4 ms·
> the document itself defines what a constitution would be, and lays out the requirements for ratifying it, which haven’t been met. It does neither, no. It st
by detaro 3y ago
> the document itself defines what a constitution would be, and lays out the requirements for ratifying it, which haven’t been met.
It does neither, no.
It states the requirements under which it can (not must) be replaced, and it's a favorite party trick of people trying to delegitimize Germany to pretend that somehow means the current state isn't legitimate.
- cycomanic 3y agoWhile I disagree with the idiots arguing that the BRD is not a legitimate state, I have to say the linked document somewhat skirts the issue that the members of the Parlamentarische Rat indeed considered that there should be a new constitution which should be voted on by the people after the reunification. The fact that this did not happen was the subject of significant debate and in the view of many at the time a missed democratic opportunity.