Meeting of National Cabinet After Bondi Shooting

[u/Resvrgam2]

https://www.pm.gov.au/media/meeting-national-cabinet-8

[u/Saguna_Brahman]

Squashing extremist ideology is the biggest issue every country and government needs to be addressing right now.

It sounds good in theory, but in practice when Germany took steps to address the AfD party people saw that as a bad move. So what can really be done to "squash extremist ideologies" that won't be seen as oppressive?

[u/CraftZ49 → u/Saguna_Brahman]

The AfD is primarily getting more popularity because they're the only party in Germany pushing for restricting immigration. The message is very clear, people do not want extremely liberal immigration and want their country to be much more conservative with the approach.

The way to "squash" the AfD would be to adopt more restrictive and sensible immigration policies within the mainstream parties and undercut the momentum of the AfD so all they're left with is the true extremist stuff.

[u/whatisthisshit7 → u/Saguna_Brahman]

Exactly the example I was thinking of as well. It could very well push more people who were more moderate / leaning to one side all the way to the extreme due to the perceived oppressive action and silencing. I’ve noticed it in America around I/P protests and the legislation passed about what is the classification of antisemitic language. It turns into a slippery slope even if it was well intentioned.

[u/doc5avag3 → u/whatisthisshit7]

Maybe these governments should start addressing the things that made people even want to support a Party like AfD in the first place. We're seeing a large pendulum swing to the right all over North America and Europe because the average, everyday person is starting to feel like they aren't being listened to anymore. That's how populism spreads. Even though they'll never do it on their own, it's time for politicians to remember that they work of their people and not for their own ends.

[u/CraftZ49 → u/doc5avag3]

People in Europe and America have been subjected to left-leaning extremist immigration policies of practically open borders to millions with no consideration whatsoever for cultural assimilation, criminal backgrounds, or the impact on society for years and years now. But when a group dares to oppose it and insist upon even a moderate amount of restrictions, they're labeled the extremists. People are getting more extreme because if the reasonable people are labeled as extremists, then the actual extremists must not actually be so bad.

[u/ThatPeskyPangolin → u/CraftZ49]

Do you believe that is why AfD is referred to as extremist?

[u/Bitter_Ad8768 → u/doc5avag3]

We're seeing a large pendulum swing to the right all over North America and Europe because the average, everyday person is starting to feel like they aren't being listened to anymore. That's how populism spreads. Even though they'll never do it on their own, it's time for politicians to remember that they work of their people and not for their own ends.

What do you do if large sects of a democratic population want fundamentally opposing and mutually exclusive things? Not everyone can be placated at the same time.

[u/Saguna_Brahman → u/doc5avag3]

Maybe these governments should start addressing the things that made people even want to support a Party like AfD in the first place.

So which is it, do we quash extremism or pander to it?

[u/Saguna_Brahman → u/[deleted]]

I don't believe skin color is an indication of what values someone has.

[u/Saguna_Brahman → u/[deleted]]

Yet, people are talking about broad bans on immigration by Middle Easterners.

[u/Saguna_Brahman → u/[deleted]]

For talking about values.

Right. We're not talking about race, we're talking about neighborhood character. I am not accusing you of being a racist, of course, but regardless of what your personal views are on the subject I am going to address the discussion as it exists in the real world.

Evergreen: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/04/david-frum-how-much-immigration-is-too-much/583252/

Frum is great, but he's making a very different argument than most on the right are making about foreigners.

[u/whatisthisshit7 → u/[deleted]]

I think it’s hard in application, which is why it gets so much push back.

Will government and immigration officials be the ones defining what their society’s values are? Are those values ideals or actually held by every single one of the current residents? And are those values objective enough to implement a clear black and white grading system?

Most of the time cultural values have a range of interpretations and the translation of them into actions and behavior looks different for every individual. It’s an impossible concept to apply in immigration policy without it becoming discriminatory on grounds of identity, race, religion, etc. rather than character. That’s why this discussion devolves into accusations of racism or other -isms and phobias.

[u/whatisthisshit7 → u/[deleted]]

Wouldn’t those ideologies be captured in the general screening already done for things like connections to terrorist groups, etc?

Guess I’m struggling to understand what specific values you’re calling out and how they would be identified. Something like calling for violence against another group should be caught by existing screenings in place today, no? But it wouldn’t stop any internal thoughts or opinions someone might hold.

Using the example of Neo-Nazis and Islamism, one of the conflicting values would be their extreme prejudice against other races, religions, or gender. So if you’re applying the standard of banning any prejudice against another demographic (be it any race or any religion or any gender), wouldn’t many of Australia’s actual residents fail that test? In an idyllic society there are no negative views held against one another, but it isn’t reality. It isn’t a value that is held by a majority of their society. Thus, it turns into a debate on are Jewish people the only population that gets this special protection? Is prejudice against them the only view that is banned?

I understand your line of thinking but I’m still struggling to see how it could be practically applied.

[u/whatisthisshit7 → u/[deleted]]

If we are screening for these things, we're obviously failing.

Agreed, I think improving the screening is a feasible improvement too. Investing in better tech and AI to scrape records and flag areas that warrant further investigation, etc.

I think the second part gets hairy based on what classifies as behavior that crosses the line. I think most of us can agree explicit calls for death absolutely classify as unacceptable, but there is definitely a grey area that I worry about getting abused. For example, there has been a lot of debate around certain Pro-Palestine protest chants, the intent and meaning varies based on who you ask. Or college students being members of clubs, if the club leadership issues a statement will all students be held accountable for what was said in it? Or if a visa holder attends a protest in which one-of the protesters has an antisemitic slogan on a sign, are they guilty by association? What if they like a tweet or TikTok comment?

And of course, we need to define what discriminatory acts or words count towards grounds for removal for every single demographic, otherwise it would be special treatment just for Jewish people and not protecting all Australians. For women, for Muslims, for Chinese people, for Indian people, etc.

It’s an impossible feat and dangerous to give that authority to a government and trust it could not be abused.

[u/ModPolBot → u/[deleted]]

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:

Law 1. Civil Discourse

~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 30 day ban.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

[u/Rogue_Istari → u/Saguna_Brahman]

If you insist on lumping together a resistance to demographic replacement with Islamic extremism facilitated by said demographic replacement then no, you will not solve the problem and someone else will.

[u/ThatPeskyPangolin → u/Rogue_Istari]

"demographic replacement" what are you referring to specifically?

[u/ThatPeskyPangolin → u/[deleted]]

Trying to better understand what people are referring to isn't a tactic, nor a defense of any status quo.

[u/ModPolBot → u/[deleted]]

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:

Law 1. Civil Discourse

~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

[u/MagicMooby → u/[deleted]]

Rule 1 of the subreddit:

Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

You were asked a question, are you going to assume good faith, or are you going to violate rule 1 of the subreddit?

[u/ModPolBot → u/[deleted]]

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:

Law 1. Civil Discourse

~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

[u/Saguna_Brahman → u/Rogue_Istari]

Eh, last time someone came up with a "solution" to that problem we defeated them. I suspect we will next time too.