| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:06 TheDwf wrote: But man, that is not what defines far-right. A fascist dictatorship à la 1930's Italy is not the only way a far-right party can govern. True. Were you using 'fascist' in the broader sense then? Because when I hear 'fascists' I always think about Italian 1920 fascists, not in the general definition. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
That's the whole mechanism. Extreme parties don't get in power because people randomly feel extreme some day, they do because people don't perceive them to be extreme anymore. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On May 04 2018 19:59 SoSexy wrote: 1) No. If it were for me, I'd arrest the guys 'defining the border' and I'd arrest the rioters. But you will have a tough time trying to find the crime they committed. Helicopter rent? Attempt at blocking people without documents (therefore illegals) to enter their country? If they throw a single punch, arrest them. But if they are just there, you can't. Which ironically is the same thing that applies to the demonstration in Paris - just there, it's ok. Start burning shit, get fucked. 2) Nice to see some progress here. Once it was 'they have inhumane conditions', now it's 'we are not islands'. Immigration isn't black or white and surely the thing could be organized better. Or do you think that right now France, Italy, EU etc are doing a wonderful job? 3) Useless propaganda point. I could say the same thing about communists - but I prefer to talk and compare ideas, not people. 4) Can't believe you said that. Vandalism damages goods? of course, but you left out that if Pierre gets his goods destroyed, he is going to be affected. Maybe he won't be able to bring his girlfriend to Thoiry, maybe he will have to sell those concert tickets because he will need a bus monthly ticket until repairs are done. Vandalism directly damages goods but indirectly damages people. I can agree on the fact that society is shit and many people are cannon meat. But if you believe that the solution to that is creating more damage, then it's the same as trying to stop a wild fire using gasoline 1) Honestly the State represses a lot of legit demonstrations, so I am sure it can find a way to repel those people. I am not asking for prison, but a far-right group simply doesn't have to "police borders". Note that this is not the first time they try to do this, they had rented a boat to repel migrants' boats in the Mediterranean before... And the weakness of the State's answer clearly made them feel they could try again. 2) I'm afraid we made no progress, I stand by my judgment about our migration policies being inhumane. What I meant is that Europe's position doesn't create a barrier the way being an island in the South-East does. No the EU isn't handling well this at all, and to help they should allocate a part of the common budget to countries who welcome migrants at the prorata of migrants received (they should also stop enforcing austerity so States have money to help integration, etc. but that's another matter). And France should help Italy with the arrivals, but here too the anti-migrant stance dominates (Macron read the results of the Italian election as the proof that his anti-migrants policy was the good choice), so solidarity cannot happen: see, your doctrine is self-defeating since when everyone adopts it, problems get worse for those who are the first in line like you. 4) Yes of course vandalism has an impact on people who lost their goods, but attacking directly someone with a wooden stick or vandalizing his car with the same weapon are still different things, and the former is a more serious fault. 5) I don't endorse those minority methods and neither do most people on the left and in trade unions. They were in fact outraged at seeing May Day being confiscated by those violences. But people who do that listen to no one, they don't listen to parties or trade unions and act on their own while using the general demonstration as an opportunity and a shield. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:19 SoSexy wrote: Hmm no? Usually extreme parties get in power because they offer non-realistic solutions that appeal to the majority, then they snowball. According to your theory, who where the 'extreme guys' that made Nazism look 'mainstream' in 1933 and the years before? They won because they WERE the extreme, the 'destroy old politics', etc. It's not "my" theory, it's mainstreaming. It's very much a thing that exists and is an effective tool. Look it up. If you look at the rhetoric that the nazis used to get elected you will see that they didn't present themselves as extreme; for example they described themselves as the best of both worlds, taking the best elements from the right (its nationalism) and the left (its socialism). | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:19 SoSexy wrote: Hmm no? Usually extreme parties get in power because they offer non-realistic solutions that appeal to the majority, then they snowball. According to your theory, who where the 'extreme guys' that made Nazism look 'mainstream' in 1933 and the years before? Communists | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5296 Posts
nope; every 'extreme party' that ever got into power did so because they offered what people needed not what people wanted. (the need is linked with subsistence, the want with opulence) | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
Who were saying the same thing about the nazi party, yet they didn't get elected. It isn't that simple. | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:41 SoSexy wrote: Because nowadays technology has provided the citizen with various news source (Internet) and he can see that he is being fed bullshit, while in 1930 many people had no idea what was happening beyond their farm and believed everything thrown at them? Today this technology is used to feed people even more bullshit. Not sure peoples idea of whats happening in the world has improved at all. We feel we know more, but the percentage of truth amongst this "knowledge" has not exactly improved. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:54 mahrgell wrote: Today this technology is used to feed people even more bullshit. Not sure peoples idea of whats happening in the world has improved at all. We feel we know more, but the percentage of truth amongst this "knowledge" has not exactly improved. Well, with all its flaws I prefer today's information over 1930's information. What about you? | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:44 SoSexy wrote: Who were saying the same thing about the nazi party, yet they didn't get elected. It isn't that simple. I would agree with you that if two opposite parties use mainstreaming at the same time, they aren't going to both win, that makes sense. Now let's go back to your original argument, which was that extreme parties don't really use mainstreaming. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12377 Posts
On May 04 2018 21:14 SoSexy wrote: I simply don't buy that mainstreaming theory, sorry. It isn't that simple. There are many parties who assumed that stance and did nothing. Okay but it's a very natural way of introducing an idea to humans. People usually think that they're very balanced and centrists while other people have crazy out there ideas. You're going to get more people on your side by convincing them that your idea should be mainstream than by appealing to their wish to be extremists. You can do it with, say, music. I'm a metalhead. Do you think I became a metalhead because I liked to punish myself with some extreme noise? Typically we start with some commercial stuff that has some metal elements in it, then our ears get used to it more and more until at some point it doesn't feel extreme anymore, and then we're there. Edit: that's also how you get stuff like the Swiss People's Party (Schweizerische Volkspartei) expanding to Romandy from their alemannic roots, observing that we're not that keen on far right stuff around here and therefore deciding to rename themselves in french as the Democratic Union of the Centre (Union Démocratique du Centre). | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
"Rewind developments that have gone to far" "Every other party is left-wing" "Continuing the legacy of real and great socialdemocrats that put Austrians first." "Only critics/alternative of the system" "Only real democratic party" and so. I'd say that sounds very much like mainstreaming. It's never about "change", the narrative is that the others are destroying the country and they are the only party left that defends the status quo. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
1. Extreme mostly refers to a (very high) distance to what is considered the norm (i.e. the mainstream). 2. Most parties try to get elected and want their ideas applied, they don't want to remain useless in a corner for decades. 3. Therefore even parties who advocate for "radical changes" try to become the new norm (i.e. mainstream or part of the new mainstream that their success would create). And when you consider their rhetoric, they never self-label themselves as "extremists". For instance in France, for decades the FN presented itself as "the true right" while saying that the governmental right was "betraying France" and was "too much left-leaning". The current FN (a) still refuses the far-right label [in studies, their sympathizers overwhelmingly consider themselves "right-wing"] and (b) do not say that they're nationalists, they're merely "patriots who want to defend their country," etc. It's clear that there is a softening rhetoric, and it was even part of an internal paper on their strategy that was published, in which it was stated that "people are now allergic to extreme stuff, so they have to be reassured" and militants should say "France no longer has the means to welcome massive immigration" rather than the good old racist "Arabs to the sea" (I am quoting the exact example that was used in this FN internal note). | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
On May 04 2018 20:56 SoSexy wrote: Well, with all its flaws I prefer today's information over 1930's information. What about you? Yeah, todays way is nicer. Back then you were only fed one version, no matter if you liked it or not. Today we can freely choose what we want to believe and then read only news that support those views. And our great modern technology is now able to filter out everything else and feed us only what we want to read. Even before we figured out that we want that. Happiness for everyone! That's the 21st century. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 04 2018 23:02 mahrgell wrote: Yeah, todays way is nicer. Back then you were only fed one version, no matter if you liked it or not. Today we can freely choose what we want to believe and then read only news that support those views. And our great modern technology is now able to filter out everything else and feed us only what we want to read. Even before we figured out that we want that. Happiness for everyone! That's the 21st century. The current information ecosystem is designed to funnel people into their little silo and exclude information that would upset their world view. It is a propagandist wet dream. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
Ipsos (20-21 april) One year after Macron's election, are you satisfied or disappointed with his action? Satisfied: 36% Disappointed: 64% + Show Spoiler [Details] + Per political proximity, differential [satisfied – disappointed]: FI (left): -82 PS (S&D): -20 EM (Macron): +80 LR (right): +2 FN (far-right): -68 Per class: Upper classes: -6 Lower classes: -52 Pensioners: -20 Is France better off or worse off since Macron's election: Better: 27% Neither better nor worse, not much change: 37% Worse: 36% + Show Spoiler [details] + Per political proximity, differential [better off – worse off, for those who considered that Macron's action changed something]: FI: -44 PS: -2 EM: +62 LR: +7 FN: -37 Per class: Upper classes: -2 Lower classes: -31 Pensioners: +3 Considering his personality and action, is Macron… Left-wing: 4% Centre: 15% Right-wing: 35% None of that: 46% + Show Spoiler [details] + Per political proximity: FI: 3% left, 7% centre, 65% right, 25% none of that PS: 3% left, 17% centre, 54% right, 26% none of that EM: 2% left, 40% centre, 12% right, 46% none of that LR: 10% left, 18% centre, 39% right, 33% none of that FN: 7% left, 10% centre, 32% right, 51% none of that BVA (18-19 april): Approval rating: 43% (-19 since one year) + Show Spoiler [Details] + Per profession: ~Senior executives: 57% (-2) Manual workers and employees: 36% (-17) Pensioners: 47% (-26) Per political proximity: FI: 6% (-17) PS: 30% (-58) EM: 94% (-6) LR: 54% (-15) FN: 13% (-24) Globally, are you rather satisfied or dissatisfied with Macron's first year? Rather satisfied: 41% Rather dissatisfied: 57% Regarding Macron's action, which one of those opinions fits you better? Support it: 20% Wait results before judging: 41% Oppose it: 38% Do you have the feeling you personally benefit from Macron's policy? Yes: 14% No: 84% For the following territories, do you have the feeling Macron understands well the situation of its inhabitants? + Show Spoiler [details] + Rural areas: Yes: 17% No: 80% Suburbs and popular neighbourhoods: Yes: 25% No: 71% Average cities: Yes: 37% No: 59% Big cities: Yes: 68% No: 28% For the following social groups, do you have the feeling Macron understands well their situation? + Show Spoiler [details] + Upper classes: Yes: 87% No: 9% Upper middle classes: Yes: 55% No: 42% Rest (lower middle classes, lower classes, underprivileged classes): Yes: 22% No: 74% What should be Macron's priorities for the next year? [3 possible answers] Overall: 1. Jobs (46%) 2. Purchase power (45%) 3. Immigration (34%) + Show Spoiler [Details per political proximity] + FI (left) 1. Purchase power (64%) 2. Education (48%) 3. Jobs & environment (46% ex aequo) PS (S&D) 1. Jobs (56%) 2. Purchase power (51%) 3. Education (40%) EM (Macron) 1. Jobs (58%) 2. Education (44%) 3. Growth (36%) LR (right) 1. Jobs (53%) 2. Immigration (46%) 3. Growth and purchase power (41% ex aequo) FN (far-right) 1. Immigration (71%) 2. Fighting terrorism (59%) 3. Purchase power (52%) | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On May 04 2018 17:09 Big J wrote: On the other side you have left-wing youths fighting for their rights violently once a year and immidiately we have a united right and liberal media front peeing their expensive pants that we could have a world revolution any moment if they don't keep these sentiments down. They don't fight for their rights, they trash the property of the city and of people who actually work for a living, it's completely idiotic. When we had the G20 riots people set cars of normal citizens on fire and trashed the small shops of immigrant business owners. It's just a bunch of hooligans who piss off the entire political spectrum with their rioting. What the fuck is stealing train rails or setting cars on fire even going to accomplish, do they think the global elite arrives at Davos by public transport or in a Toyota Prius? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
OSC
IPSL
Dewalt vs Bonyth
OSC
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
Patches Events
|
|
|
EPT
