• bridgeburner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    1 day ago

    Banning wouldn’t be necessary if the established parties would actually do proper politics. Mainly, putting proper immigration policies in place. If we had controlled immigration policies in place, like in Denmark for example, the AfD never would have gotten as popular. But unfortunately most germans (parties and people) put u automatically into the far-right corner if u say that u see the uncontrolled mass immigration critically.

    • Nalivai@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      There is no uncontrolled mass immigration, you weird uninformed racist dolt. It’s a dogwhistle that rightoids use to prop up the masses and stir hate which gives them power they use to stir more hate.

        • Nalivai@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 hours ago

          Ah, so we immediately dropping the “uncontroleld” pretension, and go to the “preserving the cleanliness of the race” territory. Yeah, over the last 10 years literal millions (around two of those millions or so) people immigrated to Germany. What’s your problem with that?

    • NotAnonymousAtAll@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      What the current government is doing on immigration has been judged (officially, by a proper court) as unlawful. They keep doing it anyway, escalating further up the court levels. This is already very close to a constitutional crisis due to the executive blatantly disregarding the judiciary.

      What else would you want them to do beyond that? Just give up on the rule of law in general and while we are at it rip up all applicable European contracts?

    • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Asylum != immigration. You’d need to change some fundamental laws how we treat people fleeing persecution and war. Mostly wars and conflicts started by the USA / Russia. Or increasingly fleeing climate change in the future.

      Basically we’ll have to create consensus to not save people from certain death that come to our borders. Most people are with you on most cases of immigration. And climate change will lead to something like a billion refugees. So asylum will need to be limited.

      Europe already turned asylum seekers back who end up in slave camps in Libya. Also a result of “intervention” that created much worse outcomes.

      Long term we might have drones and robots and automated gun turrets to secure Europe’s borders. But honestly I suspect Europe will fall apart before that precisely because of the politics we’d need. It’s a hard sell without resorting to fascism.