Most countries dealt with their internal fascists during the 20th C without mass slaughter.
France, Australia, the UK, etc; we all had fascists in the thirties, and we’ve still got 'em now. But they’re mostly a small and relatively powerless group (although the recent resurgence of Le Pen in France is worrying) and are held in justified contempt.
Blaming poverty for fascism is a mistake, IMO. Yes, economic stress tends to encourage political extremism, but the genuinely poor usually don’t go fascist; they go communist.
Fascism appeals to those who are fighting to retain their privilege, not to those who never had any to begin with. It’s a middle class pathology.
To be honest, I don’t understand what you are asking me to do. I made a minor comment about the possibility that some people might react badly to mockery, and apparently I’m making a sweeping claim about all of electoral practise everywhere ever [/hyperbole].
In which case yes, I admit that we can only ever swap anecdotal evidence back-and-forth about whether or not it is an issue, and how significant it actually is. The most I was suggesting was that folk who feel themselves under threat (and mockery is definitely one of the things that can make people react badly) will often retreat and become less receptive to other forms of engagement. And that this can come back to bite other people when they least expect it.
Other folk have suggested that engagement doesn’t solve anything; I don’t subscribe to that position. Which is why I tend to think that mockery is not always a helpful component. (And especially when the mockery is directed at a different group entirely, as in this case.)
I have never referred to myself as a Bernie Bro except as a joke. It’s a term used by hardcore Clinton supporters to frame Sanders supporters as just sexists who don’t want a woman president.
There’s been no violence when Sanders didn’t get the nomination. Nobody tried to take matters into their own hands. The worst case scenario is that now there are people who have nobody to vote for, because they believe Clinton doesn’t represent them.
It is us vs them, and there’s nothing wrong with saying that. Saying all "us vs them " scenarios are the same as the racist ones is blatant false equivalence.
Most Trump voters are middle to upper middle class.
This salts of the earth narrative is GOP invention that the media buys hook line and sinker, because they love nothing more than to perpetuate right wing narratives.
I thought it was just a Clintonian slander when I was caucusing, but they certainly exist in those people who are now voting third-party. Plenty of sexists who discount her ability entirely.
You chastise others and offer not just your opinion but a perspective you expect others to believe, if you want people to take you seriously or you want to criticize them for theirs, more than the Shadow Trump Voter who turns to the dark side should be offered.
It can contribute, but it’s not the cause of it… fascism is often a top-down phenomenon and it’s often the petite-bourgeousie that embrace it the most (small business owners, for example, seem to be sweet on Trump, for example - and as @Phrenological notes, his backbone of support is middle to upper middle class).
It is not wrong to say that there are people who are straight-ticket Rah Rah Team Blue Democratic voters but don’t want a woman to be President. Close to all of them would have voted for Bernie Sanders in the primary, because he was the most viable Clinton alternative. However, it is wrong to say that all or even most Bernie Sanders supporters are like this. Bernie Sanders got most of his support from left-leaning independent voters, not establishment Democrats inexplicably jumping ship.
I’m not a lifelong Democrat, or any kind of Democrat, so I’m not going to fall in line lock-step behind her. The only way I’d vote for her is if I’m shit-scared enough of a Trump presidency, and I hope to God it won’t come to that. Currently, I’m leaning Clinton, because even if she doesn’t believe in the same things I do, her presidency could create the type of environment that allows people who do believe what I believe to get stuff done. However, I’m still technically undecided, and whatever I do decide will not make me happy.
It certainly is, but I don’t think people discussing “Berniebros” are referring to all sanders backers (like myself), who have vastly gone to her and listened to Bernie’s pragmatic advice.
The people who refuse and who are writing HIM in against his own wishes, they dwell in that subset.
I agree in principle, but in practice it’s tricky to display that compassion without appearing to accept or pander to the bullying behavior at the core of Trumpism. If there’s a kid at school who is hitting everyone, you send him to the school psychologist to find out why, but you also make it clear that what he’s doing isn’t acceptable. You should, after all, feel alienated for expressing racist or xenophobic opinions. We should offer a viable alternative that appeals to people’s higher natures, but meanwhile we can’t be so concerned with protecting the feelings of militant white nationalists that we ignore the fact that they’re trying to shove a jackboot in our face.
I would still prefer the term “Bernie Or Bust” for what you’re describing. Many of whom have gone over to Jill Stein, some to Gary Johnson, some are sitting this one out, and some are writing in Bernie Sanders for whatever reason. Then there are those aligned with me, who aren’t technically Bernie Or Bust but don’t feel the obligation to vote for Clinton.
Bernie Bros are specifically young white men who voted for Sanders over Clinton. The implication is that they did so out of sexism, but I’m not going to open that cylinder of wriggling invertebrates. There were certainly some sexists in that crowd, but I don’t believe it was anywhere near the majority, and I certainly don’t think that the only reason anyone criticizes Clinton or would vote for anyone else is because of sexism.
Most people on this board seem to be about a 3 to 5 on a scale of 1 = Never Sanders to 7 = Never Clinton. They prefer one over the other but are actually fine with either, especially when the other major party candidate is so egregious. I’m about a 6 on that scale. I think this country is much worse off without Bernie Sanders as the Democratic nominee, don’t feel represented by Hillary Clinton, but don’t buy the line that Clinton and Trump are equal.
This is almost certainly what will happen if the R/D balance in the House and Senate gets flipped even slightly. Someone who knows not to bother fighting a lost cause will also know when there’s enough support that she can work towards progressive goals. What you want is Hillary PLUS non-Republicans (unless they’re actual moderates/old-school types, but there are so few of those left). But Trump means the rest of it doesn’t even matter. It’s a line in the sand, full stop.
Yeah. FWIW, my interpretation of the “Bernie Bros” phenomenon, whether it’s hyped or not, is related to the sad fact that when Bernie is pitching FOR something, rather than AGAINST things, his appeal withers. I think there are a lot of (mostly) white (mostly) guys who feel entitled to drama and excitement. Blame TV, if you like. A lot of them are Trump supporters and think Sharia law has taken over Dearborn MI (why they don’t call the Dearborn city council and ask, I don’t know; their number is 313-943-2000), or Bernie supporters. They like to pump their fists and yell.
They should all join community theater groups and get their drama there. Works a treat.
I can only speak for myself, but I like Bernie’s positions both for and against things. Moreover, I don’t care about the drama, nor do I feel entitled to anything. Wanna talk about entitled? How about the people who think Hillary Clinton should be president because it’s her turn, and Bernie Sanders is just another old white man who wants “her” job (rather than the job). Hillary won the nomination fair and square, but she had to go through the same primary contests that every other presidential candidate has to go through.
Trump supporters and Sanders supporters are very different groups overall. I don’t believe wacky conspiracy theories or hate Muslims or anything like that. There’s very little overlap between support for one of only two Social Democrats serving in the Senate, and support of a nativist fascist madman.
Can only speak for me, not for anyone else. I didn’t want Hillary because
it’s her “turn”. She entered the primary and won. It was a political
process, and she did better at it. I think Bernie would have been a great
candidate, but about 3M more people voted for her. Yes, she had the backing
of the DNC and Bernie didn’t. That’s problematic, but, to be fair, she’s
actually a Democrat. They’re bound to prefer that. Besides, the thing
Bernie is “for” now is Hillary.
That right there is why I’m not an enthusiastic Hillary supporter right now. I don’t care if she’s “actually a Democrat”. The Democratic Party means nothing to me. I vote for the candidate I most agree with, not the one I wave a flag for.
If being actually a Democrat matters more than being actually a progressive, then I’m glad I’m not a Democrat, actually or not.
I don’t disagree. All I said was that it was understandable that the DNC supported her. Said nothing about anyone else. You’re under no obligation to support anyone, nor am I. But they kind of are.
It’s understandable but unfortunate. He is more progressive but is in no way an establishment Democrat. Preliminary polling shows that he would have been more electable than Clinton, yet the Democratic Party establishment actively worked against him
