|
PT6A posted:Make it untenable for them to express their opinions in any public venue by metaphorically ripping off their head and making GBS threads down their neck anytime and every time they try to promote hatred and xenophobia. This looks good now until the Republicans hold the House and Senate in 2018 and Trump wins re-election in 2020 because the Democrats still haven't built any serious platform to run on other than "Trump is bad"
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:40 |
|
|
Tertiary Stresses posted:People who vote for these populists are lovely people, and economics are a minor indicator of shittiness and likely a cover for the real reasons. Both the Brexit and 2016 vote provide great examples. Where do those values come from though? People aren't just born believing in the death penalty (referring to the Brexit article). Why are the people who hold these values now able to elect US governments and fascist parties in Europe? Something must have changed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:If your excuse for voting for a fascist is "I wasn't motivated by the idea of a literal gestapo rounding up brown people and putting them in literal concentration camps! I just don't care if our government does that." Then you are in fact enormously racist. Yes, but we're not supposed to acknowledge that because they didn't specifically vote for the concentration camps. They voted for the increase in income they'd have once all those folks were rounded up, which is definitely different. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Jun 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:This is a very roundabout way of revealing that you've read the infobox on Wikipedia and nothing else. There's a reason it took more than five months to form the government. When was the last time a party in Germany has won an outright majority in government and hasn't had to negotiate a coalition to form government? If I read your original post correctly you are arguing against PR because the AfD make it harder to form government in Germany when that is an outlier in one of the most stable democracies in the world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:The arguments against PR are that democracy simply doesn't work. Maybe we can hope for a benevolent autocrat. It’s exactly this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:If your excuse for voting for a fascist is "I wasn't motivated by the idea of a literal gestapo rounding up brown people and putting them in literal concentration camps! I just don't care if our government does that." Then you are in fact enormously racist. Don't forget the always-fun "people calling me racist made me join the neo nazis"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
PCs joining the Libs in campaigning for the NDP https://twitter.com/spaikin/status/1004001045926694912 With bonus shade throwing upon the widow Ford
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:You're right, but the point is that higher levels of inequality leads to higher status anxiety. And I don't just mean economic inequality. That tends to be what we study, because it's easiest to measure, but inequality manifests along every line you can think of: economic (both income and wealth), gender, sexual orientation, race, nationality, geography, etc., etc. To grossly simplify, as inequality worsens, the different rungs on the social status ladder get farther apart, and we become more anxious about where we stand relative to others. Of course, that status ladder isn't solely determined by economics, but economic conditions exacerbate other forms of status. Here's a passage from a recent article that I think illustrates this fairly well: I totally agree that inequality can be a driving factor for status anxiety. And I believe that addressing the inequality is a major step that we have to take as a society. I'm just not convinced that it is the major contributor to the problem of populism. If you look at the history of racist politics, it always occurs when those with less status push for more equality. An example is the rise of Confederate Monuments. The majority of them were built during the Jim Crow era. The next biggest spike was during the Civil Rights movement. Both were a form of pushback by openly racist politics and occurred during different economical conditions. Even here in Ontario, one can look at the election of Mike Harris in part as a response to the social progress made by Rae. There is also a long history of racist exclusion of Blacks and other people of colour from labour movements, during times of hardship or ease. And look at the treatment of Ida B Wells by other women in the suffrage movement. The intersection of economic equality, racism, gender, sexuality, and other identifiers is complicated. I just think that the economic portion plays a smaller role than the general racism and that addressing economics will do very little to appease the significant portion of white society driven by their values for white supremacy. At best, improving economic status for everyone reduces some peoples tendency to embrace racism, but aggravates those who fully embrace their prejudices to hate the fact that PoC and women benefited from the economic boost as well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:Well, the good news is we seem to be heading in that direction, the bad news is there's a lot of 'em and they're getting madder because of it. pure democracy doesn't work though
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Typo posted:pure democracy doesn't work though What does that mean
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
"The worsening conditions for almost all but the very rich is leading to an increase in populism, racism and other forms of tribalism! They're even advocating for rounding up immigrants and minorities and putting them into prison!" "The solution is obvious; gently caress white men and also hire more women guards." Half this thread nods and applauds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
What is pure democracy? PR isn't direct democracy, it's just more granular representation than FPTP. It's not as if the extremist elements disappear when they can't form a party, they just become the radical wings of established mainstream parties. They're still there, their MPs/MPPs still get seats, but based on brand recognition of the larger organization. EvilJoven posted:"The solution is obvious; gently caress white men and also hire more women guards." Why is it you think acknowledging social justice means this? What part of "white men have considerable privilege over other demographic groups in our society, maybe it's time we gave others a leg up too" translates to "well gently caress me then" in your mind? infernal machines fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Jun 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
Typo posted:pure democracy doesn't work though Every previous civilization on earth and thus every type of government has collapsed at one point or another. It's not about whether it 'worked' or not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Dukemont posted:Every previous civilization on earth and thus every type of government has collapsed at one point or another. but certain government types worked a lot better than other ones, constitutional parliamentary monarchies for instance works a lot better than absolute monarchies, even if both collapses at some point
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:This looks good now until the Republicans hold the House and Senate in 2018 and Trump wins re-election in 2020 because the Democrats still haven't built any serious platform to run on other than "Trump is bad" this is because the democrats don't actually care that much about what trump's doing, they're only mad that he's being rude about it hell obama was doing a lot of the same poo poo, he just wasn't doing it as openly
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
Obviously you can advocate for economic equality and social issues simultaneously. Liberal politicians don't do the former because it's going to take away their ticket to getting rich. The hosed up thing is that the part of the electorate that are racist, white supremacist, whatever will still vote for progressives if its in their economic best interests to do so. To take the states as an example, a friend of mine canvassing in Pennsylvania in 2008 got a lot of "yeah don't worry, we're voting for the <n-word>" style responses from white households because Obama was was perceived at the time as the best economic hope for them at the time. 8 years later Pennsylvania went Republican and not because misogyny against Clinton overwhelmed racism against Obama, but because, given power, the Democrats had thrown the working class to the wolves while protecting the financial sector from retribution. loving Texas sent Democrats to their senate till the 90s until Bill Clinton's full neoliberal takeover of thr party and destruction of the old union base handed it over to the Republicans. Tldr, terrible racist people can, have and will vote for progressive/left wing candidates as long as they offer economic hope for them. Given the choice of nothing but lovely neoliberalism everywhere, they'll indulge their worst impulses. That's how you get Brexit and Trump. Mark Blyth had a great video with corresponding stats to back it up but I forgot how to find it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:When was the last time a party in Germany has won an outright majority in government and hasn't had to negotiate a coalition to form government? If I read your original post correctly you are arguing against PR because the AfD make it harder to form government in Germany when that is an outlier in one of the most stable democracies in the world. The only time it happened was Adenauer in 1957. What evidence do you have that the AfD is an outlier? They and Die Linke are polling higher than their performance in September.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:51
|
|
|
Typo posted:but certain government types worked a lot better than other ones, constitutional parliamentary monarchies for instance works a lot better than absolute monarchies, even if both collapses at some point By what metric did these governments 'work' better than others, is it stability? longevity? because they restricted democracy? Who did these governments work better for?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Fascism is primarily an ideology of the scared middle class. Also the main argument against PR based on fears of fascism completely fails when it's obvious that lacking this, fascists just infiltrate and take over mainstream right wing parties and drive them to the right. Congrats, you managed to avoid having an official nazi party by ensuring that your conservatives are putting power in the hands of an actual nazi anyway. quote:Who did these governments work better for? They work very good at upholding privilege
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
Dukemont posted:By what metric did these governments 'work' better than others, is it stability? longevity? because they restricted democracy? if the fact that constitutional monarchies worked better than absolute monarchies isn't obvious to you I don't think it's productive to explain it or go into a post-modernist definition defining roundabout
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:because the Democrats still haven't built any serious platform to run on other than "Trump is bad" they kinda have actually: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/29/immigration-dominating-gop-tv-ads-house-contests/638063002/ quote:Democrats, meanwhile, are bombarding voters with ads that promise to protect Obamacare, shore up Social Security, and expand Medicare, the data from Kantar’s Campaign Media Analysis Group (CMAG) shows. Democrats are basically running on the traditional platform or defending and expanding government programs, the national democratic party is garbage at messaging but individual candidates are doing pretty well at it tekz posted:loving Texas sent Democrats to their senate till the 90s until Bill Clinton's full neoliberal takeover of thr party and destruction of the old union base handed it over to the Republicans. that's more a dixiecrat holdover than anything: southern democrats they voted for were pretty economically right-wing and signed onto President Reagan's tax cuts and neoliberalism by the 1980s https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/30/business/reagan-s-3-year-25-cut-in-tax-rate-voted-by-wide-margins-in-the-house-and-senate.html quote:In a decisive victory for President Reagan, the House of Representatives today approved the Administration's tax cut bill. But I digress, dun wanna turn this into another USPOL chat thread Typo fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Jun 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:PCs joining the Libs in campaigning for the NDP Why is "for the people" written in Orange? Is Doug an NDP plant!?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Why is "for the people" written in Orange? Is Doug an NDP plant!? The "READY TO GOVERN" refers to the PC and is thus in blue. The "FOR THE PEOPLE" refers to the NDP and is orange. I don't know why Ford did that, but kudos for his relative honesty 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:24
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:What is pure democracy? OTOH it's way harder for them to appear in parliament because fringe parts of the population are distributed throughout large areas, it's harder to crack the ~30% barrier or so you need in a multiplicity of ridings than it is for those 5-10% to simply vote Trillium or w/e and get that much percentage of the seats in the legislature no matter where they are located it could also be argued that PR reduces the incentive for coalition building and lead to to a much more fractured legislature, and thus things pass alot less. quote:They're still there, their MPs/MPPs still get seats, but based on brand recognition of the larger organization. Internal party discipline means they are unlikely to be able to hold the budget or regular government actions hostage to their own weird agendas, the party whip can force their vote when push comes to shove. This is much more relevant in parliamentary systems (as oppose to america) where parties still hold a lot of power over their caucuses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:31
|
|
|
Typo posted:if the fact that constitutional monarchies worked better than absolute monarchies isn't obvious to you I don't think it's productive to explain it or go into a post-modernist definition defining roundabout I understand your point but I fundamentally disagree. I don't think that the people are necessarily better represented under a constitutional monarchy than an absolute monarchy, or that one objectively 'works' better than the other. Can you definitively say that a constitutional monarchy will be of more benefit to the people than an absolute monarchy? Or does it just continue to represent those with power at the expense of those without? I ask with what metrics you judge whether a government 'works better' than another because what is the ultimate end here?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CBCPolitics/status/1004060708550606849 Cautious optimism! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
So weird, all the tweets from this account other than retweets are NDP/York, nothing on other policies or PCs https://twitter.com/OntLiberal/status/1004033078283546625 https://twitter.com/OntLiberal/status/1004067922287955968
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
Tertiary Stresses posted:I totally agree that inequality can be a driving factor for status anxiety. And I believe that addressing the inequality is a major step that we have to take as a society. I'm just not convinced that it is the major contributor to the problem of populism. If you look at the history of racist politics, it always occurs when those with less status push for more equality. An example is the rise of Confederate Monuments. The majority of them were built during the Jim Crow era. The next biggest spike was during the Civil Rights movement. Both were a form of pushback by openly racist politics and occurred during different economical conditions. Even here in Ontario, one can look at the election of Mike Harris in part as a response to the social progress made by Rae. The history of organized labour and racism contains plenty of dark chapters and yet unions were often major proponents of expanding civil rights and making them a plank of the Democratic party platform. The CIO and UAW played a significant role as members of the New Deal coalition in setting the stage for the Democratic party to become the principal champion of civil rights from the 1960s onward. This isn't to say that unions or the labour movement should be immune from criticism for the significant and enduring racism they've perpetrated at various points in their history up to the present day, but on the balance they were an important force for fighting racism and for making anti-racism a distinctive part of post world war II liberal ideology in the United States. Go back to the pre-New Deal era before organized labour was a major player and it's more often than not the Republicans who are closer to being an anti-racist party. Organized labour played a role in changing that. quote:The intersection of economic equality, racism, gender, sexuality, and other identifiers is complicated. I just think that the economic portion plays a smaller role than the general racism and that addressing economics will do very little to appease the significant portion of white society driven by their values for white supremacy. At best, improving economic status for everyone reduces some peoples tendency to embrace racism, but aggravates those who fully embrace their prejudices to hate the fact that PoC and women benefited from the economic boost as well. What do you suppose the role of Fox News, right-wing talk radio, the billionaire funded alt-right/alt-light and various other paid media provocateurs have played over the last few decades? How does your analysis account for the fact that wealthy individuals defend their inequitable share of society's wealth by lavishly funding and providing platforms toward prominent racist right-wingers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
So what else is going on in Ontario this week
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
MikeSevigny posted:So what else is going on in Ontario this week So... she has to take June and July off?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
MikeSevigny posted:So what else is going on in Ontario this week so this is an analogue for the election right? except for the part where she loses her license obvsly
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
tekz posted:I'd say the "harmless centrists" seem to be getting more and more right wing with each year. I'd agree that all the major parties move further in support of big business every year. Just like the Dems in the USA, more and more they are committed to loving regular people to help out big business. The Libs in Canada haven't gone further right on social issues, but have definitely been more and more about big business above all else. You could even say the NDP under Mulcair was going further right economically then historically they would have. The only good thing I can really say about Canadian politics on a federal level in the past 5 or 10 years is that by and large, some progressive issues such as gay marriage and abortion aren't even really discussed anymore, they are just now a defacto standard in Canada.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:00
|
|
|
The libs on social issues are merely do-nothing rather than all out opponents. Gay marriage was almost entirely done in the judicial. The federal trans rights bill came from the NDP. Their being do-nothings also means they'll back security theater nonsense like C51 (or very slightly less bad C51, take 2) with regularity if they think it will let them get votes from terrified suburbanites. It also means they have no problem shooting and maiming first nations protesters at the pipelines so long as it doesn't look too bad. Also seriously the main way in which constitutional monarchies are a superior government form is that they can be better at staving off revolution. Not that it saved the July monarchy and it probably won't save the Spanish Bourbons in the long run either because all that means is that they found this one clever trick to save their privileges (republicans and absolute monarchists hate them).
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
tagesschau posted:The only time it happened was Adenauer in 1957. Polls between elections are mostly meaningless and change trends fairly fast depending on the mood of the country. The AfD is an outlier simply based off the last 70 years of German elections, do you think that FPTP would have given them more or less seats?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:06
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:Also seriously the main way in which constitutional monarchies are a superior government form is that they can be better at staving off revolution. Not that it saved the July monarchy and it probably won't save the Spanish Bourbons in the long run either because all that means is that they found this one clever trick to save their privileges (republicans and absolute monarchists hate them). Canada has a constitutional monarchy
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:06
|
|
|
Typo posted:Canada has a constitutional monarchy So far so good on the revolution front!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
Kevin O'Leary is going to try and get election laws changed because he's a huge loving moron that racked up half a million in debt over a leadership campaign. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-kevin-oleary-says-hell-go-to-court-to-challenge-election-laws-over/ quote:Kevin O’Leary says he is prepared to go to court to fight Canada’s election laws that prevent him from personally paying down debt from his failed federal Conservative leadership bid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:08
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:Polls between elections are mostly meaningless and change trends fairly fast depending on the mood of the country. The AfD is an outlier simply based off the last 70 years of German elections, do you think that FPTP would have given them more or less seats? I'm going to stave off that answer by saying the outright numbers would look worse in FPTP: AfD won the popular vote in Saxony outright on list seats and would probably have swept most of the state rather than just 3 rural districts. It would also have been in a position to win majorly in states where it got none of the district seats by virtue of winning the popular vote there. quote:Canada has a constitutional monarchy And one failed revolution in the 19th century that contributed to the broader adoption of constitutionalism and entrenched the royal family.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm really not down with them getting rid of the financing your goddamn campaign laws that keep the super rich from ruling Canada any more than they do. That said, I love watching Kevin O'Leary flounder, goddamn I hate that guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:40 |
|
|
Typo posted:it could also be argued that PR reduces the incentive for coalition building and lead to to a much more fractured legislature, and thus things pass alot less.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2018 20:38
|
|
