I don’t agree with your last paragraph.

That's fine, at least you try to have a civil discussion.

We face many crises today and to solve them is challenging our way of life. The political (far)right answers with simple, populist sentiments that will not solve anything: Just drive your car, just eat your meat, we need growth — look: migrants!

The problem here, for what I can see in Italy, is not the (far)right that answer with these simple slogans, but that for the most part the left did not even try to give an answer.

As a reasonable person I agree that one should look over the simple answer and look to the whole picture but I am (now) lucky to have a peaceful and relative easy life.
On the other hand I understand the ones that are less lucky and maybe struggle to put two meals on the table for their children (since I was very close to that situation at some point in the past) and I understand how simple is their reasoning when it come to choose between a party that care only about minorities and illegal immigrant and a party that promise that they will solve their problems. I cannot really blame them, honestly. And I am also pretty sure that even they don't really belive the (far) right will resolve their problem, it is just a way of saying "we need help, do something or sooner or later someone will resolve the problem in a way we all will not like"

It is understood that to care about minorities is NOT a wrong thing to do but you cannot do only that.

What I see more and more is a growing disconnection between what the left think and do and what the normal people think they should do, be it more security on the street or better job conditions or whatever neede to have a normal life. From what I see in Italy, the left cannot cry that the right won when was the left itself that try so hard to loose.

The left tries to explain very complex concepts, but all people hear is „you have to change your way of living“.

Then, maybe, they are not doing it right.

I'm not at all excusing it, I'm fact I am pointing out that the media is owned by our capital and will thus work to maintain their interests. And their interests are to not lose their wealth and power, more than maintaining democracy or anything else really.

So they, and by extension their media, are complicit in the rise of far right ideology, because fascism is better than a revolution for them, rich people tend to lose their wealth, power and occasionally their heads during revolutions.

The public broadcasters are trying very hard to imitate the private media and keep quoting even the worst examples of them (the "Bild" tabloid for example) as a source. So the situation of commercial media has very well something to do with the situation of the public broadcasters.

I was responding specifically to this:

At least here in Germany the media plays a substantial role in the rise of the AFD and normalising right wing policies.

I suppose I should quote that in the above comment, my bad

Is this in answer to something or just a passing thought?

I don't know how you got from point 1 (which is valid - but do you think there aren't Germans who will say yes?) to point 2?

How does an something being an answer on a survey make it a reasonable answer? If surveys should be limited to reasonable answers, how do we ever quantify how many unreasonable people exist?

The downvote button is not the "I disagree" button. It's a "this is irrelevant or destructive to the conversation" button. "I get what you're saying but I disagree" to me indicates you don't think my comment was either.

If the question was phrased as "Is the German national team diverse enough?" - which asks for the same opinion - would that be somehow better?

This type of finger-in-ear nonsense is the type of behaviour that leads to Germans supporting a genocide in 2024 and AfD's success being a surprise.

Adidas is short for Adolf Dassler... Just leaving that here