

No, most of it is coming from BILD and the other traditional media that poisons our public political discourse for decades.
No, most of it is coming from BILD and the other traditional media that poisons our public political discourse for decades.
Well, at least the US did remove a giant obstacle to a lasting peace from the war - Trump.
In a similar way a straitjacket won’t make the patient less suicidal but it will prevent them from cutting their own wrists. It is not meant as a long-term solution.
One of the main contributors is probably that the last time they tried banned an extremist party on the right (the NPD) it didn’t work because they didn’t present enough evidence according to the courts, that made everyone involved hesitant this time (or at least that is the excuse they used). Or rather, it failed twice, once because they had agents within the party and the other time for lack of evidence. Obviously obtaining that evidence without running into the first problem again is tricky.
It means that a stopgap is needed before voters do something that they will only regret in hindsight.
Addressing issues is definitely important too, though part of the reason for extremist and populist parties like that becoming popular is that they have hijacked the public political discourse with fake issues (e.g. immigration, stirring up hate towards minorities,…) which essentially serve as a scapegoat for the voter’s actual frustrations with the current system (e.g. wealth distribution, lack of affordable housing, lack of jobs for young people, fears that changes in the world will reduce their standard of living or anger that they already did,…)
Honestly not so sure about that. Seems like people who reach the highest positions of power in any organization in the world are extremely over represented in the “take what they want without worrying about the consequences for others” category of people. Makes you wonder how we choose leaders in general, not just the how the Church does it.
From what I’ve seen in my life, you will always be proven wrong if you stereotype anything about any perceived group of people.
Not always but the exceptions (or as close to exceptions as generalizations can ever get you anyway) are usually cases where the stereotypical behavior is entangled deeply with the very definition of the group, e.g. the vast majority of kids of rich parents can’t understand the struggles of being poor.
He is the messiah of his own cult, wouldn’t you call that a religious leader?