What´s the meaning of "democracy"? "Democracy" is the Greek word for "power of the people" and has got the same meaning like the Latin word "republic". Democracy is standing for that matters will have to happen on the will of the majority unconcernd they are right or wrong, good or bad - discribed in a very simplyfied way. The best arguments cannot always assert themselves also in a democracy, but the sicial groups having got the most (economical) power will take over. That´s why a democracy is not inevitably identical with a real legal state, just as little a dictatorship has to be inevitably a non - legal state.

Adolf Hitler took over the power by democratic elections. Although democratic elections corresponding standards of today were cancelled in the following years, Adolf Hitler had got the populace of the people of the Reich at his side. The annexion of the Saar Territory in 1935 and the Republic of Germanaustria in 1938 to the Third Reich was legitimated democratically, but the annexion of the GDR (East Germany) to the Federal Republic of Germany in 1990 was not. Also the basic law (Grundgesetz) of the Federal Republic of Germany was never been legitimated democratically by the German people, although the basic law demands a plebiscite.

Consequently even the Third Reich had got domocratical points, during the Federal Republic of Germany is also cultivating very well dictatorial parts what is being proved for example by the non - exististing seperation between state and church in Germany.

Also the GDR (East Germany) adorned itself with the demand to want to be a democartical state. Enterprises were officially "volkseigen" (owned by the people), but the GDR had to fail unavoidably because the at this kind expected economical welfare held off. This circumstance was surely mostly self - inflicted, but the worse productivity of the GDR economy and the lost of qualified employers by emigration to the more attractive capitalistic west didn´t allowed higher standards.

During the potical parties of the Federal Republic of Germany had got a significant self - contained contour in the 1950ths, they have assimilated themselves during the meantime in such a way hat they are corresponding to each other like eggs. Parties being able to offer an alternative poltic, like the KPD or SRP (KPD = communistic party of Germany; SRP = socialist party of the Reich, the follower party of Hitler´s NSDAP) were either forbidden or restrained by the voting systhem - in Germany a party has to recieve at least 5 % of the votes in order to join the parliaments. The GDR acted in a more consistent way, maybe perhaps a little bit more honest by introducing the socialistic standard party SED. Obviously the leadership feared the domcocratic control by the people in each parts of Germany.

Poolings of interests, like the churches, are being brought into line with the stately power in the Federal Republic of Germany and are being disciplined by stately financing and dependance, during in the GDR the unions shared the same fate. The justice couldn´t proved itself to be effectiv supervisory body toward the stately power, because the German justice has got too much internal weak points and has to prosecute also delicts motivated by poltical reasons. That´s why the German justice is not bein able to support the standard of a legal state.

Indeed the commuistic states of the former Eastern Bloc proved themselves to be more able and willing for reforms than the plugged - in Western democracies. In Western countries people prfer to twidle their thumbs by saying, "we have got a democracy and so erverything will be all right". But their are existing problems in real life which cannot be solved by ignorance and sitting out. That is an opportunity for radical powers of each kind to take their chance.

Well, you may object that the Germans wouldn´t had been still enough qualified for democracy after the end of the Second World War. They surely wouldn´t settled their account with the nazis alone, therefore the Allies hat to do so. Maybe, but the Allies would have been no longer able to act because of the beginning Cold War between the West and the East only a few years later. The Allies were depending on the cooperation with the old nazis on both sides.

But let´s speak about the present time. The success of the Gernan democracies after the Second World War is basing upon the economical boom causing welfare and full employment for everybody similar like Hitler´s success in the early 1930s. People wouldn´t surely respected a democracy with chaos and misery in spite of their experiences with the Third reich.

But the first oil crisis in 1973 taught the protogonist of economic growth, that only welfare cannot be a sufficient solution in the long run. It will not be sufficient to respect the existence of a state to be secured only by its economical fortune, because the fortune will not be sure forever.

Poster of the Antifa at the Ruhr University Bochum, at the end of August 2011

Translation of the text:
Sept. 3rd , hinder the marching - up of nazis in Dortmund, meeting point 7.45 o´clock am at Bochum main railroad station, event for information at Aug. 26th at 8 o´clock pm at the VERDI house (VERDI is a workers union),training for the blockade at Aug. 29th 6 o´clock pm at the (center of culture) railroad station Bochum Langendreer

But we cannot notice in reality constructive solutions for the problems of our country neither from the neo - nazis nor from the Antifa. The ultimative consequence will be that all of them will conspire a fatal alliance and both parties will infiltrate the rest remaining parts of the legal state.

But just the Antifa which is engaging itself apart from that for people from abord prosecuted by political reasons supports the intensification of the German political criminal laws. Already the old § 130 StGB (Criminal code of Germany) "Volksverhetzung" had been very questionable by legal state aspects, but nevertheless the political law shall be increased more and more. Surely, we may not offend other people or social groups, but it will not be possible to define the border between constructive and offensive critics. You can decide this question only arbitrarily, the danger of misuse of the political laws by politicians and justice will be high. Ultimately each unwelcome reviewer can be crminalized and silenced.

But a "democratically" developped society and a "democratically" developped state might have to stand such attacks. Why does exist such a histeric fear of real or pretended nazis at all? Will it be an acknowledgement of the weakness of our democracies?

If we have to answer positively, what will be the reasons for it? The reasons have to be respected in the insufficient constitutional legality of the Federal Republic of Germany. Democracy will surely be very pleasant, but alone it will not be sufficient.