Nah, I think giving a shit is here to stay. Been 'addled' with empathy from an early age. I do have occasional lapses and get quite intolerant of those who lack it, but eventually I realise very few of them are inherently bad and it's probably just environmental.
Car drives into crowd in Munich, Germany
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
This fecknut probably isn't a criminal mastermind.
Marxism and empathy aren’t synonyms.
Well spotted. In my case they are deeply connected. It was me you were commenting on.
I recognise the psychology. My younger brother (misguidedly) subscribes to a lot of it so I'm well versed in it.
I'd be sceptical of that claim to be honest. Regardless as to whether you're talking about Marx or empathy.
As I said…I recognise the psychology.
I’ve read most of his writings and studied it for a semester at university (with particular focus on looking at the law & legal issues through a Marxist lens).
In many ways it can help a person to think, which is no mean feat. And that’s probably its main merit in my view.
Yeah, the dialectic is great. As a device it's not all him but he did it well.
On the actual texts, Capital is quite an amazing tome and a very detailed analysis of a system, regardless of whether one agrees with all the conclusions.
I feel like the arguments about crime rates and poverty and so forth are useful but they can only get you so far.
Many people don't care that much about crime rates, or the complex factors that are driving them. They just care that the crime happens, and would prefer if it didn't. In the case of crimes committed by immigrants, there is a simple mechanism to reduce the crime: reduce the number of people who commit the crime. Immigrants committing crimes at a similar or lower rate than the native population is a good counterpoint to racist assumptions. But it would still mean that having more immigrants results in having more total crimes.
Many people, understandably, don't want that. They want the crime rate of immigrants to be not 'similar' or 'lower' than that of natives, they want the crime rate to be near zero, because these are guests in the country and guests are expected to behave differently.
Many people don't care that much about crime rates, or the complex factors that are driving them. They just care that the crime happens, and would prefer if it didn't. In the case of crimes committed by immigrants, there is a simple mechanism to reduce the crime: reduce the number of people who commit the crime. Immigrants committing crimes at a similar or lower rate than the native population is a good counterpoint to racist assumptions. But it would still mean that having more immigrants results in having more total crimes.
Many people, understandably, don't want that. They want the crime rate of immigrants to be not 'similar' or 'lower' than that of natives, they want the crime rate to be near zero, because these are guests in the country and guests are expected to behave differently.
Calling immigrants a guest is bollocks.
In related news:
Whole country is getting extreme in the run up to the elections.
Whole country is getting extreme in the run up to the elections.
This is nonsense. You have to engage with the data because the anecdotal evidence causes hysteria and often a violent backlash.
Do you really feel the current level of immigration is sustainable? There's something like 100,000+ additional people needing housing each year and there's absolutely no way that many dwellings are being built..
People don't like to hear it but immigrants are an incredible burden on resources and as a low income person myself who can't afford to buy a home or even rent it's disheartening what's happening (and a little selfish, I'll admit)
I feel like only a well-off person would have the opinion that unchecked immigration is a net positive to a country.
You are really bad at this. You keep assuming things to argue against and putting words in my mouth. I never commented on how sustainable the rate of emigration is.
Firstly immigration is not unchecked, that's another falsehood and phrase used to scaremonger and fan the flames.
We need some immigrants and while it may not suit your accountancy approach to society, some immigrants need us.
Housing is a really complicated and neglected issue blamed on immigration so the real culprits just laugh at us.
If you want have a discussion about housing, we definitely can, in an appropriate thread. it's been had and the reason you can't afford a house, which is a disgrace, while previous generations could is not to do with immigrants.
The fact we get from one fecking idiots criminal behaviour in Germany to you blaming the housing situation in Ireland on immigration is proof the narrative lands.
You on the internet saying crime and housing in Ireland can be blamed on immigrants is music to the ears of the government. You're basically campaigning for them.
Yup. This shit is a boon for bigots. It’s fecking upsetting.
White people are not “indigenous” to the Americas or Oceania.
Both of these claims (no residency allowance and crime record) have turned out to be false by now.
Which tells you a lot about how these discussions go these days.
I think overall we need to move in a direction on how coverage of these events should go. There is some semi-official agreements between media outlets to keep coverage about suicides as low as possible because of the proven copycat effect. Something similar might help in these cases but it obviously won't happen because to many actors have an interest in keeping these events as omnipresent as possible.
Even the "possibly islamist post in social media" that was also reported about is apparently just an "oh allah, protect us forever" on instagram - not exactly something that I'd find alarming or that I'd think to be sounding extremist.
Seems like a lot of quickshot nonsense was published very quickly about the perpetrator, and it wasn't just some random idiot posting on facebook or xitter, it came directly from the minister of the interior of Bavaria (which, to be fair, is still an idiot, but not a random one). If this came from the press they'd be investigated over their journalistic standards, and rightfully so. The only claim they apparently haven't gotten wrong was his nationality and age. No drug-related criminal record, his only contact with shoplifting was as a witness when he worked as a shop detective, and he was in posession of a valid asylum and work permit.
Seems like a lot of quickshot nonsense was published very quickly about the perpetrator, and it wasn't just some random idiot posting on facebook or xitter, it came directly from the minister of the interior of Bavaria (which, to be fair, is still an idiot, but not a random one). If this came from the press they'd be investigated over their journalistic standards, and rightfully so. The only claim they apparently haven't gotten wrong was his nationality and age. No drug-related criminal record, his only contact with shoplifting was as a witness when he worked as a shop detective, and he was in posession of a valid asylum and work permit.
Lots of distractions in here.
Sad to hear of yet another attack by some crazed individual. I feel bad for those that are in country and trying to stay and assimilate. The reality though is that the system is not perfect, never will be. The German authorities need to do some serious work to get a handle on the issue of immigration before the law abiding immigrants are adversely affected cos their will be a backlash in the polls.
All that said it's hard to blame voters if they vote for stricter measures.
Sad to hear of yet another attack by some crazed individual. I feel bad for those that are in country and trying to stay and assimilate. The reality though is that the system is not perfect, never will be. The German authorities need to do some serious work to get a handle on the issue of immigration before the law abiding immigrants are adversely affected cos their will be a backlash in the polls.
All that said it's hard to blame voters if they vote for stricter measures.
Last edited:
What's funny about that? It's pretty straightforwardly true. A guest is typically someone who is there on invitation, and can be asked to leave at the wish of the host. If that's to make any sense on the topic of nations, then a guest is someone on vacation and/or on a temporary visa. To call an immigrant a guest would be to invalidate the whole concept of citizenship.
Last edited:
I agree, immigration is totally fecked. America was once a great place and then all of a sudden we were inundated with Brits, Irish, Italians, Germans, and the goddamn French. Now look at us. They even killed out buffalo, the cnuts!!
So it appears that this guy was in Germany legally, had no criminal record, and had given no indication of anything. What exactly do you think the German authorities need to do to get a handle on in this context?
Last edited:
I personally think general crime rates has nothing to do with terrorism attack and have to be separated as they're both a totally different indicators, or at least looked at differently
Most terrorist I bet are law abiding untill they pull off that one crime of terror
A good environment, good wages while imho helps reduces the tendency of radicalism, wont work with an inherently wrong in the head bad apples that were already radicalized
Countries should crack down the head of these attack, the funding, the main ideology behind extremism, fight their own ideology war to counter radicalism. Beefing up the security just can't keep up with these car/knife attacks are they're probably impossible to police. You really can't tell when where what will happen. If the dude changes his mind last minute his status would still be law abiding immigrants.
Most terrorist I bet are law abiding untill they pull off that one crime of terror
A good environment, good wages while imho helps reduces the tendency of radicalism, wont work with an inherently wrong in the head bad apples that were already radicalized
Countries should crack down the head of these attack, the funding, the main ideology behind extremism, fight their own ideology war to counter radicalism. Beefing up the security just can't keep up with these car/knife attacks are they're probably impossible to police. You really can't tell when where what will happen. If the dude changes his mind last minute his status would still be law abiding immigrants.
Magdeburg (20th Dec, 2024) & now Munich.
That’s not entirely correct - he was only „duldet“ („tolerated“) so the authorities had the rights to deport him but didn’t or couldn’t for whatever reason we don’t know.
Immigrants can also be asked to leave a country, and many (most?) residency permits are temporary.
He arrived in 2016, his asylum application was rejected and he's been known to authorities for drug and theft crimes.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cd9x22dj423t
That is misinformation that has been rescinded yesterday as has already been said in this thread. Really speaks to how shit BBC are these days that they still wrote that hours after it was corrected.
This newer article has it right: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdry8xd47ylo
His "toleration" of April 21 had already been replaced with a permit of residency he received in October of the same year.
Thanks, didn’t have that info so far.
So no different from me and many others then, on a valid residence and work permit. No history of extremism as well.
Any confessions from him about his motives?
Press conference started 30mins ago but I can't listen to it so there may be updated info in that, dunno.
Ah right thanks, they should be very careful when getting these things right
I was thinking about this post again last night. It's the perfect summary of what's been happening in politics the past 20-30 years: the political left have moved away from talking about economic issues to focus primarily on progressive issues. That's left a huge subject gap for the right to exploit. Of course, the right don't actually care about people's ability to afford the cost of living (that would go directly against their ideology and key policy planks), so they have instead filled the hole by tantalizing accusations: if only we didn't have X all would be fine.
That doesn't actually work, but that's ok, cause they are also confusing the issue. For example, a country like the Netherlands desperately needs immigrants to do the jobs that people already in the country don't want to do anymore( like working in agriculture and warehouses) and to counter the demographic effect of aging. So the Dutch right (PVV, BBB, VVD, JA21) can't reasonably argue against immigration and really just means asylum seekers. Those are only a small part of immigration, but the right purposefully confuse numbers and terms to make it seem like there are significant issues (like the housing crisis) that can be solved by turning away all asylum seekers.
It's nonsense and entirely misdirected, but it's super effective. And so now here we are: some immigrant drives his car into people, and we end up with someone claiming their life would improve financially if immigration slowed down enormously.
I don't blame the poster (that's why I'm quoting them anonymously), but damn it's frustrating!
And yes, this is an appropriate image (if obviously not touching on all relevant points):
Last edited:
Well said. Immigrants from Asia and Africa are not the enemy of the white European working class. The enemy of the working class is the bourgeoisie, and that applies everywhere.I was thinking about this post again last night. It's the perfect summary of what's been happening in politics the past 20-30 years: the political left have moved away from talking about economic issues to focus primarily on progressive issues. That's left a huge subject gap for the right to exploit. Of course, the right don't actually care about people's ability to afford the cost of living (that would go directly against their ideology and key policy planks), so they have instead filled the hole by tantalizing accusations: if only we didn't have X all would be fine.
That doesn't actually work, but that's ok, cause they are also confusing the issue. For example, a country like the Netherlands desperately needs immigrants to do the jobs that people already in the country don't want to do anymore( like working in agriculture and warehouses) and to counter the demographic effect of aging. So the Dutch right (PVV, BBB, VVD, JA21) can't reasonably argue against immigration and really just means asylum seekers. Those are only a small part of immigration, but the right purposefully confuse numbers and terms to make it seem like there are significant issues (like the housing crisis) that can be solved by turning away all asylum seekers.
It's nonsense and entirely misdirected, but it's super effective. And so now here we are: some immigrant drives his car into people, and we end up with someone claiming their life would improve financially if immigration slowed down enormously.
I don't even blame the poster (that's why I'm quoting them anonymously), but damn it's frustrating!
And yes, this is an appropriate image (if obviously not touching on all relevant points):
To update this with some points from today's presser:
- Two people, an adult and a 2y/o child, remain in life-threatening condition. Over thirty others are counted as also having been injured to some degree.
- The perpetrator was confirmed to have had valid residency and work permits. He was not illegal and not obligated to leave the country, as first reported.
- It was confirmed that he did run his car (and yes, that Mini was his own personal car) into the crowd intentionally. Whether he targeted that procession specifically for some reason or if it was just a target of opportunity is unclear. They claim that his wording indicates a religiously motivated act.
- There are so far no indications for a mental illness.
- The initial prosecution for now is for 39 instances of attempted murder, grievous bodily harm, and severe interference with road traffic, the federal prosecutor general has taken over the case due to the severety and general importance of the case, and the perpetrator has been transferred to pre-trial custody in prison.
- There is no implication of other hostile actors so far. No accomplices, no contacts to terrorist organisations or other criminal groups, no contact to foreign state actors that might have paid or otherwise instigated him to act like this.
- Two people, an adult and a 2y/o child, remain in life-threatening condition. Over thirty others are counted as also having been injured to some degree.
- The perpetrator was confirmed to have had valid residency and work permits. He was not illegal and not obligated to leave the country, as first reported.
- It was confirmed that he did run his car (and yes, that Mini was his own personal car) into the crowd intentionally. Whether he targeted that procession specifically for some reason or if it was just a target of opportunity is unclear. They claim that his wording indicates a religiously motivated act.
- There are so far no indications for a mental illness.
- The initial prosecution for now is for 39 instances of attempted murder, grievous bodily harm, and severe interference with road traffic, the federal prosecutor general has taken over the case due to the severety and general importance of the case, and the perpetrator has been transferred to pre-trial custody in prison.
- There is no implication of other hostile actors so far. No accomplices, no contacts to terrorist organisations or other criminal groups, no contact to foreign state actors that might have paid or otherwise instigated him to act like this.
So some judge knocked the hammer and said he’s ok to stay here
And we have to live with that and can’t change the rules
Bonkers
And we have to live with that and can’t change the rules
Bonkers
The part aside where the permit was probably issued by an agency and not a judge: what, prior to this incident, was wrong with somebody like him being in Germany?
He came over as a teenager, alone, from a war-torn country. He did his school, did his vocational training and worked in a job where he was actually helping to catch criminals. He had no criminal record himself and was, according to recent statements, well integrated. He had no known tendencies towards extremism, had not made any threats as far as anybody knew. Why would he not be welcomed and get a permission to stay? What kind of sick sociopath would want to send somebody like him, who seemed to be a success story of an immigrant, back to that shitehole that is the current Afghanistan? For what one even want that? Because his skin had the "wrong" colour or he called his god the "wrong" name? Because the country is "full"?
The only two offenses to his name known to date is that, one, his original asylum application was rejected because they thought the story behind it - him being persecuted by a criminal organisation which had already killed his father - was a lie, and the second one that he was once registered jobless for a short while, took up a job again and did not report it quickly enough to the agency, which landed him a fine for the reportedly "very short time" that covered. The first one I empathize with because if I wanted to escape Afghanistan I'd lie my arse off about why I should be allowed asylum, too. And the second one I find utterly negligible since he seemingly reported it, just not quite quickly enough, so I don't think there was any malice or intent to deceive there.
That he was an asylum seeker who seemed relatively settled makes the fact he became a terrorist who drove his car into 30 people far harder to rationalise than if he was a habitual criminal on the edge of society. If anyone is a sick sociopath, it's him.