This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Is it worth mentioning that Friedrich Nietzsche, following his mental breakdown, informed his friend Franz Overbeck that he was having Adolf Stoecker shot? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.231.159 (talk) 08:02, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article is appalling. It treats Stoecker's anti-Semitic fantasies as a fact. The article says that attacks on Stoecker's movement were led by a "predominant Jewish Communist and Anti-Christian element"! The German Communist Party was not founded until 1919, and the idea that SPD were led by rabidly anti-Christian Jews sounds something out of Stoecker's own speeches. It excuses Stoekcer's decision to exclude Jews from his party because politics in Europe were "sectarian". No, that's not true, but what would you expect from an article that says the Kaiserreich was a "Parliamentary democracy". Imperial Germany was not a democracy. Yes, there was a Reichstag elected by universal manhood suffrage, but the Reichstag had very limited powers. Crucially, the Chancellor was not responsible to the Reichstag. The Chancellor was appointed by the Emperor, and could be sacked only by the Emperor. The Reichstag had no say whatsoever in the question of who was the Chancellor, which is why Imperial Germany was not a parliamentary democracy, as this article falsely claims. The article makes the ridiculous and untrue claim that the court "relied upon significant Jewish financial support"-this smacks of the worse sort of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories where Jews have vast, secret powers of manipulation over others. And nowhere would you ever know that Stoecker was a called the "second Luther" in his lifetime, one of Germany's most loved Lutheran clergyman or that he served as court chaplain to the Emperor Wilhelm I. Stoecker's position as court chaplain gave him more power and prominence than what his title as a pastor would suggest. The problem with this article is that it treats Stoecker's views as facts. The article needs a total rewrite to rid it of its anti-Semitism. --A.S. Brown (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
