AFD voters can be rejected, but if you reject the Greens, the police come?
In a democracy, as it should be, people should be treated equally, regardless of their party, religion, ethnicity, etc., but a recent report has me upset. You can find out why in this article.
Domiciliary rights and freedom of contract
Normally, when a customer goes into a store, there is the Domestic rights of the ownerThis decides whether you want to serve the customer or not. Basically, it is in the self-interest of every entrepreneur to have customers in order to generate income. There is also the Freedom of contract and so the entrepreneur can refuse to enter into a contract with a customer, for example to refuse to sell a product X to the person, for example because the guest has come into the restaurant with very dirty shoes and you issue a house ban because this person shows conspicuous behavior patterns or even steals.
In my opinion and according to the legal opinion, these examples belong to the domiciliary right and freedom of contract of every entrepreneur.
But what has just happened makes me question once again the democratic principles in which we, at least the German readers of this blog, live.
The past
A few years ago, there were reports that restaurant owners no longer wanted to serve AFD voters.
02.12.2016 - Berlin restaurant won't let AfD members in - are they allowed to? (jetzt.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
12.12.2016 - "Nobelhart & Schmutzig" - "I don't want to serve AfD people" (welt.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
07.05.2019 - Restaurant Bocca di Bacco - Berlin restaurant refuses to cater for AfD leaders (rnd.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
There are a few other local media cases, which cannot be read due to a paywall, but as I do not have full insight into them, I have not listed them.
The table and unvaccinated
During the coronavirus pandemic, particular attention was paid to the German food banks, "die Tafel", which support people in Germany who live in poverty and have little money. The Tafel receives food donations and passes them on.
During the Corona pandemic, there were cases where some bars refused to allow unvaccinated people to enter or serve them.
28.10.2021 - "I can withstand the shitstorm" - Breitner's Munich table only for vaccinated people (bild.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
25.11.2021 - Tafel Unna in NRW: Clear 2G announcement! "Everyone had the chance to get vaccinated" (derwesten.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
03.05.2022 - Neusser Tafel does not distribute to unvaccinated people (rp-online.de) (Archive link)
Who stood up for the people who did not want to be vaccinated because they wanted to control their own bodies?
In the present
At the beginning of 2024, a Innkeeper from Reutlingen put under pressure by leftists (swr.de) (Archive link | Archive link) so that he would no longer allow AFD events in his restaurant. How can that be legitimate? That you put pressure on a non-political person so that they no longer allow another party to offer events in their own restaurant? Imagine if it were the other way round....
And now we come to the problem:
Farmers don't want to serve the Greens and Green voters. Of course, you could now think, okay, then they don't want to, that's okay, because unvaccinated and AFD voters weren't served by restaurant operators either. So at least there would be a comprehensible logic.
And what happens in reality?
15.02.2024 - Fuss over farmers' poster The anti-green poster in Weisen is being removed (svz.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
16.02.2024 - Protests: "Greens are not being served": Public prosecutor investigates (zeit.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
16.02.2024 - Comment: Farmers' protest in Weisen: Anger rarely gives rise to a good idea (maz-online.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
16.02.2024 - Suspicion of incitement to hatred "Greens will not be served": Public prosecutor's office investigates poster (focus.de) (Archive link | Archive link)
Media uproar, police and public prosecutor's office investigate incitement to hatred.
There was already a similar case in June 2023, which was probably only shared in the media by the Bild newspaper. There, a Entrepreneurs do not serve Green voters (Archive link | Archive link), but politically this has probably been lost because the municipalities are dependent on commercial income.
Have I missed something? So just because you don't want to serve the Greens, just like you can be against AFD voters (rejecting citizens because of your party is generally to be rejected, but shows how democratic principles have already eroded), then the police come and you get a complaint and have to deal with the public prosecutor's office for incitement to hatred?
Why wasn't this done with the AFD? Why are only the Greens democratically defended, even though the rejection of AFD voters is not in accordance with the law? Why were there no complaints because unvaccinated people were not served?
I hope you understand the reason for my concern, because as you can see here, we are getting closer and closer to a two-class democracy, one class which is allowed to invoke democracy and the other class which has to submit to democratic obligations but is not granted the same rights as the aforementioned class.
Is that worth striving for? Do we want to live in such a democracy in which people are separated according to party and it is decided which party is granted which rights?
In the MAZ Online published this commentary article:
So the poster saying that farmers no longer want to serve "Green voters" is silly at best. How do farmers want to check who voted for whom and when?
Yes, how does that work? You can't check AFD voters either....Then why were restaurants allowed to refuse to serve AFD voters?
Where is such camp thinking supposed to lead? Will the Syrian surgeon soon no longer be operating on AfD voters? Will the conductor kick everyone off the train who hasn't shown solidarity with striking train drivers?
Camp thinking already exists, and Hospitals have even refused to operate on a child's heart because parents were not vaccinated. And one bank already had a Customers warned that donations to the AFD are not accepted become. Is that enough of an example? There are individual cases where people make the wrong decisions, but these cases show the effects.
Finally, I would like to present the German Cite Basic Law Article 3 of 1949:
Art 3
(1) All people are equal before the law.
(2) Men and women shall have equal rights. The state shall promote the actual implementation of equal rights for women and men and work towards the elimination of existing disadvantages.
(3) No one may be discriminated against or favored because of their gender, origin, race, language, homeland and origin, faith, religious or political views. No one should be disadvantaged because of their disability.
English 
German 
French 
Czech