|
Jeza posted:I will say that extreme levels of rising inequality and stagnation in quality of life for the majority leaves people with simmering resentment which often channels into blaming the 'other'. The alt right is certainly right about one thing which is that a very contented status quo of socially liberal but economically pro-free market politicians and leaders have with one hand lined their pockets and with the other have pushed down and silenced a racist and poverty stricken underclass who have now had a backlash in elections. If you don't come from money, roughly 18-24 and having gotten into a good college after having good preparation in high-school, any expectation of gainful employment is basically a fantasy. These people voted for the left when it had a chance and the left did everything it could to sabotage the choice after stomping on them and the only choice left was a criminal willing to pander and a criminal who already hosed them over while pissing on them. The problem is capitalism, racism is a symptom. The bourgeois never hesitated to hire to the klan to strike break anyone that started noticing the capitalist class is a mutual enemy, and even now, as shown in the incoherence of your argument, will exploit racism to defend capitalism.
|
# ¿ Aug 13, 2017 17:38 |
|
|
# ¿ May 21, 2024 14:28 |
|
Jeza posted:Nice meltdown, and also reading comprehension if you believe that post somehow was pro-Democrat or capitalism. drat these "non-nonsensical" DnD posters. I can't even follow this rambling screed. Pembroke Fuse posted:I think you guys are saying the same thing, more or less. Economic failure of the capitalist system for some segments of society and betrayal of the working class by their supposed center-left defenders contributes to racism. I guess I would say on Nov. 8th, the actual support for racism came from a variety sources however, most of them being lower middle class. Black people don't vote Republican because they're racist, not because the Republican party is actively hostile in terms of policy and engagement. That's so stupid that nobody that's not a Republican would actually say that, but if you kaleidoscope the poor into being the foot soldiers of racewar, you're able to come up with justifications that are completely insane and nobody bats an eye if it suits a political narrative in which you aren't effectively in league with villains If you really think about it, the landless, the slaves, and the debtors are what caused the collapse of Rome. Sneakster fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Aug 13, 2017 |
# ¿ Aug 13, 2017 18:35 |
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I don't know why you're attacking me. Pembroke Fuse posted:I'm not trying to paint the poor as anything. Economic dislocation and disengagement definitely leads to a variety of terrible outcomes, including racism. That said, "the poor" are not a monolith and not free of agency. Some poor white people have made a specific set of decisions about how they're going to disengage from the system and in what direction they're going to go. Instead of becoming more radically leftist, they chose, to a certain extent, to become more radically right-wing. Alienation does not necessitate listing towards fascism and being a victim of the economic system does not preclude you from becoming a foot soldier in a race war. The SturmAbteilung recruited heavily from the working classes as well. Why are the moral failings of the system somehow made contingent on those who have the least stake in it? They voted for the left most candidate available and the bourgeois did everything possible to remove that choice, yet somehow the poor still take the blame. The poor somehow take the lions share of responsibility for the crimes of the bourgeois.
|
# ¿ Aug 13, 2017 19:11 |
|
Rime posted:Yeah, the point of this thread was definitely not to be America centric or to get caught up in comparisons to Rome (my bad). While discussing America seems unavoidable, as it's currently declining significantly faster than other western nations and its multi-decade stranglehold over the world makes that a big issue, there's plenty of meat to be had in the EU or peripherals such as Canada. I've mentioned this in other threads, and I've been rummaging over starting a thread on it, but it seems relevant to here: I think the future might be essentially the rise of city states. If I'm wrong, please correct me, but my impression of history is that wealth has always congregated in cities and that despite the Americana suburban dream, the reality of the US being a wasteland outside of major cities mirrors the UK being kind of a shithole outside of London, I imagine the same applies to pretty much any country with wealthy urban centers and farmlands largely populated by a serf class that is always down and out to do agricultural labor with cities as trading hubs. The entire planet is urbanizing, and technology is reducing labor necessity, so one question I have is can you really consider the fall of western society as something besides the re emergence of a city-state-centric model of power? (please dismantle my stupidity if I'm completely wrong)
|
# ¿ Aug 13, 2017 19:44 |
|
Pembroke Fuse posted:I agree with this analysis, but the question still remains about why they decided/were compelled by alienation to join extra-political organizations like right-wing militias instead of left-wing militias, communes and the like. They were betrayed by the "left" and the right, but still tilted in a specific direction. asdf32 posted:But a large percentage of poor and working class people supported Trump who has zero to offer them. That's the thing to look at. The particulars of the problems we face aren't anywhere near as interesting as they seem because problems are inevitable (and especially problems of power concentration). You're projecting middle class support for colluding with capitalist interests as the poor supporting people in elections they ignored after the bourgeois stamped out any chance of reformist candidate. You're calling into question the right of the poor to vote for liberals engineering fascism as the only alternative, and that in and of itself was supported by the bourgeois. -> Poor people support socialist candidate -> Bourgeois stamp that out -> Poor people lose hope of reform and ignore election that holds nothing for them -> Bourgeois vote for fascists -> Conclusion: poor people being allowed to vote is the problem. This is insane reasoning. You're projecting capitalist propaganda and expecting a worth while analysis. Apparently the digger revolution didn't work out because of racism, and it turns out the people with the most power and exploitative role in the system are truly the victims of lumpenprole supporting them. If you think about it, the heroes are white middle class liberals. Everyone else is a victim to be saved or a deranged mob.
|
# ¿ Aug 13, 2017 21:05 |