Talk:The Republicans (Germany)

Statements from 2005 and 2006
'''There is open debate on rather facism is rightwing or not. People like F. A. Hayek, as well as many others state that these parties are state controled collectivists, and therefore leftwing.' -- posted by user:68.57.33.91, moved to talk by Ferkelparade π 08:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)''


 * This is a misrepresentation of the debate in academia. Hayek, von Mises, and Flynn are right-wing / libertarian scholars who make this claim, but in reality, none of the major scholars of fascism agree.--Cberlet 20:14, 26 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Ceberlet's comment is a common misrepresentation by leftists that can't get over the fact that their precious socialism is totalitarian in nature. F. A. Hayek is about as rightwing a an apple. Hayek says that the further right you go the more individulist oriented the form of government, with anarchy being the ultimate extreme result. He considers this extreme dangerous to society. On the other hand, he says that the further left you go the more colectivist oriented the form of government, with totalitarianism being the ultimate extreme result. He, also considers this extreme dangerous to society. And in reality most of the scholars on faciam are leftists or centrists and rightist influenced by leftist views in acedemia, which were handed down my the social elites of Hayek's day. These are the same guys who snobishly rejected Hayek's writings, because it too closely aligned racist Hitler with their beloved pet utopian, answer to the world's problems, Socialism. (Neutral nobody 20:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC))

I agree with another wikipedian on another page that suggested we drop left or right in articles. I don't see many articles on so-called leftist groups labeled with 'a far left' or left-wing label, so why insistance to do it on the one's some accociate with the right. (Neutral nobody 21:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC))


 * Here's a page linking to wikipedian socialist parties: no mention of left in alot of their articles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_democratic_parties (Neutral nobody 21:27, 8 December 2005

(UTC))
 * all most of these pages say are "a political party" whever they might be. (Neutral nobody 21:28, 8 December 2005 (UTC))

All of this debate over fascism seems unimportant, since Republikaner members likely consider themselves to be on the political right. In addition, "fascism" is never mentioned in the article. (metzerly 22:37, 28 December 2005)

I think that "left" and "right" should be banned from wikipedia. They're labels which do not recognize the dynamic political environment of the post-WWIII world and tell one little about the group in question. Is the International Third Position left or right? They would say neither. The Liberal Democrats of the UK? Libertarianism? National Anarchism? Anarcho-Monarchism? The point is that these labels are ancient and represent a current of sloppy thinking which should be absent from wikipedia.


 * Your examples do raise serious points of debate, but "right" and "left" are used throughout the world to categorize political parties. So it's hard to break away from these categories, even if they are very relative at times. I would suggest that the NPOV banner be removed from this article. metzerly 01:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Moving to ‘Republicans (Germany)’
I suggest that this article be moved to Republicans (Germany). Most/all Wikipedia articles leave "the" out of their location titles. I know this is a special circumstance (i.e. the party is often referred to as "Die Republikaner"), but since the name has already been changed/translated to English, I think it would be best to follow the normal Wikipedia standards. metzerly 01:55, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I have moved the article to Republicans (Germany) as per Wikipedia's Naming Conventions. I have also taken down the POV banner, as it does not seem relevant since the NPD and DVU articles refer to the parties as "far-right. --metzerly 07:00, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I've reverted the move. All electoral movements and parties on Wikipedia which have "Die", "Los", "Gli", "Les" or somthing like that in their name in foreign languages have a "The" in their Wikipedia article name, so this should, too. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 02:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

White Nationalist?
From what I've read they seem to be a party that represents the more conservative voters who otherwise would vote CDU, not a white nationalist group like the NPD. I'd say there should at least be a source for it, so it can't be changed periodically by different editors. MagicBear (talk) 02:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This would appear to be correct - Die Republikaner are at very worst far-right, and are certainly not extreme-right, white nationalists, or white supremacists, and are not in the same category as the NPD. The NPD also, to my knowledge, supports Pan-Germanism, whereas Die Republikaner do not. Though some supporters of Die Republikaner have sympathy for the NPD, the parties themselves are two very different things. Evil Maniac From Mars (talk) 01:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Edits

 * The Republikaner NEVER were "extreme right". Being "extreme right" is a political term used to disparage right parties by left-wing activists; Verfassungsschutz and Verfassungsgericht see extreme right as a reason for a ban. Parties under observation by Federal Verfassungsschutz are listed as "having extremist tendencies". State Verfassungsschutz agencies are so incompetent they made the Constitutional Court stop the interdiction process of the NPD. Some regional party headquarters were more right than the Federal party, however.
 * Whilst the Party logo is black-red-gold, these are more the colours of the DVU. The REP - as well as other parties, eg. the CDU - advertise with the national colours, but according to Dr Schlierer, the party colour is blue - as are the colours of Austrian FPÖ.
 * Even under the chairmanship of Mr Schönhuber, the party tried to legitimise itself by dissociating from extremist rights. Mr Schönhuber stopped that; but he lost his chairmanship shortly thereafter. Dr Schlierer has continued this dissociation, thereby losing more and more members and voters to NPD/DVU. In the convention of 2005/2006, the media anticipated Dr Schlierer being voted out of office and the dissociation to end; instead, he was confirmed, and even more extremist members left the party. This was when Verfassungsschutz stopped observing the party.
 * Therefore, it now is no longer "German extreme right", if it ever was.
 * The DVU were originally thought as a party for the "democratic right"; during this time, it had a concord with REP not to compete in state elections. That concord ended when DVU went further right and associated itself with NPD. --141.70.81.136 (talk) 09:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Official colour(s)?
In Germany, parties are linked more or less to colours, often with traditional background. So red is for SPD (their “official colour”), and black often for CDU (but it is not their “official colour”).

Here, it says: Official colours -- Black, Red, Gold (that is yellow), but this is not true. These are just the colours used in their logo. But for campaigning, almost every party uses the “Black-Red-Gold” from the Flag of Germany. --129.69.141.80 (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Logo
Here is the new Logo of this party: --217.85.173.144 (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)