30
UK joins European deal to send rejected asylum seekers to third-country hubs
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 16 May 2026
30 points (91.7% liked)
World News
56199 readers
3172 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Appeasing fascists will always lead to more fascism, not less
No, centrist parties would be preventing far-right parties from getting into power by adopting those views which are popular with people.
...and in the process those centrist parties, as they adopt the far right policies, become the new far right. QED.
Not really, since centrist policies would be generally milder versions of the far-right policies, but parties have to appeal to the desires of the electorate otherwise, they would be voted out.
You're operating under the naive conception that fascism can be reasoned or bargained with. No, it can't. But you don't need to take my word for it, just open any history book on what was Germany before the ascension of Hitler, or Italy before Mussolini began calling the shots.
The Nazi party gained control because the democratic Weimar Republic could not stop inflation. Also, Hitler was an excellent speaker. See https://www.youtube.com/shorts/OI7eqYx5Pqo
Stop "educating" yourself from youtube shorts and pick up a book. Or don't, I don't really care.
Prevent far-right parties getting into power by adopting far-right policies!
Let’s assume that that’s actually a moral thing to do - ask Kier Starmer what adopting exactly that strategy has done for the popularity of his party and the far-right party Reform
The reason is that immigration may not be the only issue.
Immigration is Reform’s one issue, and also what I’ve unfailingly see Reform voters cite as their only reason for voting
Starmer has been pushing immigration as an issue and modelled the party’s policy after Reform. He even gave a speech in which he invoked the most famous anti-immigration speech in British political history. Insiders have said explicitly that the strategy was to court right-wing voters in exactly the manner that you’re suggesting
2 years ago Labour won the general election with 33.7% of the vote. 2 weeks ago they got 20% of the vote in the local elections
2 years ago Reform got 14.5% of the vote. 2 weeks ago they got 31%
This is a party who have explicitly tried the approach that you’re suggesting and it hasn’t had the effect that you think it should. Instead it has lost Labour the support of core voters and given support to Reform by legitimising and reinforcing their platform
This real-world example is the opposite of what you’re claiming would happen
And it should be obvious - “the far-right are right about immigration, therefore you should vote for us instead” is never going to be a sensible message
I'm not familiar with British politics but if voters want the country to be tough on immigration, then parties must adopt that stance or be voted out.
This is less about the specifics (which you are misrepresenting and oversimplifying) and more about your hypothesis not being supported by the evidence
But WRT the specifics it is worth noting that there has also been a rise in votes for the Green Party, who have very progressive policies WRT immigration, diametrically opposed to Reform. Their vote share went from 6.4% 2 years ago to 18% 2 weeks ago
Yes, I read that, but Reform is getting more votes than the Green Party. I'm not too familiar with British politics but I suspect that Britons are also dissatisfied with the economy. The economy is usually the top issue. When Trump won in 2024, he made border security a top issue, but Americans were also dissatisfied with the economy.
I don’t think you understand how politics works in the real world if you think that tripling your user base in two years is worse than doubling it in the same time
Your understanding of politics is shallow, simplistic, and not rooted in reality