-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
German anti-migrant party projected to be 2nd, 21% of the vote in regional election
- Thread starter 2MF
- Start date
- Status
Saying that a country is not so stupid to not understand the difference between North and South Korea is now idiot-free?
ok.
Of course not, but the AfD sure won't put it like that. They made this an election about Merkel's politics because they want her gone desperately. Havin her loose there is a symbolic loss of "huge" (unknown, really) proportions. And if that's the narrative thats get spun - and that it is, the actual reality of the entire Vote in MeckPomm is second priority - at least for the coming days and weeks. "No one" cares who actually governs there, it's all about momentum for 2017.
Imp the Dimp
Member
Who ever said that lmao
Yes and No. Of course they want her gone but it's naive to assume all those voters cared about local issues when the AfD came in and shouted "NOW WE ONLY TALK ABOUT MERKEL AND IMMIGRANTS!!". The immigrant issue is #1 on people's mind and if they(ie the 20% in MVP) feel so agaibst the politics of Merkel they will use any opportunity to show their disdain.
I would never vote Afd or NPD or something like that (I'm an immigrant myself) but the underlying problems and issues are real and very complex in Germany. Parties have to deal with that but politicians are often scared to suggest solutions since you get put into the "nazi" camp very fast.
Is this really the case or is this the narrative that parties like AfD (and from experience, Belgian counterparts) try to spin, in order to present themselves as the only party that really has the answers?
I mean, I feel that every main party has an immigration policy, it's just that they are more complex than 'close the borders' and therefore not so simple to grasp or present to the public. The policies also take longer to bear fruit and don't necessarily deal with every immigration issue immediately, or are constrained by other factors such as budget cuts from austerity.
As evidenced by the fact that you even have to put a "I'd never vote for them" and "I'm an immigrant myself" in front.
I don't think that's true. There's a long way to go between "Wir schaffen das"-Merkel and "Let's kill immigrants at the border"-AfD. The vast majority of Germans understand there's no easy solution to this and that's frustrating. The rest votes for the AfD.
That is so utterly simplified to fit into your black/white view of things, it's ridiculous.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. There's a lot of room between "let everyone in" and "let nobody in". The parties will be more comfortable exploring that space once elections draw nearer.
When it comes to the AfD I'd say it is pretty much black/white.
His Majesty
Banned
That's true. And the large political space between those two ridiculous statements is currently unoccupied. Which means people will shift towards more extreme parties to get their voices heard.
Exactly.
Yes, that's what I am saying, tho? That MeckPom itself doesn't matter so much (which is why SPD's victory isn't the talk of the town), but the fact that AfD runs on a platform to further the downfall of Merkel and her immigration policies.
I agree with your first two sentences but I strongly disagree with saying the AfD is a nazi party and their voters are Nazi. They are not. They are a right-wing populist party with some extreme right personalities still in the management. Their future success imo will depend on whether they cleanse themselves from those "extremists" or not.
As to the voters - if you are (simplified) "against" migrants you basically have no choice but to vote AfD (or CSU in bavaria). That is the whole crux of things. Merkel's swoop to the left created this vacuum on the right in the first place. Imagine a (again simplified) situation where person X only makes negative experiences with migrants/refugees or maybe even was victim of a physical attack / knows of a rape victim. One party tells you "they are bad, we need to stop more from coming", the others tell you "no no it will all be fine, just wait" or "there are no problems you racist" or even statements like "german society will change drastically and it will be for the better"(green party). Which party will you vote for? Of course they are baiting you to vote for them that way but they are still acknowledging you.
tl;dr this mess wouldn't exist in this form if the "mainstream" parties would take people's worries seriously and/or merkel wouldn't have created this vacuum in the first place
Yes, my point was just that the "immigrant issue"/refugee policy is already the #1 thing on people's mind to begin with (and the AfD caters to that), not something the AfD somehow poisoned their minds with and that wasn't already super important in people's heads before.
This as well. I've seen both discussions where Wagenknecht was die linke's representative and one with Katja Kipping. The difference was so day and night.
AfD is the fox news of politics. Not inherently nazis, but number one with nazis.
The AfD was born out of the Euro crisis. Guess what, nobody cares about the Euro crisis anymore. Now it's all Refugees. Interestingly enough the party was founded by my former Econ professor who now regrets trying to get the far-right vote consequently allowing his party being overtaken by the far-right. Shocking.
Well technically that might still be the NPD but I see your point. That point doesn't really have much relevance though. Naturally people on the extreme right will vote for right-wing parties(especcially the one with the highest potential results) . Do you think the extreme left votes for CDU?
And how exactly do you think AfD will address your issue?
The thing is, the reigning coalition under Merkel IS implementing solutions to cope with the refugee influx. The whole debate is so blown out of proportion and it really does only serve xenophobia and racism.
What are the actual implications of the refugee crisis for John Doe in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern? Foreign neighbours at worst. Or educate me otherwise.
What are the actual implications of the refugee crisis for John Doe in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern? Foreign neighbours at worst. Or educate me otherwise.
I mean it's pretty clear that the AfD is being carried by parts of the extreme right and as you said right wingers will vote for the party which has a high possibility for success.
Clearly they won't vote for the CDU, because most of the extreme left are uncompromising in their views and the CDU is too far in the center for them, whereas parts of the extreme right will take anything which promises them some kind of power.
...after they caused the influx in this quantity to begin with and weapon exports in 2015 doubled.
But how many are those really? And reading an article about it doesn't count, because then you are just reading selectively.
The existence of the AfD itself doesn't personally bother me - it is what it is, but the rhetoric does to a degree and that's where I personally struggle with the whole situation. You can't deny them their (party) voice, but either way running on "LOL establishment right?" is so backwards to me in a country like Germany. I am against TTPP, I'm against the undemocratic elements of the EU and I am against open borders for immigrants no matter what, but my reaction to that is not to the far sides... Immigration specifically - as other made clear - isn't black and white, and while Merkel to a degree made the wrong opening move, that's not the end of the world and clearly hasn't been so far.
CyclopsRock
Member
It's worth remembering that what happens on a macro level and a micro level are often different for individuals or their local area.
The AfD will have to "cleanse" themselves from their batshit insane party program before it becomes anywhere near electable.
The thing about refugees is, if you are (simplified as you put it) against them, you are against the Grundgesetz. I agree that everything, letting refugees in without background checks etc., was way too loose for a while and that Merkel is responsible for it but don't try telling me AfD voters are just "Besorgte Bürger" who are afraid of the evil Refugees trying to turn good ol' Germany into a jungle.
And again, if people want simple solution they're gonna vote AfD. Other parties can't offer them easy solution because there are no easy solutions.
The takeaway for me here is, and I think we both agree here, that Merkel thinks too "big big" and not enough "small small". The parties will react accordingly.
Chairmanchuck
Member
It "dey teek er jebs", "dey rep or wemen", "dey destroey er cultur".
Thats what they think. In Mecklecknburg-Vorpommern that was always the reason why people voted for right wingers.
Its John Doe, without even having a Hauptschulabschluss, blaming foreigners for taking their jobs, while they actually dont even want to stand on the field farming aspargus or cleaning toilets.
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is the state with the most right-winged criminal acts.
And its also old people wanting "their old home back". Heck. Even in NRW when I talk to some of the older relatives, they wanna vote for AfD, because they want "the old Germany"/70s Germany back. They are following the opinions of the AfD. "Germany isnt beautiful anymore." "I think someone who doesnt work, shouldnt be supported by a social security system. (not knowing that a lot of people seeking works are academics)" "Nuclear energy is great! We want that back!"
Its like they vote for them out of nostalgia.
And those people also dont notice how much taxpayers money is wasted on several big projects around Germany or even in their own city.
"Politicians want to build a new city hall without actually having money."
"Failed/expensive projects like airports that havent been finished, theatres no one asked for."
"Employees in the city that actually do jackshit and still get paid for that (Trust me. I worked at our enviromental office and I could see that you could easily fire half of the employees there, because they are lazy PoS. The ones from the laboratory had 1 day in a week where they had to work for 4 hours. The other time they drove their laboratory van around the city, buying birthday presents, while the gas and the van is paid by the taxpayer)."
The refugee crisis is very expensive to deal with. Taxpayers bear a huge cost.
Golden_Pigeon
Banned
Immigration is actually necessary to cope with the generational gap european countries are facing.
Anyways, the other way of dealing with the refugees crisis is to let them die in the sea, like does others europeans countries. Or maybe pretend it's the problem of nobody ?
I wonder how historians will see this shameful treatment of refugees by Europe. Maybe as we look the way the US and Europe in general mistreat the jews fleeing the pogroms in the 20th ?
What stops someone from noticing both things?
The same tired nonsense arguments again. How about programs that make getting children more viable again? And even if that doesn't get the birthrate up to 2.1(and for example France and UK aren't to far away from that with 2.01 and 1.90), there is still a difference between controlled immigration and opening the floodgates to every poor country on the planet. How will 85% young male afghans of which many are illiterate and have never worked in their lives "fill the generational gap"? If anything that causes demographical problems because as times have shown again and again you don't want a surplus of (especcially young) men in your population.
And no, the other option is not to let them die in the sea. This kind of shoddy, purposefully deceptive way of arguing is one of the reasons right-wing parties are gaining so much traction. If you travel through Iran through Turkey through Greece through Macedonia through Serbia through Croatia through through Hungary through Austria through Germany to Sweden then it is not "Germany/Sweden/Austria or drowning in the sea" for gods sake.
Misleading.
These European countries have generous welfare states. Many if not most refugees will be unemployed and unemployable. They will cost the welfare states a great deal, whilst not paying into them. Even the most rabidly pro-immigration people tend to be able to recognize that these asylum seekers are certainly not the solution to Europe's demographic problems.
Several problems here:
First of all, most migrants into Europe are economic migrants from all over the region, not Syrians fleeing conflict. They are overwhelmingly young, and male. Many pretend to be children when they are actually adults, because children have an easier time getting in.
Second, offering asylum directly incentivizes these economic migrants who are not in danger to make extremely dangerous passages that may cost them their lives.
Third, it is ironic that you speak of the suffering of Jews in reference to this issue. It is Jews who are most often the victim of poorly integrated immigrants from the Middle East. Just look at what has happened in Malmö.
Chairmanchuck
Member
I think the problem is that, unless its something like Stuttgart 21, no one really "cares" about that or would even vote for a new party that just states they will fight against that.
You wont see anyone burning city offices when all employees are gone.
Of course you can see both problems. I do. I am pretty skeptical how the whole refugee crisis was and is still handled. The reason why a lot of people, especially from eastern europe are voting for those right-wings parties isnt because of the money they pay as tax-payers I guess.
It's not the first time he brings "but the jews!" into a discussion on this topic.
Kill Your Masters
Member
I don't understand the "Thanks Merkel" or "Merkels fault" sentiment.
If you vote for a bigoted, racist, anti-semitist, islamophobic, homophobic, climate change denying party because "immigrants!!!" then you are a ignorant piece of shit and an idiot.
No excuses. No Merkel, no refugees, no nothing. Human garbage votes for human garbage.
If you vote for a bigoted, racist, anti-semitist, islamophobic, homophobic, climate change denying party because "immigrants!!!" then you are a ignorant piece of shit and an idiot.
No excuses. No Merkel, no refugees, no nothing. Human garbage votes for human garbage.
ClosingADoor
Member
Germany's policy to let everyone in led to a rise in refugees (and economic immigrants) crossing the Mediterranean and human trafficking to get there. Germany didn't ferry them over safely or provide transportation. So you argument that other European countries let them die in the sea is faulty. Germany also didn't do anything there to help.
An idiot to me is someone who lives in an echo-chamber where everything is black and white and no nuance whatsoever.
I guess you were as blind and deaf as your government when up to two years before the "refugee crisis" there were boats with hundreds of refugees coming (and some sinking) on the coast of Italy. Italy and Greece complained about the issue for so long before it blew up, but the other EU countries didn't move a finger until it was way too late.
There's no nuance in voting AfD. Voting AfD means agreeing with their proposed policies/measures. That's pretty black and white to me.
KonradLaw
Member
No it;s not. Vast majority of those people will never be able to make a living on their own. Instead they will have to be supported by the state. And even those who could work mostly can only do the simpliest manual labor, of which there is none in Germany. Germany needs higly qualified workers, which isn't something you will find often among migrants coming from middle east and africa.
And that's not even considering how much automatization will wreck havoc on the entire job market, affecting the typically migrant jobs the most.
So no, there are only big downsides with taking this type of migrants in (as opposed to say..USA, which cherry picks the best from around the world). You can only talk about it in humanitarian/charity terms.
Benjamin1981
Member
To say "Wir schaffen das" and open our borders against the will of the majority of the people was a big mistake. CDU does not provide any solutions to the refugee crisis or does not communicate them well enough. I don't vote AfD and i never will but Merkel has lost me. We have enough problems like poverty among old people to deal with and can't just let everyone in. We are not the social welfare department of the world. Might not be a popular opinion here but it is the truth.
Don't think he was disputing any of that. Germany, who later claimed the high moral ground, ignored Italy and Greece with the situation for a long time until they "collapsed".
Absolutely not. Have you never heard of the term protest voting? If we specifically look at the vote on Sunday - I'm pretty sure a majority of AfD voters didn't carefully read through the Parteiprogramm and agree with every point as much as they wanted to send a clear signal of "Fuck off, Merkel". And even aside from that, it doesn't mean you agree with the whole Parteiprogramm. It means they speak to you the most - which again in the simplified example I brought above is not too unexpected when you continually have bad experiences but all the other parties essentially tell you "nah its nothing".
The immigrant discussion overplayed every other topic so some of the idiot AFD officials haven't had the chance to really expose themselves as unelectable. Yesterday at their victory press conference my jaw droppec when the head of the Lower Saxony branch defended VW cheating on diesel emissions by declaring this whole mess wasn't really VW's fault, but instead it was an act of industrial and legal warfare against the corporation which is instigated by America and that the German government should be ashamed for not siding with the car manufacturer.
So like the dissonance begins when we talk about the premise.
I don't think the German government caused the refugee crisis. The crisis was at hand in the Mediterranean. It was a pragmatic approach to solve a humanitarian catastrophy.
And the decision makers were completely let down by other EU states, by the coalition partners, not so much by the opposition funny enough. They also were not able to communicate the necessity and the plans to a big minority of the population. But to be fair it is hard to be heard over the hysteric screaming of those fringe parties and the boulevard media.
ClosingADoor
Member
No need for personal attacks like that. I have advocated in every refugee thread for more funding towards UN camps and transportation for refugees toward safe countries, so the numbers can be handled better, we actually help the ones who need it the most instead of the ones who are strong enough to make a hard journey, filter out economic immigrants, and provide a safe journey instead of risking people to drown or suffer abuse from smugglers.
But all this talk about how Germany is the good guy is missing some nuance, because their policy certainly wasn't the best and could have done with a lot of improvement so problems we see now would have been prevented.
Protest voting is giving back a blank vote. Or nullifying your vote. It's misused recently to justify voting for dubious parties.
Again, if you vote for a party you vote for that party's policies*, no matter what you say to yourself to feel you're still a decent human being.
Edit: *and this is valid for all the parties, because I see this kind of excuse used too for all the parties, not just the extremist ones. "I don't agree with this and this that the government I voted for did". Well, bad luck, you voted for that government to exist.
So because the NPD(a 0-3% party) once used the phrase on a billboard nobody else can say it? Of course it doesn't look good but the phrase itself isn't something inheretly "nazi".
Ok I see there is no point discussion any further with you when you have such a radical and narrow point of view and generalize people to such an extreme degree.
- Status