Austrian far right party in government again

lol @ people getting upset from this discussion. You get unfiltered open door immigration/refugees from countries which have different sets of culture to Western Europe. It's been a highly controversial topic, even Merkel finally admitted it was a mistake. It has long term effects for us all, and then people get worried or question why anti-immigration parties are on the rise. And also wonder why people want to talk about it?

Yeah let's just all bury our heads in the sand and say everything is fine, nothing to see or talk about here.
 
This is a good thing in my view. It will be interesting to see what they bring to the table.

Calling them Nazis on the basis of an anti-Islamic stance is pretty amusing. Since when were the National Socialists anti-Islamic? Quite the opposite.
 
rare said:
This is a good thing in my view. It will be interesting to see what they bring to the table.

Calling them Nazis on the basis of an anti-Islamic stance is pretty amusing. Since when were the National Socialists anti-Islamic? Quite the opposite.
Click to expand...

Well apparently anything more right wing than traditional conservative parties these days instantly gets the label of far right, and with that people reach to fascist and nazi!

Fantastic isn't it? -.-

Also apparently open door immigration is now the normal and moderate stance to take. The idea of controlling immigration is far right and xenophobic.
 
Freakbro said:
You don't elect coalitions



Yea, you have and you're still wrong :D You'll be dead and gone and the EU will still be going
Click to expand...


This is a typical example of how short sighted people are these days, you talk in terms of tens of years and think it's a long time. The Edwardians and Victorians had a far longer sighted view of the future and planned accordingly. The streets of London and our major cities would be awash in sewage were it not for the long sightedness of the Victorians and the build quality of their sewers. The building of St. Paul's and many other magnificent structures took many tens of years, the millennium tent a few months, and the results show. I am not suggesting the EU will be gone in two years, but in the next ten to fifteen it will be totally unlike it is now. That's assuming a World War doesn't get kicked off and the many many EU bureaucrats all die of indecision and fright in their clamour to do sod all.

The parties forming a coalition all got a share of the votes though, just no one got enough to form a majority. The swings toward the Right are marked all over the world where immigration has become a major problem and an encumbrance to a country's inhabitants.
 
Chris Wilson said:
This is a typical example of how short sighted people are these days, you talk in terms of tens of years and think it's a long time. The Edwardians and Victorians had a far longer sighted view of the future and planned accordingly. The streets of London and our major cities would be awash in sewage were it not for the long sightedness of the Victorians and the build quality of their sewers. The building of St. Paul's and many other magnificent structures took many tens of years, the millennium tent a few months, and the results show. I am not suggesting the EU will be gone in two years, but in the next ten to fifteen it will be totally unlike it is now. That's assuming a World War doesn't get kicked off and the many many EU bureaucrats all die of indecision and fright in their clamour to do sod all.

The parties forming a coalition all got a share of the votes though, just no one got enough to form a majority. The swings toward the Right are marked all over the world where immigration has become a major problem and an encumbrance to a country's inhabitants.
Click to expand...

Difference of perspective.

You see getting rid of the EU as a long term solution to fixing things, whereas I see the EU as a long term solution to fixing things.

More unity, more integration, more collaboration - not less. The quicker we move to a one world government the better imho.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Difference of perspective.

You see getting rid of the EU as a long term solution to fixing things, whereas I see the EU as a long term solution to fixing things.

More unity, more integration, more collaboration - not less. The quicker we move to a one world government the better imho.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think one party (assuming a parliamentary system) governing the world is a good idea?
 
dowie said:
"Islam has no place in Austria”

Seems a tad extreme, while I'm no fan of religion to claim that one religion has no place is rather dubious within a country that is supposed to have freedom of religion.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I'm all for freedom of religion, but I don't think it should be a protected characteristic. It's a privilege after all, not a right. Religion is a choice and it should fall in the same category as other coming-of-age activities such as voting, driving, drinking/smoking, joining the military, having a job, getting married etc.
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
Agreed.

I'm all for freedom of religion, but I don't think it should be a protected characteristic. It's a privilege after all, not a right. Religion is a choice and it should fall in the same category as other coming-of-age activities such as voting, driving, drinking/smoking, joining the military, having a job, getting married etc.
Click to expand...
Freedom of religion is enshrined as a basic human right.
 
amigafan2003 said:
The quicker we move to a one world government the better imho.
Click to expand...

I think that's a pipe dream. Religion would need to die out for starters and as most people in the world today harbour some form of religion, that ain't happening anytime soon. The political diversity we see today would need to be unified. Again, we're a million miles away from that ever happening on a global scale. Then there's economics and racism and nationalism to mention but a few obstacles.

The current world population of 7.3 billion is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100, according to a new UN DESA report. (http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/population/2015-report.html). I think humanity is going to face catastrophe in the near future due to there simply being too many people and not enough resources. This is a more likely future than a one world government.

Anyway, back on topic, Austria is a country with a well educated population. I've been there, it's a nice place. I'm sure if the far right coalition tries to push through far right policies the people will just vote them out next time around. Bit like Trump now. Can anyone honestly see Trump winning a second term? I can't.
 
Sliver said:
I think that's a pipe dream. Religion would need to die out for starters and as most people in the world today harbour some form of religion, that ain't happening anytime soon. The political diversity we see today would need to be unified. Again, we're a million miles away from that ever happening on a global scale. Then there's economics and racism and nationalism to mention but a few obstacles.

The current world population of 7.3 billion is expected to reach 8.5 billion by 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100, according to a new UN DESA report. (http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/population/2015-report.html). I think humanity is going to face catastrophe in the near future due to there simply being too many people and not enough resources.

Anyway, back on topic, Austria is a country with well educated population. I've been there, it's a nice place. I'm sure if the right coalition tries to push through far right policies the people will just vote them out next time around. Bit like Trump now. Can anyone honestly see Trump winning a second term? I can't.
Click to expand...

And the more obvious issue of: people can barely come to consensus on what politics they like at a constituency level, a regional level, and a national level. Whoever thinks that a world government is achievable is a lunatic. Also giving someone or some party power of the world is lunacy.

The UN is the best we'll get. A stage for all the world talk over their issues rather than fight over their issues. I very much doubt very many people associate with the rest of the world nor would they want to.
 
A world government. Sweet Jesus. I thought these people liked freedom? Power needs to be given to local authorities, that was one of my major reasons for voting out in the referendum. Not a fan of large scale centralised power.

One world government...bwahaha. What a notion! Sounds like a blank cheque for genocide.
 
Vonhelmet said:
He didn’t say one party. He didn’t even specify the type of government.
Click to expand...
I did, I even explicitly wrote assuming a parliamentary system. There's no deceit in my question. I'm being very explicit.

So I'll open it up then, do you think any form of government to govern the world is a good idea?
 
amigafan2003 said:
Difference of perspective.

You see getting rid of the EU as a long term solution to fixing things, whereas I see the EU as a long term solution to fixing things.

More unity, more integration, more collaboration - not less. The quicker we move to a one world government the better imho.
Click to expand...

How would local interests be handled, would I still have a local Council? I guess all the money would go into one pot, which presumably would then be shared out. What would a health service look like? I mean most people in third world countries wouldn't be able to pay in, yet they'd be entitled to the same level of care as the rest of us which is obviously unaffordable, unless we just privatised health care?

Could you give me some specifics?

How would Saudi Arabia operate alongside Canada, one is a highly conservative country governed by Sharia Law, the other is a fairly liberal country, should Saudi Arabia completely change how they like to live or should Canada be more like SA?

What about borders, what would stop the entire continent of Africa moving to Europe and North America? How would we handle such a large movement of people, where would we house them and how would we care for them when it inevitably happened?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom