• 52 Posts
  • 373 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle




  • Thank you for your reply. I think there is little point in continuing this thread as we are unlikely to agree. As I have said several times, I am of the opinion that migration policy is not the serious problem that many people think it is - including you, apparently. Accordingly, I also think it is wrong to say that the AfD is pursuing fact-based policies. Rather, I think that the AfD uses (and promotes) people’s vague fears in order to push through its political agenda, which incidentally is not at all in the interests of the “little people” when it comes to economic policy, for example. I am also fundamentally of the opinion that politics must be designed for the long term - this is an absolute necessity, as political decisions always set the course for the future. I think it is naive to believe that political decisions can be made without any long-term effect. That’s why you have to know where you want to go and weigh up what effects political decisions will have. This applies to migration policy as well as to all other policy areas. Apart from that, we also have to deal with problems such as climate change, which of course require extremely long-term planning. Like the AfD, you can simply claim that this problem doesn’t exist and that you can simply carry on as before, but that doesn’t change the fact that climate change is real and needs to be dealt with in a meaningful way.



  • Yes, it is somewhat true that the AfD addresses people’s problems - at least they make it seem that way. But their rhetoric also ensures that people blame the wrong groups for these problems. The conservatives in the USA do the same, as do the right-wing populists in other countries. The Nazis in the Third Reich also did exactly that - it’s nothing new.

    Believe me, I have tried to understand why so many people don’t see through these simple tricks and even allow themselves to be misled into voting against their own interests. I have had discussions with AfD supporters, both online and in real life. I have come to the conclusion that these people are either hopelessly under-informed because they only consume the corresponding social media content, or accept everything their leaders put in front of them in a sect-like manner - even the most ludicrous false claims that can be easily refuted. In both cases, I have very rarely been able to convince people that they are wrong to blame immigrants for all their problems. Over time I have become so disillusioned that I no longer believe that these people can be persuaded en masse with rational arguments - they simply want to believe that they are right and go through the greatest lengths to keep believing that.

    However, I am not prepared to abandon a fact-based political discourse just because some particularly loud and snivelling people make life too easy for themselves. So I don’t think that the left should also spread lies, rely on sub-complex explanations and blame some make-believe enemies. Nor do I think that is even possible.

    So I must honestly say that I have lost faith in the functioning of democracy. Not because of any military thread or something, but because of the convenience and idiocy of the people. Maybe it can get better when the right-wingers are in government and fail completely - or it will get even worse when they get in a position to impose their inhuman ideology on all moderates in autocratic structures by force. In Germany that has already happened once with disastrous consequences and now we are on the best way to make history repeat itself.


  • The AfD will always remain unelectable for me - if only because of its openly fascist rhetoric and the associated ideas, which I reject as immoral and inhumane. The claim that the AfD is not a dangerous radical right-wing party is simply false - see Björn Höcke, for example, who is obviously a Nazi with links to various anti-constitutional groups. In addition, their EU election manifesto denies climate change, wants to limit freedom of movement in Europe and wants to abolish the euro as a common currency as well as the GDPR alongside other protectionist, anti-European demands across the board. In my opinion, all these demands are completely absurd and only show how little substance the AfD really has. All they are doing is profiting from the fear-based mood towards immigration that they themselves have helped to create. I can’t understand how anyone can vote for such a party.


  • What I mean is that the right-wing parties in Germany have focused their entire election campaign on the issue of migration - even the moderate conservatives (CDU). I think this one-sided explanatory approach is wrong and dangerous. On the one hand, I think it is a case of problem shifting. Important issues such as economic and energy policy or climate protection take a back seat to this one, disproportionately presented issue. On the other hand, I think that the isolationist policy advocated by the extreme right (in Germany, the AfD) is an outdated approach, as it does not solve the problem of illegal migration, but merely creates a counterproductive negative mindset towards immigration. And this is precisely what I consider to be very problematic: due to demographic developments, Germany urgently needs workers from abroad - not only, but especially in so-called low-skilled jobs such as nursing. This fact is being completely overlooked in the political debate, which in this country is characterized by xenophobic and even openly racist rhetoric. In short, I believe that the focus of right-wing parties on migration policy is nothing but empty polemics that is based on attributing blame instead of constructive proposals for solutions - we have other problems that need to be solved. I assume that the situation is similar in other European countries.




  • I had somewhat hoped that my fellow countrymen in Germany would not fall for the obtuse populism of the right, but that is exactly what has happened.

    I’m afraid there’s nothing left to counter this, because voters obviously no longer care about rational arguments and don’t even want to acknowledge the real problems of our time. They make it easy for themselves and just blame everything on illegal migration or whatever - just as the right-wingers tell them to do.

    In this reality characterized by stupidity and false attributions of blame, it is hardly surprising that important but somewhat abstract topics such as data protection are no longer of interest to the masses. It’s enough to make you cry.





  • I think you can also see something fundamentally positive in the critical attitude of many Lemmy users: namely the fact that criticism of undesirable developments in politics, society, the economy and so on is practiced here at all. In my opinion, this is important and should not be taken for granted. If only because it is impossible for so many people in numerous countries around the world to express their opinions freely and criticize their governments or powerful people in their society.

    In any case, I think that a certain fundamental skepticism towards the existing power structures in politics, media and business is something of a unifying element that motivates many people to participate in Fediverse, after all, this platform is an alternative to the centrally managed social media providers and their functional logics.

    Nevertheless, I think your post is important because it shows that all the negativity that goes hand in hand with a critical examination of the numerous problems in the real world is extremely off-putting for many users. This is of course problematic both for the mass appeal of the Fediverse and to a certain degree probably also for the mental health of the user base.

    Unfortunately, I don’t have an answer as to how to deal with this in a meaningful way. However, I try to stay positive and hope for the best.






  • Trump is directly responsible for these excesses. In the press conference right after the conviction, he said:

    This was a rigged trail by a conflicted judge who was corrupt. (…) This was done by the Biden administration in order to wound or hurt a political opponent.

    These are, of course, allegations that have no basis in fact whatsoever. So I wonder: are there no legal means to prosecute Trump for these blatantly false allegations?

    Shouldn’t the mere allegation that the judge was corrupt be enough to sue for defamation? I mean, it has to be enormously damaging to the judge’s reputation if someone makes such serious accusations against him.