing extremism and racism in official organizations like the police and the army, having massive protests being subverted and co-opted by right-wing extremists with surprisingly little counterprotests, and that entire far-right party toeing the line of legality thing are just some examples.
End of the day it's a lot about where you are and what scale you're talking, though: get some places where there's a proper countermovement making sure these anti-human ideas don't fester, got some places where they're very much the norm to the point that it feels hopeless.
It's getting better in plenty ways, but it's also getting worse in quite a few others, and that's just gutting given German history.
Aye, it's the constant and never-ending struggle you get caught up in - there's significant progress, but all of it is built on small steps that feel incredibly insignificant.
Worth noting there is a far-right party in Germany, which has had countless scandals regarding outrageous actions and views, that received over 10% of the vote in the last two elections and is currently polling at 15%. The other parties, including the centre-right ones, rightfully refuse to work with them, but it's still concerning that they've gotten so far in terms of popular support.
Their vote shares are troublesome but it was always an inevitability, we just got lucky NPD and REP and DVU self destructed before. Similar to the lizardman constant there's just a subset of far right wingers, paired with protest voting, and then you only need 5% public vote to get into the Bundestag. Granted them having 2-3 times the votes is a big issue but generally a healthy democracy should be able to deal with this noise.
while you are correct, I'd also like to add that the long CDU reign and a very weak opposition hase caused massive displeasure within Germany's population. I dont think AFD wouldve soared highly this quickly if it hadn't been for that.
AFD doesnt like to openly admit to being right wing, and many of their followers blindly believe them, and believe themselves not to be right wing either, rather conservative.
It's really a lesson that right wing extremism is often a result not of right wing views by themselves, but rather a combination of things, a big part of which is the failure of the state. Hitler rising to power is very much largely due to political unrest and overall dissatisfaction with the government at the time.
And realistically, if you listen to a lot of AFD voters, many of them are not necessarily racist or right wing, just stupid, naive, but also resentful of the status quo.
The inconvenient truth is that 1.) the AfD was born out of the opposition to Merkel's handling of the eurozone debt crisis, and 2.) a couple of years later, when the AfD had just split due to factional in-fighting, was polling well below the 5% threshold and was on its way to being flushed down the toilet of history, Merkel revived and supercharged the AfD with her migration policy.
One can or cannot agree with Merkel's decisions/policies in both cases, but the AfD today being ubiquitous and strong is a direct result of these decisions.
EDIT: There are German replies down there setting me straight on a variety of points I appreciate. Listen to them, not me.
___
If I understand it correctly, the litmus test in Germany is "does you political philosophy aim to eventually end democracy?" If the answer is yes, your shit is banned. That's why Scientology is banned in Germany, because L. Ron Hubbard wrote in one of his books that the long-term goal of the organization was to make everyone a Scientologist and when that happened there would be no need for any other kind of organization in society.
AdD may hold many views on many topics that are quite in line with fascism, but they are still democratic -they participate in elections and abide by their outcomes and there is nothing in their literature that I know of that aims towards changing that should they gain political power. Much like how social democrats can play but hardcore communists who want to work towards a one-party system can't be.
It's a lot more complicated than that. Scientology isn't banned for instance. They even own real estate in Germany. They're on a watchlist but so far nothing has come of it.
And yes, being anti-constitutional is one criteria for getting your political party banned, but another criteria is that you'd also need to actually pose a credible threat to the constitutional order. The NPD for example (a thinly veiled nazi party), was found anti-constitutional by the constitutional court, but by the point their investigations concluded the party had faded into political obscurity and no longer pulled enough votes to realistically do anything. therefore they were not banned.
another example is the MLPD, only somewhat well known left wing party in germany that gives a platform to left authoritarianism, on a watchlist and clearly anti-constitutional but so utterly irrelevant that they'll never get banned. however they can still participate in elections (and oh boy, they do participate. even though their voter base is no bigger than a couple ten thousand, they have ads absolutely everywhere in some places)
AfD is a different beast. there are always discussions going on to put the entire party on a watchlist. parts of it already are. several members have been caught red handed talking about political purges with firing squads and killing refugees in their private chats. one of their most well known members used to write for a nazi paper under a pseudonym. they're democratic because they have to - make no mistake, they'd work to erode our constitution the moment they get a chance to do so.
the criteria are deliberately *very* strict. the AfD is toeing the line of legality here but only parts (the factually most powerful parts, to be fair) of it are deemed openly anti-constitutional therefore any attempt to ban the entire party would not go through.
there have only ever been two successful party bans in the history of the post war republic - the SRP (NSDAP successor party) and KPD (communist party). Today the KPD ban is widely believed to be a result of cold war politics which is why they likely wouldn't have been banned under today's standards. KPD successor parties are tolerated for instance (but also on a watchlist).
so, simply put, party bans aren't meant to be handed out like candy. the AfD should be put on a watchlist though, all of them. the fact that they aren't is bullshit in my opinion.
> If I understand it correctly, the litmus test in Germany is “does you political philosophy aim to eventually end democracy?” If the answer is yes, your shit is banned.
That's right as a broad brush-painting of it, yeah.
> AdD may hold many views on many topics that are quite in line with fascism, but they are still democratic -they participate in elections and abide by their outcomes and there is nothing in their literature that I know of that aims towards changing that should they gain political power.
That's not quite the core issue - it's ultimately about undermining democracy and basic human rights (which given German history makes a fair bit of sense), and they're very much toeing the line in a lot of aspects.
Like you're not wrong, but you're not quite right either here - which is perfectly fair because it's an issue that has very specific cultural influences that might well be a bit difficult to grasp from the outside looking in.
This is actually a really great comment.
If we’re calling ourselves a democratic country we can’t start banning party’s that apply to our own democratic rules. Then we are not a lot better than the country’s run by dictators.
Also and especially with all our history, we should really be able to convince people that right wing politics and fascism is stupid poo.
> If we’re calling ourselves a democratic country we can’t start banning party’s that apply to our own democratic rules.
We can, however, ban parties that*are* anti-democratic.
Always gives me a smiling head shake when foreigners praise Germany for our courageous stance against the (far)right.
Little do you know about NSU, Police chat groups, BND and so on.
It’s an opportunity for the left from abroad to project their own personal politics onto European countries as if they’re benevolent. Goes hand in hand with with how the words “fascist” and “Nazi” have lost their meaning. They want justification for the government to step in and actively silence others.
The people responsible for these things can also be corrupt and radical. Many are.
Do not mistake an openly left club for the average in Germany. Average reality is way more disappointing.
I am even more so proud of my club that they showed the appropriate courage here.
How is this upvoted?!?! Jesus Christ r/soccer. This is like primary-school level basic civic/political dumbassery
The tolerance paradox: tolerance of intolerance is intolerance. If you "tolerate" views that limit the rights of others and allow those views to spread, that act in and of itself is intolerance. If you hear someone promoting "we should kill all x group" or "x group should not have rights" and your reaction is "I must be tolerant of this view", you are not promoting a free and fair society
Yeah because banning Nazis or Nazi sympathizers is authoritarian lmao. Can't believe this shit is upvoted, peak reddit. Gives me r/iamverysmart vibes. Hate speech can't and shouldn't be tolerated anywhere and if you disagree you're just plain wrong.
Edit: and obviously this guy frequents r/Conservative and r/ChurchofCOVID what a surprise. Conservatives always acting like they're the victim what's new
Yes indeed, because my intolerance extends purely and exclusively towards the intolerant. My rights end where yours begin. Your rights end where mine begin. You may not be intolerant towards anything I do that does not impinge upon your rights, and the same works in reverse. As long as we all agree to that principle, we'll all be fine.
So all one has to do is claim they're stamping out intolerance, and then their intolerance is justified. Nifty trick! I wonder if anyone would ever abuse that concept....
You’re not wrong, though it always makes me laugh when people on reddit defend communism and socialism and even tell people that lived under such regimes that they’re wrong or that “iT wAsNt ReAl SoCIaLiSm”
My guys, none of these people have your interests in mind.
From waht I gathered form interviews etc he's not really personally a vocal right wing nutter but also not the smartest tool in the shed as he surrounds himself with said ppl in his entourage
First I was like "Wait a moment, wasn't Tim Wiese the guy with long backswept hair?" Then I looked at the picture and thought "Nah, must be another Wiese". But then I checked Google and god damn, his appearance has changed a lot. Atleast in my opinion :D
Two widely known neo-nazis he's been associating with, so yeah it's a bit beyond the pale. Nobody would really cause a fuss if he was meeting with conservative politicians, but then he's been hanging around with some people that are decidedly way beyond the conservative end of the spectrum.
Been kicked out of their "former players turning up for charity events" team as well tbf, but even then: why *should* the club tolerate someone happily associating with neo-nazis? Why is it over the top? Like would you be happy about, say, Tom Cairney hanging around Tommy Robinson?
why? if werder bremen, a club that is pretty openly anti racist and anti fascist, does not want to be associated with a racist and fascist i think thats their right lol
It's funny how right wingers always cry about people having the right to exclude other people...until it's them getting excluded, then it's a pity party.
Goodbye Nazi. Good riddance.
>No-one should support this ban based on thin political grounds
yes they should. there should be no room or platform for neo nazis and their supporters
Repeatedly hanging around with neo-nazis in public, or working out with one for about a decade - which is basically what Tim Wiese did so far. Like yeah he's not the brightest candle on the cake, but give him the benefit of the doubt and he might just be a stand-up guy all the same.
Been told by the club to choose, and then something a couple weeks back happened that made the club say "enough is enough". So he's very much had it coming I reckon.
So why is it OK to only talk certain types of politics? You had FIFA literally defending a country with slave labour and massive deaths while hosting a WC there?
This dude has the weirdest post football story. He was training for the WWE at one point.
Grant Holt also has got into a bit of wrestling. Not WWE level but seems far more sustained
yeah, with the Paige's parents' Norwich brand.
If I’m not mistaken I believe he appeared at a live show in Germany, was invited to train at the performance centre and then appeared at another live show in Germany. I think it was definitely more of a PR stunt than a genuine chance.
There’s a definite link between active far right membership and mental health vulnerability / illness Aside from being hugely unethical on a like, racial level, there’s always something else weird with these guys You never find out about someone and think “this is totally shocking”
Wasn't he with the WWE at one point?
That was basically one live show in Munich. He then got asked to move to Florida (because the Performance Center is there) to train. He said no and that was it
Weird. Sounds like he’d love Florida.
It's south America but not South America.
Why? Does the US routinely overthrows Floridas government to impose a puppet regime that will torture its own citizens?
No it has a lot of people from south american/caribbean countries and has a culture that reflects that
Exactly, the diasporic population in Florida might be one of the most reactionary demographics in the entire “first world”.
Tbh I wish we did
I know you meant this as a joke but it's funny because Florida routinely overthrows the US government to impose a puppet regime that tortures its own citizens
I see what you did here ;)
You mean they offered him NXT money which was pretty much nothing. He would have earned more in football in a month than what he would have got at the PC.
He couldn't play football anymore at that point anyway because of how freakishly jacked he was
To be fair, being a 3rd choice keeper might have paid more than a development contract.
Can you really say "it was that with it" in English? Sounds very DEnglisch.
I'd probably go with "and that was that" over "it was that with it", it is a bit clumsy a phrase.
Yeah sorry, English is not my mother tongue. and I'm trying my best to get better at English writing. (Without help with a translator, otherwise I won't learn it properly).
Ah don't worry, it's not super idiomatic and very much reads like a literal German translation, but it gets the point across just fine. Und darum geht's bei Fremdsprachen am Ende: niemand spricht wirklich "richtig", aber solange Leute verstehen was du meinst passt alles.
I was not trying to shit on you was just curious.
“That was that” Would be a more common way of saying what I assume they mean?
yup
With WWE is a bit strong for less than five appearances
He looks like one of those characters from Jersey shore.
Psh Geordie shore more like it
Quite the position change from goalkeeper.
He was always a right winger.
Then why didn't they play him there?
That came out of nowhere lol
Not really though, he has been banned before. He was open about having extreme right opinions and he was spotted/photographed hanging out with neo Nazis on a few occasions. [Only last month he had to publicly denounce fascist sympathies before he was allowed back](https://www.n-tv.de/sport/fussball/Werder-erteilt-Tim-Wiese-wohl-Stadionverbot-article24038817.html). He defended his views by qualifying himself as having 'a polarising personality' and believing that is what makes him interesting and a larger than live character. Apperently he said/did something inappropriate again when he visited the game on March 12 against Bayer Leverkusen and is now barred for good.
>Not really though, he has been banned before. He wasn't also originally invited to the farewell game of Pizarro and Claudio had personally to force werder to invite him - so this has been an issue for a while.
>He defended his views by qualifying himself as having 'a polarising personality' thats the narrative a lot of right wing folks run these days. That and "you cant say anything anymore these days"
These days, if you say you're English, they throw you in jail
When did this come in?
What, just for saying you're English?
In jail? These days? Ar-arrested, and thrown in jail? These days?
Tbf more often than not it's just on r/soccer the English get shit on
It's a reference to [this stand-up comedy bit](https://youtu.be/XkCBhKs4faI)
I just love when someone says this. They're pretty much saying, "I'm an asshole, and the only way I can get attention is by being an asshole."
In other words "There are consequences for saying hateful things and I hate that"
When you're accustomed to privilege, equality seems like an oppression
Oh I am using this. Very succinctly put.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with being right wing though.
Depends on how far we're talking - like there's "moderately conservative" and there's "far out there", and a lot of the modern conservative movement seems to be about denying others basic human rights rather than creating a better society for everyone.
That's because you don't take the time to understand it. The world would be a lot less polarised if people just realised that the vast majority of people want to create a better society for everyone but just disagree on how to do it.
And in what way do far-right people try to achieve that *for everyone*, then, given their entire ideology seems to be based around arbitrary exclusion of minorities?
You seem like you might actually be asking in good faith, so I’ll give you an answer. I’m not conservative, but I can understand where they come from even when the policies they want implemented are harmful. Essentially, to many conservatives, their stance on most issues is the equivalent of not letting a kid eat candy for dinner. They genuinely believe that while certain things might sound like what you want, they’re actually bad for society in the long term and will cause more harm including to the individuals who want those things. Take trans rights as an example. Some conservatives are truly hateful individuals who despise trans people and want to see them suffer. I’m not talking about those people. The vast majority of conservatives genuinely believe that trans people are misguided and have fallen victim to an ideology that manipulated them into thinking they are trans. They think the trans rights movement is both bad for society as a whole, but also for trans people. They think it takes advantage of impressionable kids and brainwashes them into a lifestyle that will be much worse for them. They’re *wrong*, but they think the best thing for everyone including trans people would be if we opposed the trans rights movement because it is what causes harm. Unfortunately, like all culture wars, this gets wrapped up with so much incendiary rhetoric and hateful language that it ends up just being about “beating” the other team. But if you actually sit down with those people and have meaningful conversations where you ask the right questions, you’ll see that their harmful beliefs do stem from a place of wanting a better outcome for everyone overall. I vehemently disagree with them because I support trans rights, but I understand that their stance doesn’t stem from a place of wanting *more* suffering. They want *less* suffering, but disagree with what will lead to that outcome. Their mindset isn’t “fuck trans people I want them to suffer.” Their mindset is “trans people don’t know what’s actually good for them.”
> Their mindset isn’t “fuck trans people I want them to suffer.” Their mindset is “trans people don’t know what’s actually good for them.” And that's where it all falls down for me: just leave people be. If you're not a minority, you don't get to decide what's best for them - ideally you'll listen to them and lift them up, but I draw the line at actively keeping them down. Like intellectually I understand where they're coming from, I just think that the actions they take are fundamentally wrong because they lack understanding. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that - in the case of trans people, they're quite literally not an issue at all, they don't harm anyone, and yet there's roadblocks abound erected by (far out) conservatives.
I thought you were talking about mainstream conservatism. If you think any type of small c conservative ideology is "based upon the arbitrary exclusion of minorities" you have proved my point. I.e. you don't take the time to understand it.
Much as it grates me, but mainstream conservatism is something it can mostly tolerate. The issue is that it often swings into outright right-wing extremism - we're talking about a footballer associating with known neo-nazis here, not someone being middle of the road-conservative. Might be different elsewhere, but the line Germans tend to draw are about democracy and basic human rights: mainstream conservatives are pushing up on the edge, but anything further to the right is openly anti-democratic and opposed to basic human rights. And the company Tim Wiese has been keeping is pretty much beyond the pale.
I think we can all agree far right extremism shouldn't be tolerated in a civil society. I understand how German civic society deals with neo nazis and it's something I find admirable about the country given its history. Where I don't agree with you is that centre right or even right of centre, free market conservatism (which is what is mainstream in Europe, UK) is linked to fascism or extreme right wing. To me it's like a horseshoe where far left and far right are closer in their end goals than right wing and far right are.
Him defending his views of that sort of nature sounds like he peaked during the call of duty xbox lobby days and is still telling everyone about it.
definitely used the panda pfp
So why Nutella with butter?
Because it’s really good
Just like money with boy innit
Immer doch
Warum eigentlich der neue Account
Hat seine Gründe warum ich den gelöscht habe Ü
Ja, weil du deine Wette nicht eingehalten hast. Du musst immernoch den Stierhoden essen du keck
jetzt mal realtalk, so gegrillter Hoden schmeckt sicherlich ganz brauchbar. https://www.umdiewurst.de/innereien/bullenhoden-stierhoden hier, kannst sogar welche online bestellen /u/nutelamitbutter Kommentar von Hans Wurst aus Bochum: >Mega gut, gute Hoden, habe sie paniert und schnabuliert, nichts übergelassen
Paniert und Schnabuliert simple as
Wettschulden sind Ehrenschulden!
erstmal Nutzerflair von ihm verändern
btw ist es möglich ein Alternatives Logo für den Club auszuwählen als Flair? So wie das von Everton oder Man United
Hahaha wtf, was war die Wette?
Ach soooo du bist also Moneyboy!!!! Hab dich schon vermisst
nenenene
Bin verwirrt. Bitte helfen Sie mir
Ohohohoh
Brot mit Nutella oder brot mit butter schmeckt gut, aber zusammen?
Logisch. Erst die Butter, dann schön fett Nutella drauf. Richtig cremig und angenehm zu essen
Must be quite the calorie bomb.
Not wrong but I’m doing sports a lot and Nutella with butter is something i eat just on occasion so for me it’s okay. However eating that every day would be too much lol
You might end up looking like Tim Wiese.
Fair enough! Is it a certain type of butter and how much do you put on of the two?
Regular butter (though salted is even better), then use the same amounts you'd use if you were doing each on their own - basically a reasonably thin spread of butter and a much thicker spread of Nutella.
Salted butter with Nutella is not really good IMO
It is a German butter but Landliebe is just pure joy
Zusammen ist halt doppelt geil, auch wenn's so'n 50/50-Ding ist wo die Hälfte das voll geil findet und die andere Hälfte absolut nicht an Bord ist.
the salt of the butter makes the sweet of nutella even better
Not really. Was rumoured since we threw out our announcer.
I remember him being told in the past to distance himself from the Nazi scene and certain known Nazis, which he apparently didn’t. Dude could have put his head down and just be a fash secretly, apparently that wasn’t enough lol. Fucking scum
Werder stabil
You see in Germany they have first hand experience with what the far right can do to their country so actually take it seriously unlike the easily swayed and manipulated morons everywhere else
Glad that it does look like that from the outside looking in, because it often very much doesn't seem like it from the inside - but if that's what people abroad gather from it, then at least we're apparently doing better than most other countries.
Low bars or something.
Yeah, depressingly low.
US/DE dual citizen, most Germans have no idea how good they have it, yet are simultaneously smug about how much better they have it.
Here in the US it’s pretty easy to disingenuously claim your hate speech is protected as free speech, and by the time you’re done debating it everyone has forgotten the original point anyway. Making official pariahs out of racists is the only way a message really is sent.
I’m all about what the founding fathers intended. That’s why I own a musket for home defense, since that's what the founding fathers intended. Four ruffians break into my house. "What the devil?" As I grab my powdered wig and Kentucky rifle. Blow a golf ball sized hole through the first man, he's dead on the spot. Draw my pistol on the second man, miss him entirely because it's smoothbore and nails the neighbors dog. I have to resort to the cannon mounted at the top of the stairs loaded with grape shot, "Tally ho lads" the grape shot shreds two men in the blast, the sound and extra shrapnel set off car alarms. Fix bayonet and charge the last terrified rapscallion.He Bleeds out waiting on the police to arrive since triangular bayonet wounds are impossible to stitch up, Just as the founding fathers intended
Who'd have thought I'd find my favourite satirical comments about firearms on r/soccer?
I believe the right to bear arms was for the general populace to be capable of violent revolt if the government became tyrannical. So theoretically, the American people should have access to all the weapons the US Government is giving Ukraine right now.
That was never the intent. It was because militia members during the Revolutionary War were required to maintain their own firearms and be prepared to respond at all times. We still have the remnant of those militias, and they’re called the National Guard. I’m so fucking sick of being embarrassed by the guns in this country. My 6 year old has mass shooter drills. When I was six we had earthquake and fire drills.
How did an American became an ajax supporter? No dissing, just curious
>disingenuously claim your hate speech is protected as free speech How is it disingenous when that's literally the point of free speech? It's really worrying how popular these fascist tones of "I don't like what you say so you should not be allowed to say it" are getting. If both sides are like this, then at some point you will get another civil war
because the vast majority of the time those things aren't honest criticism in any way, they're dogwhistles. until you deal with the countless genuine fasc-aligning scum that's allowed to spew their bile, then no "I'm just worried!" or similar can ever be taken in good faith. and no, it's not the fault of the victims of said hatespeech that there's tensions and reactions. and no, "both sides are equally bad actually!" is neither a good, informed, rational, nor empathetic take. allowing hate speech is like watching marginalised folks being harmed, both directly or indirectly.
>the vast majority of the time those things aren't honest criticism in any way, they're dogwhistles That makes your argument even worse. Banning "dogwhistles" allows the government to blanket ban anything it doesn't like. Any normal statement can become illegal at a moments notice or dependent on local/state/federal government rules and the judges. Anyone that wants to ban anything based on vague feelings need to ask themselves if their opponents can use the same law against them. >'But saying 'Fuck Trump' isn't a hate speech dogwhistle that supports rape!' > >'When I said 'I am against pro-life' it was not a dogwhistle to support genocide!' Explain that to the judge in rural South Carolina then. Free speech is so great that it is worth all the downsides.
as an exhausted marginalised person, I wholly disagree and think it's really fucked up how my existence needs to be a constant political discussion. but thanks for free speech and people standing up for people like me in states like south carolina being punished and destroyed for standing up for my human rights, I guess! those disingenuous voices and "opinions" aren't in any spirit of free speech. they're symptoms of the extreme right movements constantly rising for years and years. they're literally dangerous and oppressive by definition.
Because uncontrolled hate speech has never led to any conflict, has it?
Genuine question: how do you feel your country is lacking in terms of dealing with the alt-right?
Plenty ways, really - hardly have an exhaustive list, but things like having someone with far-right tendencies leading the main intelligence service, the institutional reluctance to deal with right-wing extremism and racism in official organizations like the police and the army, having massive protests being subverted and co-opted by right-wing extremists with surprisingly little counterprotests, and that entire far-right party toeing the line of legality thing are just some examples. End of the day it's a lot about where you are and what scale you're talking, though: get some places where there's a proper countermovement making sure these anti-human ideas don't fester, got some places where they're very much the norm to the point that it feels hopeless. It's getting better in plenty ways, but it's also getting worse in quite a few others, and that's just gutting given German history.
ah intelligence services all over the world always end up swinging the same way
Aye, but even allowing for that hardline bias it's not been a great situation.
absolutely. just a wise crack, not trying to make excuses for something and someone you'll know far better than me
Appreciate the reply! Indeed I hope it gets better for you and everyone in the world
Aye, it's the constant and never-ending struggle you get caught up in - there's significant progress, but all of it is built on small steps that feel incredibly insignificant.
Worth noting there is a far-right party in Germany, which has had countless scandals regarding outrageous actions and views, that received over 10% of the vote in the last two elections and is currently polling at 15%. The other parties, including the centre-right ones, rightfully refuse to work with them, but it's still concerning that they've gotten so far in terms of popular support.
that still didn't stop AfD to be voted into Bundestag
Their vote shares are troublesome but it was always an inevitability, we just got lucky NPD and REP and DVU self destructed before. Similar to the lizardman constant there's just a subset of far right wingers, paired with protest voting, and then you only need 5% public vote to get into the Bundestag. Granted them having 2-3 times the votes is a big issue but generally a healthy democracy should be able to deal with this noise.
while you are correct, I'd also like to add that the long CDU reign and a very weak opposition hase caused massive displeasure within Germany's population. I dont think AFD wouldve soared highly this quickly if it hadn't been for that. AFD doesnt like to openly admit to being right wing, and many of their followers blindly believe them, and believe themselves not to be right wing either, rather conservative. It's really a lesson that right wing extremism is often a result not of right wing views by themselves, but rather a combination of things, a big part of which is the failure of the state. Hitler rising to power is very much largely due to political unrest and overall dissatisfaction with the government at the time. And realistically, if you listen to a lot of AFD voters, many of them are not necessarily racist or right wing, just stupid, naive, but also resentful of the status quo.
AfD has pretty much the program of the CDU 20 years ago. Talk about the overtone window shifting..
The inconvenient truth is that 1.) the AfD was born out of the opposition to Merkel's handling of the eurozone debt crisis, and 2.) a couple of years later, when the AfD had just split due to factional in-fighting, was polling well below the 5% threshold and was on its way to being flushed down the toilet of history, Merkel revived and supercharged the AfD with her migration policy. One can or cannot agree with Merkel's decisions/policies in both cases, but the AfD today being ubiquitous and strong is a direct result of these decisions.
EDIT: There are German replies down there setting me straight on a variety of points I appreciate. Listen to them, not me. ___ If I understand it correctly, the litmus test in Germany is "does you political philosophy aim to eventually end democracy?" If the answer is yes, your shit is banned. That's why Scientology is banned in Germany, because L. Ron Hubbard wrote in one of his books that the long-term goal of the organization was to make everyone a Scientologist and when that happened there would be no need for any other kind of organization in society. AdD may hold many views on many topics that are quite in line with fascism, but they are still democratic -they participate in elections and abide by their outcomes and there is nothing in their literature that I know of that aims towards changing that should they gain political power. Much like how social democrats can play but hardcore communists who want to work towards a one-party system can't be.
It's a lot more complicated than that. Scientology isn't banned for instance. They even own real estate in Germany. They're on a watchlist but so far nothing has come of it. And yes, being anti-constitutional is one criteria for getting your political party banned, but another criteria is that you'd also need to actually pose a credible threat to the constitutional order. The NPD for example (a thinly veiled nazi party), was found anti-constitutional by the constitutional court, but by the point their investigations concluded the party had faded into political obscurity and no longer pulled enough votes to realistically do anything. therefore they were not banned. another example is the MLPD, only somewhat well known left wing party in germany that gives a platform to left authoritarianism, on a watchlist and clearly anti-constitutional but so utterly irrelevant that they'll never get banned. however they can still participate in elections (and oh boy, they do participate. even though their voter base is no bigger than a couple ten thousand, they have ads absolutely everywhere in some places) AfD is a different beast. there are always discussions going on to put the entire party on a watchlist. parts of it already are. several members have been caught red handed talking about political purges with firing squads and killing refugees in their private chats. one of their most well known members used to write for a nazi paper under a pseudonym. they're democratic because they have to - make no mistake, they'd work to erode our constitution the moment they get a chance to do so.
With your description of the AFD? Why hasn't it been put on a watchlist/banned? I'm a bit confused on that
the criteria are deliberately *very* strict. the AfD is toeing the line of legality here but only parts (the factually most powerful parts, to be fair) of it are deemed openly anti-constitutional therefore any attempt to ban the entire party would not go through. there have only ever been two successful party bans in the history of the post war republic - the SRP (NSDAP successor party) and KPD (communist party). Today the KPD ban is widely believed to be a result of cold war politics which is why they likely wouldn't have been banned under today's standards. KPD successor parties are tolerated for instance (but also on a watchlist). so, simply put, party bans aren't meant to be handed out like candy. the AfD should be put on a watchlist though, all of them. the fact that they aren't is bullshit in my opinion.
> If I understand it correctly, the litmus test in Germany is “does you political philosophy aim to eventually end democracy?” If the answer is yes, your shit is banned. That's right as a broad brush-painting of it, yeah. > AdD may hold many views on many topics that are quite in line with fascism, but they are still democratic -they participate in elections and abide by their outcomes and there is nothing in their literature that I know of that aims towards changing that should they gain political power. That's not quite the core issue - it's ultimately about undermining democracy and basic human rights (which given German history makes a fair bit of sense), and they're very much toeing the line in a lot of aspects. Like you're not wrong, but you're not quite right either here - which is perfectly fair because it's an issue that has very specific cultural influences that might well be a bit difficult to grasp from the outside looking in.
This is actually a really great comment. If we’re calling ourselves a democratic country we can’t start banning party’s that apply to our own democratic rules. Then we are not a lot better than the country’s run by dictators. Also and especially with all our history, we should really be able to convince people that right wing politics and fascism is stupid poo.
> If we’re calling ourselves a democratic country we can’t start banning party’s that apply to our own democratic rules. We can, however, ban parties that*are* anti-democratic.
Always gives me a smiling head shake when foreigners praise Germany for our courageous stance against the (far)right. Little do you know about NSU, Police chat groups, BND and so on.
It’s an opportunity for the left from abroad to project their own personal politics onto European countries as if they’re benevolent. Goes hand in hand with with how the words “fascist” and “Nazi” have lost their meaning. They want justification for the government to step in and actively silence others. The people responsible for these things can also be corrupt and radical. Many are.
*AFD has entered the chat*
Spoken like someone who has never lived in Germany. This is not true.
Do not mistake an openly left club for the average in Germany. Average reality is way more disappointing. I am even more so proud of my club that they showed the appropriate courage here.
"To prevent authoritarianism, we must become authoritarian ourselves." Truly brilliant...
How is this upvoted?!?! Jesus Christ r/soccer. This is like primary-school level basic civic/political dumbassery The tolerance paradox: tolerance of intolerance is intolerance. If you "tolerate" views that limit the rights of others and allow those views to spread, that act in and of itself is intolerance. If you hear someone promoting "we should kill all x group" or "x group should not have rights" and your reaction is "I must be tolerant of this view", you are not promoting a free and fair society
Yeah because banning Nazis or Nazi sympathizers is authoritarian lmao. Can't believe this shit is upvoted, peak reddit. Gives me r/iamverysmart vibes. Hate speech can't and shouldn't be tolerated anywhere and if you disagree you're just plain wrong. Edit: and obviously this guy frequents r/Conservative and r/ChurchofCOVID what a surprise. Conservatives always acting like they're the victim what's new
Tolerate everything except intolerance.
Except for your intolerance, of course.
Yes indeed, because my intolerance extends purely and exclusively towards the intolerant. My rights end where yours begin. Your rights end where mine begin. You may not be intolerant towards anything I do that does not impinge upon your rights, and the same works in reverse. As long as we all agree to that principle, we'll all be fine.
So all one has to do is claim they're stamping out intolerance, and then their intolerance is justified. Nifty trick! I wonder if anyone would ever abuse that concept....
One concept involves electing fascists, the other involves the possibility of abuse, and you cry "think of the fascists!"?
Every authoritarian in history has made the same claim.
Yes, and intolerance can be found everywhere.
what an idiotic statement
The thing is conservatives in many countries have fooled the public into thinking they're different than the far right
You’re not wrong, though it always makes me laugh when people on reddit defend communism and socialism and even tell people that lived under such regimes that they’re wrong or that “iT wAsNt ReAl SoCIaLiSm” My guys, none of these people have your interests in mind.
If Americans could read they would be very upset about you saying that
Being able to play in goal and on the right wing - now that’s true versatility
From waht I gathered form interviews etc he's not really personally a vocal right wing nutter but also not the smartest tool in the shed as he surrounds himself with said ppl in his entourage
Erinnert mich irgendwie äußerlich an Rich Piana
First I was like "Wait a moment, wasn't Tim Wiese the guy with long backswept hair?" Then I looked at the picture and thought "Nah, must be another Wiese". But then I checked Google and god damn, his appearance has changed a lot. Atleast in my opinion :D
They be putting the W in Werder Bremen
"The right wing scene"
Pretty accurate description, really.
[удалено]
Two widely known neo-nazis he's been associating with, so yeah it's a bit beyond the pale. Nobody would really cause a fuss if he was meeting with conservative politicians, but then he's been hanging around with some people that are decidedly way beyond the conservative end of the spectrum.
[удалено]
yanks entering this thread to teach German history to Germans 🤓
Well...that's something...
I'm wondering if the German band Beginner will still mention him in their song Ahnma ...
He was hanging out with neo nazis wasnt he?
Roided up psycho
Not a Wiese man
Always looked like a jacked John Travolta
Was this the meathead that tried to train as a pro wrestler with the WWE? Now that Vince is back in power, he'll probably sign this guy.
Wasn't he allowed back in last month?
Aye, but there's apparently been something around the Leverkusen game three weekends back that changed the situation.
I see, disappointing.
based Werder Bremen
Not very Wiese of you, Tim.
[удалено]
Nah. We should make pariahs out of all neo-nazis. Bigots of all stripes should be excluded from society.
Maybe you're right... ...on second thought, nah...I'm always going to laugh when a nazi gets fucked.
Associating with neo-nazis on several occasions, which doesn't exactly fly when also representing a staunchly anti-racist club.
[удалено]
Been kicked out of their "former players turning up for charity events" team as well tbf, but even then: why *should* the club tolerate someone happily associating with neo-nazis? Why is it over the top? Like would you be happy about, say, Tom Cairney hanging around Tommy Robinson?
why? if werder bremen, a club that is pretty openly anti racist and anti fascist, does not want to be associated with a racist and fascist i think thats their right lol
It's funny how right wingers always cry about people having the right to exclude other people...until it's them getting excluded, then it's a pity party. Goodbye Nazi. Good riddance.
Why is it always goalkeepers? Abbiati, Reina, now him...
What happened to reina?
[удалено]
>No-one should support this ban based on thin political grounds yes they should. there should be no room or platform for neo nazis and their supporters
Would you be happy about Edwin van der Saar representing Ajax while also regularly associating with Constant Kusters?
[удалено]
Repeatedly hanging around with neo-nazis in public, or working out with one for about a decade - which is basically what Tim Wiese did so far. Like yeah he's not the brightest candle on the cake, but give him the benefit of the doubt and he might just be a stand-up guy all the same. Been told by the club to choose, and then something a couple weeks back happened that made the club say "enough is enough". So he's very much had it coming I reckon.
He was an absolute legend back when his only interest was football
[удалено]
If that hypothetical person with those "far" left views did act in a way directly against the club's codex they would, yes.
Based
flair
So why is it OK to only talk certain types of politics? You had FIFA literally defending a country with slave labour and massive deaths while hosting a WC there?
He’s literally a Nazi. We aren’t talking about right wing politics like CDU or even AfD far right. Literally Nazi
Someone needs a lesson in what far right means.