|
Oh i should not forget the media constantly feeding trans and anti trans discourse at every opportunity was not great. Even if you were to be apathetic to the issue, the constant arguing about it would be sure to make you hate it regardless. Coworker of mine keeps bringing it up, tho there is literally no trans and barely any lgbtq anywhere in the area at all. I still hear about different labels on bathrooms, like cmon guys, who the gently caress cares But it seemed for a while that this was the only thing happening on the main left. 
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 04:21 |
|
|
Blut posted:Thats not remotely accurate. That said, the stats point more towards being low-income being somewhat predictive of voting for the Democrats, rather than being high-income being predictive of voting for the Republicans.  Of course the original claim was about wealth, which I haven't been able to find stats on. I wouldn't exactly be surprised if the effect was more pronounced there, given wealth probably correlates a lot better with race than income. Still not on the level of race though, where goes all the way up to ratio of 11:1 in favor of Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 07:10
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:You can't just post an image cutting off the bottom 75% of the thing being claimed to be a predictor and use that as an argument against the claim. I used the first image I saw on google's search results. Low income voters voting more for Trump doesn't change the fact that the claim of "in 2016 wealth was the biggest predictive factor whether someone ended up voting Trump." that I was responding to is just completely factually incorrect. The wealthy voted approx 47% Clinton, 48% Trump. This parity was very much not the case for a whole load of other predictive demographic factors, ie Aged 18-29 - 55% Clinton, 36% Trump African Americans - 89% Clinton, 9% Trump Immigration the most cared for issue - 33% Clinton, 64% Trump College graduate - 57% Clinton, 37% Trump Evangelical Christian - 16% Clinton, 77% Trump etc. There are literally a huge number of far more predictive demographic factors. High wealth was if anything one of the least predictive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 14:16
|
|
|
Kale posted:Funny how fascism seemed dead in the water before social media and now seemingly every election everywhere has an open faacist as a leading contender to form a government or outright winning elections despite failing miserably many times in the past before the onslaught of fascist propaganda and fear mongering on most major social media platforms became so common place and influential Fascism was dead in the water because back then it still meant fascism. Today all kinds of right wing politics routinely get branded as fascism so naturally you see more of it everywhere. A Buttery Pastry posted:Yeah, it's not like liberalism in the EU hadn't already started capitulating to these people at a fundamental level back during the early 2000s, accepting the premise that immigrants were a major issue that all of politics should center around. And then a decent chunk of Europe went on a crusade, that was carried by the mainstream media. A crusade started by a president installed by a coup, whose administration would normalize torture, and which pushed various authoritarian domestic policies that no one has bothered trying to really roll back. If they did all that with no real social media, it probably doesn't make much sense to blame the current crop on social media. Immigrants were and still are a major issue. From one side of the continent to the other, from elections to elections, voters want less immigration. It's the immigration, stupid.* *it's a phrase, not calling this poster stupid I heard from many people over the years how they felt unsafe in immigrant-rich areas of big European cities. Maybe it was their racism speaking, but it was their personal, first-hand experience. They weren't regurgitating hate speech fed to them by a shadowy cabal of evil millionaires. Blaming the rich and the media, generally speaking, is actually a nationalist/authoritarian strategy. Like listening to Vucic or Orban. The left simply doesn't have a response to the anti-immigration sentiment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 14:23
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:Fascism was dead in the water because back then it still meant fascism. Today all kinds of right wing politics routinely get branded as fascism so naturally you see more of it everywhere. I think its probably more accurate to say the left by and large does have a response to the anti-immigration sentiment - its to call anyone espousing it racist and/or ignorant and/or uneducated. The problem is this doesn't actually win people back to their cause in any way. What the modern left-wing parties generally don't do is actually address the fears of working class people of more strain on social housing/welfare, more competition for entry level jobs, more crowding in underfunded schools and hospitals, more competition for private housing, increased crime locally, fear of terrorism, fear of local cultural/social change etc. Some of those fears are more valid than others, but they're all hugely felt in the working and middle classes across most of Europe these days. You very rarely see modern left-wing politician reliably and honestly address them though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 14:54
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:Fascism was dead in the water because back then it still meant fascism. Today all kinds of right wing politics routinely get branded as fascism so naturally you see more of it everywhere. If you think that liberal use of "fascist" to describe any brand of right-wing authoritarianism is a recent invention I have to assume that you bought your SA account as a toddler. quote:Immigrants were and still are a major issue. From one side of the continent to the other, from elections to elections, voters want less immigration. It's the immigration, stupid.* The left has perfectly good answers to anti-immigration sentiments (such as that the mass waves of immigration following 2011 are a result of interventionism, economic exploitation and imperialism in the middle east and africa). The point that was being made that you missed is that the left is not competing on a fair playing field in the marketplace of ideas, but in an environment that capital has every incentive to mobilise its resources to present the left in a negative light and promote other alternative answers to anti-immigration sentiments, such as ethnonationalism, that will oppose the left and preserve property rights.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 15:08
|
|
|
Blut posted:What the modern left-wing parties generally don't do is actually address the fears of working class people of more strain on social housing/welfare, more competition for entry level jobs, more crowding in underfunded schools and hospitals, more competition for private housing, increased crime locally, fear of terrorism, fear of local cultural/social change etc. I'm pretty sure the 2019 Labour manifesto addressed a lot of that, but the media decided to screech about Jeremy "adolf hitler" Corbyn instead for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 15:10
|
|
|
Blut posted:I used the first image I saw on google's search results. Anyway, like I said, I don't doubt your conclusion about wealth not being the largest determinant - but you've not actually disproven it with the stats you've posted. Not that it's your job to disprove, but the Pope's job to prove. Doctor Malaver posted:Fascism was dead in the water because back then it still meant fascism. Today all kinds of right wing politics routinely get branded as fascism so naturally you see more of it everywhere. Like YF-23 said, the left actually does have answers to these questions, it's just that they're not super palatable to people on the economic right, nor to people who just hate other people who are different. The latter group isn't that big though, unless they're feeling they're in a competition for dwindling resources due to the economic right setting up that scenario to cover the fact that they're the ones everyone else is actually in competition with. *They admitted it in the media. Doctor Malaver posted:They weren't regurgitating hate speech fed to them by a shadowy cabal of evil millionaires. Blaming the rich and the media, generally speaking, is actually a nationalist/authoritarian strategy. Like listening to Vucic or Orban.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 15:51
|
|
|
I mean yeah the Tory government as came in in 2010 was right-wing and authoritarian but not fascist, but the Tory party of 2023, and I'd argue many right wing parties worldwide post-covid, has a large, powerful and vocal actual-fascist wing. Like memorial day two weeks back had white supremacists storm the cenotaph at armistice hour because our home secretary told them the police were leftist agitators because they wouldn't ban a peaceful demonstration she demanded they ban because it had brown people in it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
sinky posted:I'm pretty sure the 2019 Labour manifesto addressed a lot of that, but the media decided to screech about Jeremy "adolf hitler" Corbyn instead for some reason. Sir this is the EU politics thread, Brexit means Brexit  A Buttery Pastry posted:Do you actually have the numbers for wealth? Because like I mentioned, we're talking income if we're going off the posted charts, which is not at all the same. Wealth skews older, and skews heavily white, and the skew towards white people is even greater amongst the old. Income is not the same as wealth no, but if you take the top 6% of income in a country (ie one of the groups in the image I posted) that will correlate heavily with the wealthiest say 10% of people in the country. There aren't any vote breakdowns done in the US by household wealth for the 2016 election that I've ever seen anyway, income is the closest proxy commonly used. Which again does further disprove his point that wealth is "the biggest predictive factor".
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 17:18
|
|
|
It doesn't matter anyway, both democrats and republicans are right-wing parties. The US capitalist class didn't need to support Trump in 2016 because the alternative to him was practically synonymous with the bourgeois establishment. If the democrats hadn't been able to silence left-wing dissent and it was a Trump vs Sanders contest, you'd have definitely seen capital polarise towards Trump - and I say this as someone who doesn't consider Bernie as anything more than a centrist social-democrat, not as a left-wing candidate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:If you think that liberal use of "fascist" to describe any brand of right-wing authoritarianism is a recent invention I have to assume that you bought your SA account as a toddler. Using fascist as a throwaway insult certainly has a long tradition, but today the word is used as a matter of fact. Many on the left consider Meloni, Wilders etc to be literal fascists. quote:The left has perfectly good answers to anti-immigration sentiments (such as that the mass waves of immigration following 2011 are a result of interventionism, economic exploitation and imperialism in the middle east and africa). The point that was being made that you missed is that the left is not competing on a fair playing field in the marketplace of ideas, but in an environment that capital has every incentive to mobilise its resources to present the left in a negative light and promote other alternative answers to anti-immigration sentiments, such as ethnonationalism, that will oppose the left and preserve property rights. That's not an answer, as in something actionable that would make a difference to the voter. It's an explanation, at best. As for the capital successfully killing the the left ideas... That's just a blanket statement that proves my point. Did it happen in literally every country that now has a right government? When you don't have an (actionable, difference-making) answer, just throw accusations around. As we could see with anti-vaxxers, anti-establishment and anti-capital ideas can spread and get a strong foothold despite the heaviest possible bombardment from state and corporate media. And even if the playing field isn't exactly 50-50, well it isn't 1-99 either. Chomsky, Piketty, Thurnberg or whoever you choose as an authority of the left, do get exposure. If a charismatic socialist politician with a proposal to solve the immigration crisis appeared, millions would listen. A Buttery Pastry posted:Counterpoint: Following our center-right party deciding to embrace the far right, they deliberately undermined integration efforts to stoke up anti-immigrant sentiments*, to undermine their main rivals the social democrats. Ignoring the fact that anti-Muslim sentiment obviously got a ton of play in the early 2000s, the fact that politicians materially affected immigrant communities so they would become scarier means that even a theoretical voter who never heard a single media born viewpoint would still become more scared during that period. That's not an inevitable outcome of immigration, that's a result of deliberate choices. I appreciate the counterpoint. Where was this, Denmark? Any links? quote:This is just unserious. Yes, blaming it on a shadowy cabal of evil millionaires I might give you as a nationalist/authoritarian strategy, but no one on the left thinks they're shadowy. The position of leftists is that all this happens right in the open because these people have no reason to act that covertly. Yes, the shadowy cabal was a joke, aimed at the fact that the left got very proficient at finding enemies and culprits but much less so at finding solutions. For every post/article/discussion I heard about... quote:more strain on social housing/welfare, more competition for entry level jobs, more crowding in underfunded schools and hospitals, more competition for private housing, increased crime locally, fear of terrorism, fear of local cultural/social change etc. ...I heard 20 that were just throwing around accusations of racism, nazism, capitalism, liberalism, etc
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Anyway, like I said, I don't doubt your conclusion about wealth not being the largest determinant - but you've not actually disproven it with the stats you've posted. Not that it's your job to disprove, but the Pope's job to prove. You're right. Frustratingly, I can't find the source that claimed wealth was the biggest indicator of being a Trump supporter. What I did find is that the wealthier brackets do have an outsized effect on the outcome of the election because they tend to vote more despite having smaller numbers. Since I can't find the source of my original statement, I've got to say I'm probably more on board with your and Blut's rebuttals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 18:31
|
|
|
wealth used to be a predictor of which party you'd vote for but the D's caught up to the R's in the last two decades. D policies since the 90s just aren't that scary to the wealthy anymore and can focus on social issues which many wealthy folks care about. it's not a monolith though, and the different ways people come into their wealth is still a predictor. business owners still vote R; wealthy people in arts, white-collar jobs that require advanced degrees, and more recently wealth management and finance vote D. these D demos would have been Rockefeller Republicans in the 70s when the Democrat demographics were still based around the urban proletariat and deep south.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:That's not an answer, as in something actionable that would make a difference to the voter. It's an explanation, at best. It is absolutely actionable to oppose the causes of issues. It is harder and requires an international effort as one country not supporting the war on terror or intevention during the arab spring isn't going to stop those things from happening, but it is the actual honest answer as to how you avoid impoverished refugees from war-torn countries fleeing to greener pastures: you avoid creating war-torn countries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:As for the capital successfully killing the the left ideas... That's just a blanket statement that proves my point. Did it happen in literally every country that now has a right government? When you don't have an (actionable, difference-making) answer, just throw accusations around. As we could see with anti-vaxxers, anti-establishment and anti-capital ideas can spread and get a strong foothold despite the heaviest possible bombardment from state and corporate media. And even if the playing field isn't exactly 50-50, well it isn't 1-99 either. Chomsky, Piketty, Thurnberg or whoever you choose as an authority of the left, do get exposure. If a charismatic socialist politician with a proposal to solve the immigration crisis appeared, millions would listen. Doctor Malaver posted:I appreciate the counterpoint. Where was this, Denmark? Any links? Doctor Malaver posted:Yes, the shadowy cabal was a joke, aimed at the fact that the left got very proficient at finding enemies and culprits but much less so at finding solutions. For every post/article/discussion I heard about... Blut posted:Income is not the same as wealth no, but if you take the top 6% of income in a country (ie one of the groups in the image I posted) that will correlate heavily with the wealthiest say 10% of people in the country. Pope Hilarius II posted:You're right. Frustratingly, I can't find the source that claimed wealth was the biggest indicator of being a Trump supporter. What I did find is that the wealthier brackets do have an outsized effect on the outcome of the election because they tend to vote more despite having smaller numbers. Since I can't find the source of my original statement, I've got to say I'm probably more on board with your and Blut's rebuttals. https://www.vox.com/2014/4/18/5624310/martin-gilens-testing-theories-of-american-politics-explained I would be very interested to see a similar study in Europe.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Like, where are the actual solutions presented by the right to the question of immigration? Hell, the very framing of immigration as the issue is doing this, if the actual issue is things like economic prospects and social cohesion. Real solutions? None. But they can offer the simple and straightforward answer of "ban/severely limit immigration", and that alone is winning over a lot of people. Real, more complex solutions that are hard to implement are a much harder sell for the left, even when they actually attempt to deliver them and don't just get stuck calling the far right fascists and racists.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
The right always has a particular Solution, it's just thankfully still unpalatable to enough of the electorate... for now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
It turns out that when it comes to political campaigns, lying about what you are going to do, or even have the power to do so, is more successful than trying to present constructive ideas. Geert Wilders won't be able to block EU travel, or have a Nexit that leads to prosperity, but that doesn't stop him from selling dreamt-up scenarios. The center(-right) prefers to chase the dreams instead of proving them impossible, lending them more credibility.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 19:16
|
|
|
I look forward to Nexit and the UK and the Nederlands trading our unwanted useless poo poo back and forth. I want it to be clear that that isn't me being horrible about immigrants, although it would be extremely on brand for us to arrange to deport all the immigrants between the two countries in an Orwellian charade of "solving" the crisis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 19:47
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:It is absolutely actionable to oppose the causes of issues. It is harder and requires an international effort as one country not supporting the war on terror or intevention during the arab spring isn't going to stop those things from happening, but it is the actual honest answer as to how you avoid impoverished refugees from war-torn countries fleeing to greener pastures: you avoid creating war-torn countries. Yes but that doesn't mean much to the voter. If his complaint is that he's uncomfortable to let his kids walk to school through the neighborhood, and your response is "we shouldn't have supported the campaign against Libya 10 years ago, even though it would not have mattered in the end" then you would be better off not saying anything. A Buttery Pastry posted:Millions did listen in the UK, and he got monstered by the press and sabotaged by senior politicians in his own party. Ideas alone do not define politics. Corbyn is very well known and much cited. Do you have other such examples? quote:You post this like every group on the political spectrum isn't doing this, just with different enemies. Like, where are the actual solutions presented by the right to the question of immigration? Hell, the very framing of immigration as the issue is doing this, if the actual issue is things like economic prospects and social cohesion. I post this because I lean left and I'm on a leftist forum and the left idea is in decline across the board. If I were a right voter I wouldn't have to complain about inept responses because we'd be winning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 20:35
|
|
|
greece also had a very popular radical-left government which ran into rather strong institutional barriers. whenever there's a leftward turn in europe, the neoliberalised social democrats either win out or completely collapse and have the social-liberal/technocratic wing cannibalised by explicit centrists. this is going to take several more cycles to start seriously benefiting the socialist left. in addition there really is a lot of money and influence and careers in working to discredit socialist thinking. the atlas network of think-tanks alone is a large, consciously and explicitly anti-socialist endeavour with more formal resources than the entire radical-left (as in, left of the surviving S&D parties) movement in the western sphere, and it's one (though arguably the largest) project out of many. at the end of the day capitalism is actively killing us all through its structual and essential commitment to exponential consumption growth, and as the US-led imperial sphere continues to founder the exploitation at home will have to intensify. this will likely lead to a reconsolidation of the labour movement in a non-neoliberal direction in the longer term. this is all in a ~20-year perspective, though - after the breaking of the corbyn-sanders wave of left-wing neoinstitutionalism, the radical left is quite dead for now. if you're interested in political projects which are likely to be successful (in the sense of forming governments etc) in the short term, the left is a risky proposition
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 21:53
|
|
|
Yup, EU really works as a strong additional buffer for neoliberal politics in Europe so even if there's political will to change things in member state, they will be going against EU next even if they were able to win against domestic bourgeoise politics. It really is a Catch 22. As long as we live in global neoliberal order, being member of EU makes sense because it allows European countries to work efficiently within that same framework (ie. enjoying the benefits of free trade and global supply chains while getting hit with austerity and, well being dependent on those same supply chains meaning EU is also vulnerable to disruptions there). But because EU embodies neoliberal dogma, it also strongly deters all other policy alternatives, so we're stuck with neoliberal dogma. I really see only two ways out of this precarious status quo. Either EU moves towards closer integration and gets the power to implement efficient common fiscal policy (none of these half assed support packages that demand years of negotiations between members). That would mean opening up EU politics to alternatives to neoliberalism, like counter cyclical spending instead of constant austerity etc.. Now that of course means that leftist forces would need to gain control of Commission, EP and Council, so enough countries would need to have leftist shift at the same time. And that's a very difficult thing to pull. But either way, EU wouldn't stand in the way of leftist politics institutionally anymore because now there'd actually be institutional venue to push pan-European politics that aren't inherently neoliberal. Call this leftist reformism or something, I don't know. Or dismantling the Union so that European countries now have freedom to push more radical change in domestic policies. As I understand this was the core argument for brexit movement on the left in UK. But that of course puts European countries more at the mercy of big global players because then there wouldn't be any framework to push for common European interests anymore. So for example no more EP and Commission saying 'gently caress off' to America tech giants when they want flex their monopolistic power. At least until European countries with now leftist politics start banding together to form EUSSR. Or far right countries form Fortress Europa. Or whatever. Most likely EU will just keep holding on to status quo with dear life until some exogenous shocks force either of those options on Europe. Surely it wont happen because Europeans or our leaders proactively choose to do either willingly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2023 23:20
|
|
|
An insane mind posted:The amount of comments on Dutch newssites going yes finally we the right can fix the problems the left gave us make me want to shake someone and scream. I don't know why they figure the government won't descend to insanely petty infighting and score settling poo poo almost immediately and be unablento accomplis much like most of these right wing governments that are all the rage these days have
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Kale posted:Funny how fascism seemed dead in the water before social media and now seemingly every election everywhere has an open faacist as a leading contender to form a government or outright winning elections despite failing miserably many times in the past before the onslaught of fascist propaganda and fear mongering on most major social media platforms became so common place and influential I agree with the rest of the posters that really the breakdown of neoliberalism and the lack of a leftist bulwark in Europe has opened the floodgates for the return of the far right, but I wouldn't dismiss your post out of a hand. Social media has a created a level of propaganda saturation that right-wing regimes of the mid-20th century would have killed for, not to mention the capacity for mass surveillance. In the past, ideologically committed people had their newspapers and magazines and books as well as their clubs and social events, but it required a certain time commitment to radicalize and spread extremist ideologies. Now you have so many streams of disinfo online, that people can literally do nothing but stew in nonstop agitprop online. You can slack your way to Nazism. There's a also a much higher saturation of very fringe ideas being mainstreamed relatively quickly (you don't have to check out a book at the library to get plugged into crazy conspiracy theories anymore). The fact that most largescale media is owned by neo-liberal people and institutions or right-wing capitalists doesn't help because you have this dichotomy of crazy reactionary influencers online and self-deluded out-of-touch mainstream media that everyone knows is kind of a joke. I wouldn't want to push this too far because of all the other historically-rooted reasons why we're here. But the Internet has been gangbusters for demagogues and charlatans and the idea of a widely accepted mainstream narrative is dead. Love Rat fucked around with this message at 22:50 on Nov 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2023 22:47
|
|
|
Social media also amplifies popular sentiments that people know they shouldn't believe in. In decent company they wouldn't admit to voting for the "kick out all immigrants" party because it's understood to be an inhumane position. But now they see the xenophobe they voted for get 1/4th of the votes, they see 15 people in their wider neighborhood telling Moroccans to go back to Turkey and they get more confidence in their chosen beliefs to not be so abhorrent anymore. 50 years ago those thoughts also existed, but they got filtered through the editor finishing the "reader letters" section, or copious amounts of alcohol in a bar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 11:00
|
|
|
At the same time social media makes it a lot easier to be exposed to left-wing objections and counterarguments to all of those things, where in the past you'd need to be buying socialist papers (and, depending on where you lived, end up on a list because of it). And to the extent that right-wing narratives lean on disinformation, social media's mass enabling of citizen journalism is actually a huge problem for them; it's a lot harder to spin police brutality in a positive light when it gets uploaded on video from multiple angles by people that just happened to be there, for example. I would say that social media is far from a net positive for the right; it's an arena that it has used effectively in the past, but I don't think it is structurally built to favour them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 11:37
|
|
|
Blaming social media in 2023 for the right of the anti-immigrant right in Europe is also a bit like blaming the radio for Hitler's rise in 1933. Sure, the technology undoubtedly helps amplify the message. But its the underlying economic and social factors that are the real driving force, not the media.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 13:07
|
|
|
social media definitely boosts the far right, but even with the amplification, it's hard to see what boost there'd be to neoliberals on social media for something like "better things aren't possible, like if you agree!" here's the dutch youth vote in parliament seats btw https://twitter.com/PopulismUpdates/status/1728154933973663850 ("youth" doing a bit of work here with ages up to 35) kliras fucked around with this message at 13:16 on Nov 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 13:13
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:At the same time social media makes it a lot easier to be exposed to left-wing objections and counterarguments to all of those things, where in the past you'd need to be buying socialist papers (and, depending on where you lived, end up on a list because of it). And to the extent that right-wing narratives lean on disinformation, social media's mass enabling of citizen journalism is actually a huge problem for them; it's a lot harder to spin police brutality in a positive light when it gets uploaded on video from multiple angles by people that just happened to be there, for example. I would say that social media is far from a net positive for the right; it's an arena that it has used effectively in the past, but I don't think it is structurally built to favour them. The underlying problem is of course capitalism. If the top 10 websites most people visited wouldn't be controlled by multi-billionaire corporations, I don't doubt left-wing messages would be a bit more popular in TYOOL 2023.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 14:06
|
|
|
Pope Hilarius II posted:The underlying problem is of course capitalism. If the top 10 websites most people visited wouldn't be controlled by multi-billionaire corporations, I don't doubt left-wing messages would be a bit more popular in TYOOL 2023. In Croatia the top visited site is probably index.hr and it's independent. It's liberal left, with strong anti-corruption and anti-nationalism stance. They don't filter out social care, LGBT, climate, and other left wing topics. But neither do most other top sites that are corporate-owned. And yet we've had a conservative government since forever and we're sliding more right. Croatia doesn't have an issue with immigration but with the recent war so maybe we're an odd case, but I have trouble believing that in all other countries sliding right it's the billionaires steering media anti-left. Unless for you the left-wing messages are "send the rich to guillotines" or "abolish private property" in which case yes, they indeed don't get mentioned much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
kliras posted:social media definitely boosts the far right, but even with the amplification, it's hard to see what boost there'd be to neoliberals on social media for something like "better things aren't possible, like if you agree!" the pvv result is most nutso but DENK and SP are notable here too i say swears online fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Nov 26, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 17:12
|
|
|
Has there ever been anyone studying how much of the rightward drift is just developed countries getting inexorably older on average? I've always thought that was going to become a real headwind against left politics
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
joe football posted:Has there ever been anyone studying how much of the rightward drift is just developed countries getting inexorably older on average? I've always thought that was going to become a real headwind against left politics This question already assumes that age is primary driver of becoming more right wing and even that is nowhere near settled. Also there’s a difference between conservative “let’s keep it like it is” and the rising reactionary movements, which are sometimes even seeking active change.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 17:49
|
|
|
Blut posted:Blaming social media in 2023 for the right of the anti-immigrant right in Europe is also a bit like blaming the radio for Hitler's rise in 1933. ITT people are blaming the social media AND they are blaming the mainstream corporate media. It has to be media 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:In Croatia the top visited site is probably index.hr and it's independent. It's liberal left, with strong anti-corruption and anti-nationalism stance. They don't filter out social care, LGBT, climate, and other left wing topics. But neither do most other top sites that are corporate-owned. And yet we've had a conservative government since forever and we're sliding more right. Croatia doesn't have an issue with immigration but with the recent war so maybe we're an odd case, but I have trouble believing that in all other countries sliding right it's the billionaires steering media anti-left. Doctor Malaver posted:Unless for you the left-wing messages are "send the rich to guillotines" or "abolish private property" in which case yes, they indeed don't get mentioned much. Basically, do they push left wing ideas that are as radical, actionable, and emotionally engaging as what the right does? Or is it all just kind milquetoast, tainted by establishment liberalism to the point that it at best becomes background noise?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
joe football posted:Has there ever been anyone studying how much of the rightward drift is just developed countries getting inexorably older on average? I've always thought that was going to become a real headwind against left politics The post a few above yours shows 41% of Dutch people aged 18-35 voting for a far-right party, so thats not it. Doctor Malaver posted:ITT people are blaming the social media AND they are blaming the mainstream corporate media. It has to be media Its part of the usual "blame anything except our own stances being unpopular" problem with the modern left. Migration is the really obvious one here again - theres currently a lot of things ongoing in Ireland about it currently. Polls showed as of May 2023 75% of the population (and more in working class areas) think Ireland is taking in too many refugees (and thats likely even higher now) - as far as democracy goes thats about as definitive a public opinion as you get. Working class areas of Dublin, and rural areas, have for many months now had rolling anti-migration protests, attracting up to 1000 people per protest. This is for a few reasons mainly: - We've had a string of neoliberal governments since 2011 which have resulted in unprecedented current strain on our social services - schools/hospitals etc - We have the worst housing crisis in the history of the state (12,000 or so Irish homeless people currently), yet we currently have approx 75,000 immigrants being temporarily housed by the state. And even more putting pressure on the private sector rental market. And 1000+ more arriving each week. - About 1/3rd of the people on our long term social housing waiting list are foreign born - which means lots of foreigners are literally ahead of working class Irish people in the queue for desperately needed housing. - Sheer numbers - we had 121,000 immigrants in 2022 for our population of 5million. Taking in more refugees is now both one of the most important issues for most working class people, and one they're very strongly against. But not a single mainstream left-wing party is even discussing the idea that we need to limit immigration in any way. Anyone who even mentions this on the left gets instantly accused of racism. Our further left wing parties are even still calling for Ireland to take in unlimited numbers of migrants, which is obviously a great idea in theory/morally but is just completely impractical logistically, and politically utterly against the wishes of their constituents. This week a male Algerigan immigrant randomly stabbed multiple school children in a working class area, and it resulted in massive rioting locally - it was literally the match that struck the tindering. The riots descended into general looting and burning of police cars etc, which is all our media, and left-wing commentariat, have focused on. There has been no discussion/analysis of why these working class people were set off by the incident - why are they anti-immigration? Why are they so angry? What can we do to listen to them, and fix the problem? Instead all of the focus has been on the evils of social media fuelling the riot and calling the rioters criminals, thugs etc. Its the exact same pattern that has pushed working class people to far-right populists across Europe, and its just shocking to see it still happening today when we have so many obvious examples of it having already happened nearby.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
It's easier to demonize immigrants than to build housing. Neoliberals won't do anything and the right will fan the flames and direct the anger against the most powerless.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 21:52
|
|
|
Blut posted:What the modern left-wing parties generally don't do is actually address the fears of working class people of more strain on social housing/welfare, more competition for entry level jobs, more crowding in underfunded schools and hospitals, more competition for private housing, increased crime locally, fear of terrorism, fear of local cultural/social change etc. We had state elections recently in Germany with huge AFD gains and the polls show the same thing as always: the areas with the best AFD results are rural. These are the areas that don't have a significant number of immigrants and are not much affected by the housing crisis, crime, cultural changes or terrorism. The areas that actually do have these problems, i.e. urban centers, are where AFD got the worst results.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 04:21 |
|
|
mila kunis posted:It's easier to demonize immigrants than to build housing. Neoliberals won't do anything and the right will fan the flames and direct the anger against the most powerless. The cool part is that even left wing parties are refusing to build housing and privately demonizing immigrants while pushing a pro-immigration message. the president of Vooruit, the Flemish social democrat party, just got sacked for saying things so vile about the Roma community while inebriated (for which he was written up by police officers to whom he was ranting about the Roma) that even our right-wing politicians would blush if it got caught on tape. Meanwhile the socialist party (PVBA / PTB) is faring the pro-Putin route of international politics and biting its teeth on "we must find a compromise" and anti-NATO handwringing which don't want to vote for either
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2023 23:25
|
|
