I can't into German politics.
Do they have a chance of winning, or is this symbolic?
>>157661Even if they are right it can only be symbolics because of "le ebin nazis".
To give you a perspective here is something that happened:
AfD tried made a claim to add a phrase to the basic law that went like this: "The national langugage of germany is german."
Every other party voted it down despite some having the same claims prviously because the AfD is evil so no matter if it is right they are evil and wrong by default.
To make a solid case out of this is really fucking hard so it can only be symbolics.
>>157655>Doctors without Borders GermanyIt's a shame. I really liked them before.
>>157655How do i fight NGOs in germany?
>>157771Posters displaying how they're traitors to Germany, how they follow Soros's agenda, and how they don't actually help refugees.
Time.
AfD founded 2013: 4.7% of national votes.
AfD 2017: 12.6% of national votes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany#Federal_Parliament_(Bundestag)Lets assume a 100 year cycle and AfD or alike gets 50% in 2033. See pic.
Change comes from suffering. As the suffering in each individual increases the grass roots change in each individual will also increase. The right-wing propaganda is just a door, an offer, the pain of the individuals is the energy that sends people through the door. The pain has only sent 12% through the door, more pain is needed.
"Turn the other cheek" is part of Western psychology and makes Western Civilization, it is gone against unwillingly.
Indeed and rests upon Martin Arrmstrong's (
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/the-ecm-and-the-interaction-of-a-complex-wave-structure/ ) work. I find it plausible. It also rests upon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theoryAnd is reminiscent of the Fascism cycle claim.
I see a cycle of 100 years being the most impactful and most unexpected cycle that affects our lives. So I focus on it a lot to understand our future. I keeps bearing out.
>>157787This
>>157782 is a reply to you. I also want to thank you, while searching for references I found pic related where Armstrong admits the cycles are fractals, something I long suspected. Yay! I wish public facing economists would examine this more.