3 ms·

> Well, the EU, and Germany, have been threatening and punishing any member state that voted the "wrong way" Works as designed, then. What's the point of havi

> Well, the EU, and Germany, have been threatening and punishing any member state that voted the "wrong way" Works as designed, then. What's the point of having a system of shared values if one member goes "Hey, let's, umm, kill all the left-handed people!" and your system can't defend itself against such actors? What if those actors were paid by an entity determined to destroy your system by testing the extreme edge cases of your shared values? Let's say Russia decides to troll your system by paying for staged Koran burnings in Sweden [1]. Now, a debate ensues about the tradeoff between freedom of speech/expression, and the value of not hurting people's religious feelings. If your system gets weaker by such attacks, you need to strengthen the system by excluding or restricting malicious actors. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/27/burning-of-quran-in-stockholm-funded-by-journalist-with-kremlin-ties-sweden-nato-russia https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/27/burning-of-qur...

ms4720 3y ago
No if your system gets weaker by that you need a stronger system
- purerandomness 3y ago
  Agree. Suggestions?
the_lego 3y ago
> What's the point of having a system of shared values if one member goes "Hey, let's, umm, [stop immigration]!" and your system can't defend itself against such actors? Corrected to better reflect AfD's position. To address your point, the goal should be to serve the people, not the system. A system that persists against its subjects wishes is, by definition, tyranny.
- purerandomness 3y ago
  AfD never, ever, wanted to stop immigration. The trick is that they set up a decoy problem that needs fixed, that only they know how to fix (without providing a fix, of course). "Chemtrail poisonings need to stop" would be a popular AfD demand [1]. The trick here is to use a popular conspiracy theory, so demanding stopping of chemtrail poisonings looks like serving the poeple from the outside, right? Now, the AfD would never say "stop immigration". They say "stop uncontrolled excess immigration", so it seems like there'd be some "normal" amount of immigration, and the stupid government doesn't see that we're currently surpassing it, and that this is a huge problem that needs fixing. They want to have a say who's a "valid" asylum seeker, and who's just entering with malicious intent. And this is where shared values are being overstepped. Populists will tell you that they know how to weed out rapists, by looking at their nose, or skin colour, or if they have mobile phones on them when entering the country. The problem arises when a critical mass starts believing that yes, indeed, 5G needs to be banned from our vaccines, and the people will be served! [1] https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/afd-in-sachsen-staatskanzlei-muss-sich-nach-kleiner-anfrage-mit-chemtrails-befassen-a-5d295473-0a4c-4cda-a958-2e9ef1b61f6d https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/afd-in-sachsen-st...
  - the_lego 3y ago
    I see. So the only allowed anti-immigration position is "we want to stop immigration for no reason whatsoever". As soon as a reason is given, like, "there's too much immigration, we want to reduce it to 'normal' levels" or "we don't like the kind of immigrants we're getting", that position oversteps shared values and is grounds for a ban, regardless of what voters want? > AfD never, ever, wanted to stop immigration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany#Immigration,_multiculturalism_and_Islam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany#Immigr... says otherwise - they want to reduce it to "small numbers of skilled immigrants". Granted that's not the same as zero immigration, but that's splitting hairs.
gumballindie 3y ago
> you need to strengthen the system by excluding or restricting malicious actors. And how do we strenghten the system? By supressing people that demand change? Isn't it obvious by now that poverty and daily struggles are pushing folks towards extremes EU wide? Surely the EU and member states should listen to people's problems. Supressing legitimate cries of help will only lead to more frustration. Every year europeans are poorer, more taxed, more regulated, their quality of life dropping, european capitals are unsafe, innovation lags, and so on, and the only parties that at least aknowledge their grievances are these extremes that we want to ban. We ban them, then what? Do we offer a viable alternative, one that goes beyond lecturing? No, we want to ban them without actually listening to folks. I don't Russia is capable of more than letting us dig our own grave. Also what did Germany do to restrict "malicious actors" prior to the war? It imposed its will on member states that knew _exactly_ what Russia is planning. > Let's say Russia decides to troll your system by paying for staged Koran burnings in Sweden [1]. Have you actually looked into the underlying issues that cause what's happening in Sweden? Have you spoken to immigrants and how they are treated in that country, and have you been to the ghettos where they have to live? If you did you'd have a better understanding why Russia finds it so easy to stir trouble in there. The all welcoming, all loving, country of Sweden has some deep deep issues it needs to solve before it passes blame on Russia. But this is just another example of how we try to solve the sympton instead of the cause.
- the_lego 3y ago
  > And how do we strengthen the system? According to the founder of the migrant sea rescue NGO Mission Lifeline [1], by importing more immigrants and giving them voting rights, to overwhelm the native population's vote: If there had been enough immigration from abroad (e.g., by abolishing the visa requirement for Afghans and other persecuted people), and if these people had been given the right to vote immediately, (the German district of) Sonneberg would not be an issue today. Therefore: Open the borders! - https://twitter.com/Axel_Steier/status/1673019802523254785 https://twitter.com/Axel_Steier/status/1673019802523254785 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Lifeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Lifeline
  - 3y ago
Gud 3y ago
Your [1] citation is completely bogus and made me lose all faith in The Guardian, a newspaper I used to hold in high regard. That Chang Frick has ties to the Kremlin is ludicrous.

ms4720 3y ago

No if your system gets weaker by that you need a stronger system

purerandomness 3y ago
Agree. Suggestions?

the_lego 3y ago

> What's the point of having a system of shared values if one member goes "Hey, let's, umm, [stop immigration]!" and your system can't defend itself against such actors? Corrected to better reflect AfD's position. To address your point, the goal should be to serve the people, not the system. A system that persists against its subjects wishes is, by definition, tyranny.

purerandomness 3y ago
AfD never, ever, wanted to stop immigration. The trick is that they set up a decoy problem that needs fixed, that only they know how to fix (without providing a fix, of course). "Chemtrail poisonings need to stop" would be a popular AfD demand [1]. The trick here is to use a popular conspiracy theory, so demanding stopping of chemtrail poisonings looks like serving the poeple from the outside, right? Now, the AfD would never say "stop immigration". They say "stop uncontrolled excess immigration", so it seems like there'd be some "normal" amount of immigration, and the stupid government doesn't see that we're currently surpassing it, and that this is a huge problem that needs fixing. They want to have a say who's a "valid" asylum seeker, and who's just entering with malicious intent. And this is where shared values are being overstepped. Populists will tell you that they know how to weed out rapists, by looking at their nose, or skin colour, or if they have mobile phones on them when entering the country. The problem arises when a critical mass starts believing that yes, indeed, 5G needs to be banned from our vaccines, and the people will be served! [1] https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/afd-in-sachsen-staatskanzlei-muss-sich-nach-kleiner-anfrage-mit-chemtrails-befassen-a-5d295473-0a4c-4cda-a958-2e9ef1b61f6d https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/afd-in-sachsen-st...
- the_lego 3y ago
  I see. So the only allowed anti-immigration position is "we want to stop immigration for no reason whatsoever". As soon as a reason is given, like, "there's too much immigration, we want to reduce it to 'normal' levels" or "we don't like the kind of immigrants we're getting", that position oversteps shared values and is grounds for a ban, regardless of what voters want? > AfD never, ever, wanted to stop immigration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany#Immigration,_multiculturalism_and_Islam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany#Immigr... says otherwise - they want to reduce it to "small numbers of skilled immigrants". Granted that's not the same as zero immigration, but that's splitting hairs.

gumballindie 3y ago

> you need to strengthen the system by excluding or restricting malicious actors. And how do we strenghten the system? By supressing people that demand change? Isn't it obvious by now that poverty and daily struggles are pushing folks towards extremes EU wide? Surely the EU and member states should listen to people's problems. Supressing legitimate cries of help will only lead to more frustration. Every year europeans are poorer, more taxed, more regulated, their quality of life dropping, european capitals are unsafe, innovation lags, and so on, and the only parties that at least aknowledge their grievances are these extremes that we want to ban. We ban them, then what? Do we offer a viable alternative, one that goes beyond lecturing? No, we want to ban them without actually listening to folks. I don't Russia is capable of more than letting us dig our own grave. Also what did Germany do to restrict "malicious actors" prior to the war? It imposed its will on member states that knew _exactly_ what Russia is planning. > Let's say Russia decides to troll your system by paying for staged Koran burnings in Sweden [1]. Have you actually looked into the underlying issues that cause what's happening in Sweden? Have you spoken to immigrants and how they are treated in that country, and have you been to the ghettos where they have to live? If you did you'd have a better understanding why Russia finds it so easy to stir trouble in there. The all welcoming, all loving, country of Sweden has some deep deep issues it needs to solve before it passes blame on Russia. But this is just another example of how we try to solve the sympton instead of the cause.

the_lego 3y ago
> And how do we strengthen the system? According to the founder of the migrant sea rescue NGO Mission Lifeline [1], by importing more immigrants and giving them voting rights, to overwhelm the native population's vote: If there had been enough immigration from abroad (e.g., by abolishing the visa requirement for Afghans and other persecuted people), and if these people had been given the right to vote immediately, (the German district of) Sonneberg would not be an issue today. Therefore: Open the borders! - https://twitter.com/Axel_Steier/status/1673019802523254785 https://twitter.com/Axel_Steier/status/1673019802523254785 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Lifeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Lifeline
- 3y ago

Gud 3y ago

Your [1] citation is completely bogus and made me lose all faith in The Guardian, a newspaper I used to hold in high regard. That Chang Frick has ties to the Kremlin is ludicrous.