I thought this was interesting:
2 Likes
This is great news. I can’t help but assume that the fucking dumpster fire we have in the White House influenced the outcome.
8 Likes
It’s still a landslide vote against fascism in a two-person race. I’m happy to take what victories we can (see also Austria and the Netherlands) and then build on them. I now feel more confident that AfD and the other far-right parties in Germany will also be rejected in 2017.
Very true. It’s not a co-incidence that right-wing populism and ultra-nationalism are crawling out from under the rocks in Europe just as the fascist period and its horrific consequences are starting to pass out of living memory.
7 Likes
I hope so. I am not, though.
1 Like
Lots of reasons. Because people are willing to give up some freedom for security. Compound the fact that people have a romantic view of the past, and that the old time days were in some way better than they are now. The call to revert to the “old” ways or “traditional” ways is appealing to people who are now feeling more marginalized than in the past. They probably wouldn’t mind the others so much if they were prospering more, instead of being stagnant or declining. They are willing to give power to the state as long as they come up ahead - Machiavellian barters.
Of course if you think only one side is willing to do this, remember too the powers that the Democrats had and the plea to remove some of them before Trump took office. Remember that when the political tide changes, that one doesn’t support some of the same things, just because the new team in power isn’t them.
Also, as an aside, removing the often racist and xenophobic aspects, others just have a preference for strong, central authoritarian powers. My black shooting buddy has voiced his opinion many times he’d rather have someone strong in charge because he doesn’t have faith in the average person doing the right thing on their own. (I don’t think he voted for Trump, but this is an example that political views span a wide spectrum and one can be drawn to one element of a party, but not the others.) Even many on BB seem to be anti-authoritarian and pro-freedom, until it comes to dangerous objects that clearly need restrictions - because they too lack faith in the average person doing the right thing.
A point I have brought up many times, that even though Europe has their share of immigrants, none of them really have the whole “melting pot” mentality. If things aren’t going well, immigrants are a very convenient scapegoat, and have been for a long, long time, including in the US. (There is also the practical point that those with large social programs can have immigrants put a strain on those systems, but that should be adaptable.)
The funny thing is, if you look at history, the nations with a thriving influx of immigrants are the ones who most usually have the most growth and success. Some of that is self fulfilling, as the better nations will attract more immigrants. But time and again, those who close off their borders or withdraw stagnate. Classic example would be China who went from the most prosperous and advanced nation to, meh. More recent would be Ireland, whose “Ireland first” trade laws stagnated their industry, lead to serious brain drain, and high unemployment. Economic and trade reforms has revitalized them and their GDP has risen accordingly.
3 Likes
I’m being optimistic. I hope it doesn’t go that far.
2 Likes
Do the Democrats have many marxists and anarchists in their party? I mean real ones, not republican bogeymen.
I didn’t think so.
No one knows what centrist is anymore because they don’t know what left wing is anymore. Bernie Sanders is only centre-left by European standards. Hillary Clinton is like a one nation conservative. ⊥rump is undeniably a reactionary fascist.
15 Likes
Sanders is not only centre left by European standards, he’s a solid social democrat, which is the basic definition of centre-left. He mistakenly called himself a democratic socialist at one point, which brings to mind the more radically left wing, like the south american socialists, but he’s nowhere close to that (thankfully). Clinton is nothing like a one nation conservative either, she’s more like a classical liberal. Trump is pretty far from a fascist as well, he’s just equal parts protectionist, populist, and liar, say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, at least it’s an ethos, Trump doesn’t have an ethos aside from Trumpism. So wrong on all points basically.
edit: maybe a bit strong to say Clinton was nothing like a one nation conservative, she showed a certain amount of pragmatism towards the left wing of the party after she won the primary, but I still think she’s closer to a classical liberal in principle when you look at most of her policy positions.
6 Likes
That’s exactly his program. That’s why a lot of “leftists” were reluctant to give him a vote, and a lot voted blank.
4 Likes
I meant he was only centre left, as opposed to being far left.
Her actions in government seemed too authoritarian for that.
2 Likes
And it’s a program that’s sorely needed in France, a country that doesn’t resemble @gilgongo’s description at all. France has a grossly inflated public sector (one of the largest in europe, if not the largest), crippling levels of pension debt for future generations and massive levels of growth destroying bureaucracy. It’s been in massive need of reform for decades.
Cabinet members don’t set policy agendas, they carry them out.
2 Likes
You don’t think she was caught in the classic sexist trap of a woman not being able to be pacifist for fear of being seen as weak? Bill’s administration was relatively non aggressive and I saw no reason hers would be different from any centrist Democrat. The choices you think you have before being POTUS narrow, ask Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner who had 8 years of war.
5 Likes
[quote=“caze, post:28, topic:100557”]
Her father would have fared even worse, Marine at least made an attempt to distance herself from the extremes of the FN, her father was an unabashed holocaust denier.[/quote]
This is my read of the situation. Of her 35%, maybe half are hard-core old-style nationalists who would have voted for her father, the rest were people who convinced themselves she wasn’t a racist, anti-semitic, progress-hating bigot like her father and thought they were voting for change and against what they perceived as a global hegemony of bankers and other internationalists. She did an excellent job of letting people read into her what they wanted to see - much like Trump - and so she had support from unexpected quarters. For example, polling showed she was popular among French students, not generally a demographic favorable to her father’s positions, and many in the Orthodox Jewish community thought her dislike of Muslim immigrants far outweighed any hatred of Jews she might have inherited from Papa.
5 Likes
That one still is mind-boggling to me. She talked about banning the wearing of religious items in public, including the yamulke along with the hijab (but presumably excluding crucifix necklaces); she talked specifically about Jewish French people who had it having to give up Israeli citizenship (dual loyalties, don’t you know); she downplayed the role of French collaboration in the implementation of the “Final Solution”; and, as you note, she fed into the idea that “a global hegemony of bankers and other internationalists” was conspiring against her supporters. That’s before you get to her Papa’s embarrassingly unrepentant comrades still in the FN (one example).
And yet some Orthodox Jews supported her because the FN is currently placing Muslims ahead of Jews on their hit list and is making pro-Zionist noises (reminiscent of how the Apartheid-era South African government “beneficently” supported the existence of segregated “homelands” for various black tribes). Fear-driven madness and short-sighted stupidity to invite a wolf like that in the door, even to protect oneself from what one perceives as another predator.
13 Likes
5 Likes
I have complete faith in the average person doing the right thing an average amount of the time (and the wrong thing the rest of the time), but the real problem comes those many people who are below the average.
The thing about rights is they come with responsibilities. Some folks think that - especially when it comes to dangerous tools - the operator has the responsibility demonstrate some level of competence before they get to use said tool. This is why we have driver’s license testing, 8 years of med school, pilots licensing, trade apprenticeships, etc. Other folks believe it’s a better idea to let self-styled surgeons, pilots, train drivers, mechanics, etc., go hog wild, and only hold them responsible if (a.k.a. ‘when’) they screw up. Either way it’s the same basic policy of balancing rights with responsibilities, but although neither guarantees perfection one of them definitely ends up with a lot more dead and injured innocent bystanders.
16 Likes
I don’t understand all the blank votes cast here. Why not just stay home if you don’t like either candidate?
“You both suck” != “Meh, I can’t be bothered”
15 Likes
Coma patient: So what’s been going on around the world when I was out?
Family member: Well, I’ve got some good news and some bad news. About 40 percent of France is now fascist…
Coma patient: Holy shit! What’s the good news?
Family member: That IS the good news.
23 Likes
