4 ms·

> what's your evidence that asylum systems aren't being abused by fraud? So what are we talking about here? What's your evidence that aspartame doesn't cause

> what's your evidence that asylum systems aren't being abused by fraud? So what are we talking about here? What's your evidence that aspartame doesn't cause cancer? What's your evidence that God doesn't exist? What's your evidence that X doesn't cause Y? See, the problem isn't that there are asylum seekers who abuse the system. Nobody disagrees with you. It's the extraordinary claim that it's a current and massive phenomenon (A) that is causeing big trouble (B) and that it's not being worked on (C), and that AfD has a solution for it (D) that no other party has (E). Remember, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. Here, we have claims A, B, C, D, and E that each need extraordinary evidence. We have zero data, and the problem is long gone. Should we spend resources, time and money into investigating a phantom problem that probably doesn't exist? 20% say yes. I think it's phenomenal that a party can divert attention from actual, real problems into decoy problems and blow them out of proportion to gain power. That's the actual danger to democracy we're talking about.

Manuel_D 3y ago
> What's your evidence that aspartame doesn't cause cancer? An extensive body of people taking aspartame compared with oncology patients and a mountain of evidence finding no correlation between the two. Not merely an absence of evidence. > We have zero data, and the problem is long gone. Then stop saying fraud is rare. If you have zero data it's entirely dishonest to make any claims about the rates of fraud. And the problem is gone? Did Germany expell the asylum seekers? If so that's news to me. > Should we spend resources, time and money into investigating a phantom problem that probably doesn't exist? 20% say yes. And that's an entirely valid position for a political party to hold. Remember, there was a time when most people thought climate change was a phantom problem that didn't exist. Not so long ago, the possibility that COVID leaked from a lab was a phantom conspiracy theory. Here's an alternate theory as to why mainstream parties are so resistant to auditing and investigating asylum claims: they don't want to face repercussions for shoddy policy that did little to verify asylum claims. You seem so confident that fraud is very rare, yet so defensive about validating asylum claims. > I think it's phenomenal that a party can divert attention from actual, real problems into decoy problems and blow them out of proportion to gain power. > That's the actual danger to democracy we're talking about. What's phenomenal and dangerous is how people can convince themselves that banning a political party because they don't share the same concerns is defending democracy. By this logic, Republicans would be defending democracy by banning Democrats. Democrats are diverting attention from real problems into - according to Republicans - phantom problems like climate change. You don't have any more right to say what is or isn't a relationship problem than an AfD member. Plenty of people probably believe, with the same conviction, that some of your concerns are phantom problems diverting attention from real issues. Understanding that is what preserves democracy.
memefrog 3y ago
It is not an extraordinary claim. It is consistent with what people see before them and with human nature. It is completely different from the claim some substance causes cancer. It is more like the claim that smoking causes cancer: it very obviously did, but the evidence was suppressed and investigations were discouraged. Of course people in desperate situations in third world countries lie to get into a country like Germany or the UK where they have been told they will get jobs and benefits, no questions asked. To suggest people wouldn't lie in that situation is ridiculous. Even the "genuine" asylum seekers travelling illegally to Germany through safe haven countries are queue jumpers over their much more numerous brethren that have been waiting for years in refugee camps for a chance to get lucky enough to go to a western country. To suggest that people will cross the Med to get to Europe but that they won't lie is ridiculous. People can see the problem with their very eyes as well. It materially affects them. They witness crime. Are they imagining that too? It is also not an "extraordinary" claim that it is not being worked on. How could it be? You deny it even exists. How can something both not be a problem and also be being worked on. You can't say "it is extraordinary to claim the problem exists and that it isnt being worked on". That is complete sophistry.

Manuel_D 3y ago

> What's your evidence that aspartame doesn't cause cancer? An extensive body of people taking aspartame compared with oncology patients and a mountain of evidence finding no correlation between the two. Not merely an absence of evidence. > We have zero data, and the problem is long gone. Then stop saying fraud is rare. If you have zero data it's entirely dishonest to make any claims about the rates of fraud. And the problem is gone? Did Germany expell the asylum seekers? If so that's news to me. > Should we spend resources, time and money into investigating a phantom problem that probably doesn't exist? 20% say yes. And that's an entirely valid position for a political party to hold. Remember, there was a time when most people thought climate change was a phantom problem that didn't exist. Not so long ago, the possibility that COVID leaked from a lab was a phantom conspiracy theory. Here's an alternate theory as to why mainstream parties are so resistant to auditing and investigating asylum claims: they don't want to face repercussions for shoddy policy that did little to verify asylum claims. You seem so confident that fraud is very rare, yet so defensive about validating asylum claims. > I think it's phenomenal that a party can divert attention from actual, real problems into decoy problems and blow them out of proportion to gain power. > That's the actual danger to democracy we're talking about. What's phenomenal and dangerous is how people can convince themselves that banning a political party because they don't share the same concerns is defending democracy. By this logic, Republicans would be defending democracy by banning Democrats. Democrats are diverting attention from real problems into - according to Republicans - phantom problems like climate change. You don't have any more right to say what is or isn't a relationship problem than an AfD member. Plenty of people probably believe, with the same conviction, that some of your concerns are phantom problems diverting attention from real issues. Understanding that is what preserves democracy.

memefrog 3y ago

It is not an extraordinary claim. It is consistent with what people see before them and with human nature. It is completely different from the claim some substance causes cancer. It is more like the claim that smoking causes cancer: it very obviously did, but the evidence was suppressed and investigations were discouraged. Of course people in desperate situations in third world countries lie to get into a country like Germany or the UK where they have been told they will get jobs and benefits, no questions asked. To suggest people wouldn't lie in that situation is ridiculous. Even the "genuine" asylum seekers travelling illegally to Germany through safe haven countries are queue jumpers over their much more numerous brethren that have been waiting for years in refugee camps for a chance to get lucky enough to go to a western country. To suggest that people will cross the Med to get to Europe but that they won't lie is ridiculous. People can see the problem with their very eyes as well. It materially affects them. They witness crime. Are they imagining that too? It is also not an "extraordinary" claim that it is not being worked on. How could it be? You deny it even exists. How can something both not be a problem and also be being worked on. You can't say "it is extraordinary to claim the problem exists and that it isnt being worked on". That is complete sophistry.