In Germany, social media algorithms are pumping out huge amounts of far-right, pro-AfD content.
-
Fuck off for trying to control what people do. You're literally a subhuman like Spez for that. The whole point of defederation is a breakdown of centralised power, if your little dictator brain can't understand that then jump off a cliff with Reddit.
Ayee i caught a nazi that uses nazi words
Seriously tho what are you even talking about?
-
This is the opposite of true. Appeasing the far right on immigration in other countries has led to disaster, every time. It's caused Brexit. It shifts the overton window., allowing their rhetoric to become mainstream, making it credible. You do not give these fucks an inch. You tell them no. They have to be fought as early as possible, because they're like bedbugs: if you allow them in you can't get rid of them.
Its not only that but how the left has been marginalised, as what happened with the labour party in the UK - Jeremy corbyn, the old leader who was actually left wing has been barred from the party, which he was part of for his whole life. A lifelong anti-racist on the correct side of every issue has been smeared as being a racist and that is now the mainstream 'truth'.
The only left wing party of any size in the UK now is the green party. The only alternatives to business as usual labour/conservatives (same thing) are the greens (seen mostly as a middle class protest vote) or reform.
Labour are definitely not for the working class anymore.
-
Apparently telling voters “no” is working terribly because right wing parties keep rising in polls. The evidence directly contradicts your claim. I don’t see how Brexit was caused in any way by appeasement. If anything, Brexit was caused by derision and dismissal, leaving low socioeconomic voters in particular no other way to vent their anger than by burning an institution to the ground. If you don’t give voters what they want they will vote extremists into power, or vote for extreme solutions out of spite.
Broadly speaking I find the argument of telling voters “no” in a democracy absurd and authoritarian.
Those voters had already been brainwashed by fascists into thinking destitute refugees and asylum seekers were at the root of their problems instead of offshore bank accounts stuffed with their taxes, which should have been used to pay for public services and housing.
-
Germany has enacted border controls to catch illegal immigrants, causing massive traffic jams. There are huge pushbacks kicking out thousands of refugees. Social services have been cut for refugees. All of that leads to a doubling of the right wing party, because migration ends up a topic in the media and the right wing is calling for everybody who is not 100% ethnic German to be kicked out of Germany, which is obviously insane.
Trump will give them space in Guantanamo bay
-
Ayee i caught a nazi that uses nazi words
Seriously tho what are you even talking about?
Wow you're incredibly, mind numbingly stupid. That explains a lot actually.
Keep being controlling and authoritarian and projecting your Nazism onto others, that's the Elon-Trump playbook you fascist fuck.
Let people live how they want or go kill yourself. Not a loss for anyone.
-
because all major parties in Germany are now tougher on immigration
But they aren’t. Only the CDU has proposed some changes which they haven’t implemented, and aren’t expected to make any measurable impact. It is far too little, far too late.
Chancellor Scholz (SPD) is pushing a tougher stance on deportation.
To summarize:
AfD wants Nazi shit.
CDU/CSU, FDP and BSW are copying them on the topic, including demanding things that are obvious violations of European law and our constitution.
SPD is steering in that direction as far as possible without obviously breaking European law and our constitution.
The Greens are begrudgingly going along with it.
Among all the relevant parties here only the Left have a clear stance against all this madness.
-
Wow you're incredibly, mind numbingly stupid. That explains a lot actually.
Keep being controlling and authoritarian and projecting your Nazism onto others, that's the Elon-Trump playbook you fascist fuck.
Let people live how they want or go kill yourself. Not a loss for anyone.
Damn dude, how are you this mad over something like this?
-
In the West yes, people can obtain information on the internet.. But will they?
With declining economy and increasing disinfo, we don't have the time to sift through all the nonsense and obtain the actual facts. We might as well be living in China.
Did you follow what happened when a lot of American TikTok users made a trip to Rednote, a Chinese lifestyle app, to escape the looming ban earlier this year? The Americans discovered that a lot of what they knew about China was propaganda. The Chinese, to their horror, discovered what they knew about America, that they assumed to be propaganda, was correct..
I think you are falsely equating the choice not to seek out new knowledge with the belief that the adverts one sees on TikTok are all correct. I understand you believe the latter is a serious problem. I just do not. I have much more respect and faith in the average person.
-
Damn dude, how are you this mad over something like this?
Next thing you'll do is control women's body. Or will it be "immigrants" that are actually natives?
Ahh I know, you seem like the "not allowing people to vote" and "indentured slavery in for profit prisons" type of guy.
-
Next thing you'll do is control women's body. Or will it be "immigrants" that are actually natives?
Ahh I know, you seem like the "not allowing people to vote" and "indentured slavery in for profit prisons" type of guy.
This is really bad rage bait man. You at least have to engage with the topic at surface level if you wanna really make people mad.
-
Its not only that but how the left has been marginalised, as what happened with the labour party in the UK - Jeremy corbyn, the old leader who was actually left wing has been barred from the party, which he was part of for his whole life. A lifelong anti-racist on the correct side of every issue has been smeared as being a racist and that is now the mainstream 'truth'.
The only left wing party of any size in the UK now is the green party. The only alternatives to business as usual labour/conservatives (same thing) are the greens (seen mostly as a middle class protest vote) or reform.
Labour are definitely not for the working class anymore.
Couldn't agree with you more there.
For what it's worth, I'm a member of the TUSC (trade union socialist coalition) and the Socialist Party. You're right they're not big hitters, smaller even than the greens, but they are there, they stand for what I stand for, and they're just a great bunch of people that I love hanging out with. Also, unlike Lemmy, it's a tankie-free zone!
They're good at building a community and they are active every day on a small, local scale. -
Brexit happened because successive neoliberal governments ground low and middle class workers into dust. The two party system provided no alternative to voters than the two neoliberal governments. So when voters got the chance, they burned a cherished institution to the ground in protest. The issue here is decades of neglecting the wellbeing of citizens, and I'm dismayed that you would argue the issue might be actually listening to voters for the first time in generations. It is the exact opposite that is needed in the UK and around Europe.
The issue here is decades of neglecting the wellbeing of citizens
Yes? But what does this have to do with immigration? Do you genuinely believe that immigrants are what's causing the decay of citizen wellbeing and not as you say "neoliberal governments grounding low and middle class workers into dust"?
You see the issue but you side with the neoliberals on their preferred solution?
-
Popper's paradox of tolerance gives in my view pretty clear guidelines on what to protect and what not to tolerate. I believe that if we held onto that, fascism would have a much harder time.
I am not an expert on political science, so I don't know what the data tells us. The feeling I get from the world though is that the "impressionable" part is large enough to be consequential, in part because the "educated" part has already made up their minds.
It's also not sufficient to talk specifically about ads in tiktok without considering them in the wider context of online messaging, all of which is going to be systemically tailored to feed into the same fears and shame.
Popper’s paradox of tolerance gives in my view pretty clear guidelines on what to protect and what not to tolerate. I believe that if we held onto that, fascism would have a much harder time.
Popper did make his line clear: physical violence.
"I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols."
So I agree with you. Tolerate up to the point of people using physical violence to enact their political aims.
-
This is really bad rage bait man. You at least have to engage with the topic at surface level if you wanna really make people mad.
Rage bait is being vile then calling people who point it out Nazis. Do better, cunt.
-
So after years of this happening in plain sight for everyone to see, people now notice days before an election?
AfD will make massive progress. These social media algos had to be banned years ago. Same thing will happen with Canada.
-
No. Advertising exists to inform people about products and services. I do not subscribe to the notion that advertising can convince an average voter to vote against their best interests or contra to facts.
Then I commend for your idealism and congratulate you further for never having had anything to do with the cancerous growth on humanity's back that is the advertising industry. Keep it that way, you're already making the world a slightly better place by staying away. But no, it unfortunately does not work as you describe it. Spending X on advertising will increase your product sales by Y. That's the simple equation that justifies the industry's existence - and it works. Helping consumers (or voters) to make informed decisions does not factor into it.
Not in a Western society in which one can easily obtain the facts on the internet. This might be true in a country like China where the internet is tightly controlled and facts aren’t easy to obtain.
You'd think that, yeah, it's absolutely natural! But then you could also consider that even though a rural forest warden in the Harz mountains may hold and be entitled to opinions on, for example, both bark beetle control and foreign policy, he'll only ever be able to make a truly informed decision on how one these issues should be handled in his best interest. For the other he'll substitute a lifetime of proficiency with whatever is available. And that may or may not be in his best interest.
That's how everybody does it. Spending your lifetime immersed in academic peace-and-conflict-studies for example might leave you to conclude that in a world of squabbling monkey tribes, transnational governing bodies with actual agency and legislative weight like the EU are, so far, humanity's greatest and most unlikely achievement and that maintaining, growing and strengthening them while further eroding national borders is a reliable (and possibly the only) way to ensure sustainable peace and prosperity for everybody. And after reaching that conclusion you'd think "Why is this not obvious to everybody? The facts are freely available." They are not. They are there, but in a complex world the cost to aquire them is high. Few will spend six months researching a tricky solution if they already got tricked by somebody else into believing that there's an easy solution. That's not on them though, that's on the trickster.
And now I'll probably dive into reading about bark beetles for a week because I've nerd-sniped myself. But that's another thing: I can just do that. I have a well-paying job and plenty of spare time. In other words, I have a high budget to spend on informed decisions. That's a bit of a tangent from the original topic but the gist is: If you wish to assume ideal voters then you quickly arrive at ultimate socio-economic and educational equality as a necessary prerequisite for a working democracy.
Spending X on advertising will increase your product sales by Y.
Because it exposes products to customers who were otherwise unaware of their existence or features, not because advertising has special brainwashing powers.
I think there is an implied argument you are making that unless people vote the "correct" way, they're misinformed. I think some people just have different priorities. They care about different things and for this reason, consume different media. I was horrified to learn my wife clicks on ads when she's shopping. Apparently that works for her. It doesn't mean she's wrong. Just that she's not as rigorous about her selection process because she's ultimately happy with the outcome.
-
No. Advertising exists to inform people about products and services. I do not subscribe to the notion that advertising can convince an average voter to vote against their best interests or contra to facts. Not in a Western society in which one can easily obtain the facts on the internet. This might be true in a country like China where the internet is tightly controlled and facts aren't easy to obtain.
Wait, you're both saying people voted for Brexit out of their own free will but also that advertising doesn't persuade people? How do you explain Cambridge Analytica literally influencing millions of people to vote for Brexit? (a vote won by 2% margin btw) - like why would the right-wing establishment pay for ads if not to sway public opinion?
Do you really think neoliberals spent millions to inform people why Brexit is good for them actually because that was factual information people couldn't have found otherwise?
-
The issue here is decades of neglecting the wellbeing of citizens
Yes? But what does this have to do with immigration? Do you genuinely believe that immigrants are what's causing the decay of citizen wellbeing and not as you say "neoliberal governments grounding low and middle class workers into dust"?
You see the issue but you side with the neoliberals on their preferred solution?
Yes? But what does this have to do with immigration?
I'm not making that link. The user above argued Brexit was caused by appeasement. I was addressing that specific claim.
I generally side against the neoliberals. In this case, they have been tirelessly fighting for globalisation and high immigration. Like all economic policies, it comes with some good and some bad. It has certainly resulted in a lot of top line wealth generation. The problem is that most of it has been accrued at the top. This is not sustainable. I think this is why we are seeing a general backlash to globalisation: the experiment hurt a lot of middle and lower class people.
-
Couldn't agree with you more there.
For what it's worth, I'm a member of the TUSC (trade union socialist coalition) and the Socialist Party. You're right they're not big hitters, smaller even than the greens, but they are there, they stand for what I stand for, and they're just a great bunch of people that I love hanging out with. Also, unlike Lemmy, it's a tankie-free zone!
They're good at building a community and they are active every day on a small, local scale.I've had some good conversations with local TUSC members collecting signatures and so on, I've a lot of respect for them but sadly the general public don't seem to. I think after the kicking by thatcher, unions and socialism in general are out of fashion. I do think there should be a broadly left party, allowing secondary membership maybe. Work on getting agreement on some issues, laser focus on what's most urgent and get decent people elected. I'd support any party with decent policies and which had the most chance of getting elected.
-
Chancellor Scholz (SPD) is pushing a tougher stance on deportation.
To summarize:
AfD wants Nazi shit.
CDU/CSU, FDP and BSW are copying them on the topic, including demanding things that are obvious violations of European law and our constitution.
SPD is steering in that direction as far as possible without obviously breaking European law and our constitution.
The Greens are begrudgingly going along with it.
Among all the relevant parties here only the Left have a clear stance against all this madness.
I'm not sure if you read your sources but you are only corroborating what I argued. It's a lot of empty talk. None of them are willing to act. Take the example of the border security. It's theatre. Even if an illegal immigrant is stopped, they still have the right to reside in the country for many years, and indefinitely if they refuse to leave in most circumstances. All of this is paid for by German citizens. I can't believe you would use the Greens as an example of a party getting tough on immigration. They have zero policies to reduce immigration.
To summarise your sources: not a single party is willing to act on immigration. Don't be surprised when people vote for parties which will.
