I feel like this article isn’t clear. Is the court opining that teaching Marx should be banned in Germany?
Even as someone who has strong disagreements with Marxism, that seems quite unnecessary and, frankly, dangerous to democratic principles.
The headline isn't clear. The article goes into quite a lot of detail (the situation is much more complex, and the headline is probably a pretty misleading summary) and is perfectly clear.
I read the article but I did not find it clear at all. They quote the court’s reasoning but what is the implication of it? Or is it just an opinion without any consequences?
Okay? It isn't part of the constitution, so why would that matter?
Unconstitutional means "illegal"
Has anybody a link to the ruling? I'm now 3 articles deep into the taz newspaper which the article cites as source but can't find it.
I feel like this article isn’t clear. Is the court opining that teaching Marx should be banned in Germany?
Even as someone who has strong disagreements with Marxism, that seems quite unnecessary and, frankly, dangerous to democratic principles.
The headline isn't clear. The article goes into quite a lot of detail (the situation is much more complex, and the headline is probably a pretty misleading summary) and is perfectly clear.
I read the article but I did not find it clear at all. They quote the court’s reasoning but what is the implication of it? Or is it just an opinion without any consequences?