>>11444676>is it true that there is no debate in society?There is a "debate", yes. But that debate isn't about the issues, it isn't about statistics or about efficiency and resources.
And you see it every time Sarrazin publishes a book. The reaction from the people who's policy he is attacking isn't to publish statistics which go against his arguments.
The whole "protest culture" is another issue.
>Or is it a case of consensus among a large majority versus a minority with a dissenting opinionA large majority for what?
I have severe doubts that you would find a majority supporting the open borders policy during the refugee crisis.
Especially since there is (at least was) no majority for open borders:
https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/289427/umfrage/umfrage-zu-einer-begrenzung-der-zuwanderung-nach-deutschland/>The rise of the AfD is evidence for the latter, wouldn't you agree?I do not think so, they exist because the CDU has left a large spectrum of opinions open.
> The fact that the AfD is often vilified for the things that they stand for does not nullify the fact that they do exist to begin withBut their vilification is the issue. You do not debate villains, you do not have to consider what they have to say and you want to get rid of them.
And the ridiculous thing is that to the CDU the AfD is FAR WORSE than die Linke.
>have the legal rightBut people don't believe they do. Certainly Ramelow doesn't.
>>11444683I don't care whether you believe that everybody should come or that everybody who knows how to make Kebab should come.
The core debate of, "Who should live in this country?" "Whos interests should be put first inside and outside of this country?" is what I am interested in and at this point I am practically certain that for the political establishment the answers are "Everyone" and "Everyone's, no matter the cost". And to be honest, I consider these answers equivalent to treason.
