Well, 20 years ago i was really, really on the left. I mean, i have read “Das Kapital”, i visited political talks, was a member in “Die Linke” (a very left leaning party in Germany) and often participated in protests.
Over the years while having increased contact to asylum seekers / migrants during the time after 2015 and after getting the opportunity to get to know many of them (i volunteered to help in some projects) i noticed my political views moving step by step more to the right.
In 2015 i was very well aboard the “Refugees welcome” train and really thought that the influx of those people would benefit the German society and create a more diverse and open culture. After getting to know some of those asylum seekers, working with some of them and trying to help others to find their way around the German bureaucracy i quickly discovered that, while there are some genuine nice people among them, most hold worldviews that would even an alt-right nationalist nutjob be too conservative. I genuinely witnessed attempts at fraud at an astronomical scale and an absolute disregard for the societal norms. Oh, and there were two attempts to rob me at knifepoint.
Let me just state that i am now in favor of much stricter asylum / immigration laws and i vocally advocate for sending people home who abuse the system and / or going criminal.
Thank you, I think it is a very reasonable take. Not every asylum seekers have value that align with left-leaning ideology. It is hard to start this discussion without being labeled as right wing/nazi/racist.
I am an ex-muslim and also pretty damn left, but it is really hard to have a discussion on why Islam can be Bad. I put my hope for all the progressive muslims to change the culture surrounding the religion but considering how Islam works, I am not very optimistic it can change. We will see.
There is an important requirement toward assimilation into laws and some freedoms, I think, and I would love to see incoming refugees and migrants find a way to preserve their own beliefs while understanding where it doesn’t match the belief structure of their new country and ready to work within the new environment.
This means very careful face-covering regs that respect religious demands on women but understands legal requirements for very discreet identification by ‘approved’ state reps – and provides both education around it for everyone and people ready to bridge that gap.
And it also means better education around fraud and the freedom and responsibility to report it. And yes, I think that people mirating on a provisional basis - temporary/new status - need to know that their new countries don’t accept the cut corners with a pay-out, that that it’s our responsibility to report that stuff as proper citizens.
And yes, crime should remove the privileges of a temporary resident status. It’s well-shown that immigrants are the most law-abiding people, on average, so this won’t be a huge problem, but those who slip through the cracks can’t stay and earn permanent status like that.
But it’s nuanced. We need to deal with the hate toward immigration so it doesn’t colour every interaction with refugees and migrants, and cause low-key distrust toward wonderful people. That’s essentially racism, and it’s not cool. I think we can let in people who like their new country and its rights and freedoms, while gently redirecting the people who can’t assimilate properly where it matters (laws and rights, not directly religious and cultural). Some people are not a good fit to some host countries, and that needs to be assessed on a case basis, lest they indirectly germinate racism by their very discordant presence.
Unleash the downvotes. I’m sure I’ve offended droves of people who don’t get that I am very pro-migration but cautiously so.
The thing is: At least in many German circles there is this weird focus on intersectionality, you CAN NOT be left if you are advocating for a stricter immigration / asylum regulation - you will be labeled a Nazi / Fascist or something along the lines.
This is problematic because it judges human beings based on the value they bring to the state. This is also why “Most of them are valuable workers” is a bad argument. It says we should allow immigration but only if our state profits from it.
If you are against nationalism, you should also disagree with this, as it assigns the interest of the state to be the interest of the population.
Human beings shouldn’t be measured by the work they can bring but by the fact that they are humans too.
In fact the workers have more in common with immigrants than with politicians or anyone in power
Yeah, leftist idealism is great when you’re dealing with people who share those common-good views, but the harsh reality is that far too much of the world is “dog-eat-dog” (a.k.a. “every man for himself”) to be compatible with such ideals. You’ve got to ensure those you’re allowing into the collective mindset are actually part of that mindset, or they will destroy it from within like a cancer.
It’s called “nuance,” and far too few take the time to consider it, preferring instead to not think and just go with the “all or nothing” extremes. Nuance is something that comes with maturity and a world that forces you to learn it or get screwed. You haven’t really changed your beliefs, but rather you’ve just learned there are practical limitations to everything.
Well, 20 years ago i was really, really on the left. I mean, i have read “Das Kapital”, i visited political talks, was a member in “Die Linke” (a very left leaning party in Germany) and often participated in protests.
Over the years while having increased contact to asylum seekers / migrants during the time after 2015 and after getting the opportunity to get to know many of them (i volunteered to help in some projects) i noticed my political views moving step by step more to the right.
If you’re okay with sharing it here, I would like to know more about what happened? Which value of extreme left have you reconsidered?
In 2015 i was very well aboard the “Refugees welcome” train and really thought that the influx of those people would benefit the German society and create a more diverse and open culture. After getting to know some of those asylum seekers, working with some of them and trying to help others to find their way around the German bureaucracy i quickly discovered that, while there are some genuine nice people among them, most hold worldviews that would even an alt-right nationalist nutjob be too conservative. I genuinely witnessed attempts at fraud at an astronomical scale and an absolute disregard for the societal norms. Oh, and there were two attempts to rob me at knifepoint.
Let me just state that i am now in favor of much stricter asylum / immigration laws and i vocally advocate for sending people home who abuse the system and / or going criminal.
Thank you, I think it is a very reasonable take. Not every asylum seekers have value that align with left-leaning ideology. It is hard to start this discussion without being labeled as right wing/nazi/racist.
I am an ex-muslim and also pretty damn left, but it is really hard to have a discussion on why Islam can be Bad. I put my hope for all the progressive muslims to change the culture surrounding the religion but considering how Islam works, I am not very optimistic it can change. We will see.
There is an important requirement toward assimilation into laws and some freedoms, I think, and I would love to see incoming refugees and migrants find a way to preserve their own beliefs while understanding where it doesn’t match the belief structure of their new country and ready to work within the new environment.
This means very careful face-covering regs that respect religious demands on women but understands legal requirements for very discreet identification by ‘approved’ state reps – and provides both education around it for everyone and people ready to bridge that gap.
And it also means better education around fraud and the freedom and responsibility to report it. And yes, I think that people mirating on a provisional basis - temporary/new status - need to know that their new countries don’t accept the cut corners with a pay-out, that that it’s our responsibility to report that stuff as proper citizens.
And yes, crime should remove the privileges of a temporary resident status. It’s well-shown that immigrants are the most law-abiding people, on average, so this won’t be a huge problem, but those who slip through the cracks can’t stay and earn permanent status like that.
But it’s nuanced. We need to deal with the hate toward immigration so it doesn’t colour every interaction with refugees and migrants, and cause low-key distrust toward wonderful people. That’s essentially racism, and it’s not cool. I think we can let in people who like their new country and its rights and freedoms, while gently redirecting the people who can’t assimilate properly where it matters (laws and rights, not directly religious and cultural). Some people are not a good fit to some host countries, and that needs to be assessed on a case basis, lest they indirectly germinate racism by their very discordant presence.
Unleash the downvotes. I’m sure I’ve offended droves of people who don’t get that I am very pro-migration but cautiously so.
Are you no longer a communist over this? I don’t really see how your stance on immigration is very related.
The thing is: At least in many German circles there is this weird focus on intersectionality, you CAN NOT be left if you are advocating for a stricter immigration / asylum regulation - you will be labeled a Nazi / Fascist or something along the lines.
This is problematic because it judges human beings based on the value they bring to the state. This is also why “Most of them are valuable workers” is a bad argument. It says we should allow immigration but only if our state profits from it.
If you are against nationalism, you should also disagree with this, as it assigns the interest of the state to be the interest of the population.
Human beings shouldn’t be measured by the work they can bring but by the fact that they are humans too.
In fact the workers have more in common with immigrants than with politicians or anyone in power
So? Aren’t they just wrong? Why reject the whole philosophy because some people are wrong about it?
Yeah, leftist idealism is great when you’re dealing with people who share those common-good views, but the harsh reality is that far too much of the world is “dog-eat-dog” (a.k.a. “every man for himself”) to be compatible with such ideals. You’ve got to ensure those you’re allowing into the collective mindset are actually part of that mindset, or they will destroy it from within like a cancer.
It’s called “nuance,” and far too few take the time to consider it, preferring instead to not think and just go with the “all or nothing” extremes. Nuance is something that comes with maturity and a world that forces you to learn it or get screwed. You haven’t really changed your beliefs, but rather you’ve just learned there are practical limitations to everything.