EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1090
| 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. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10801 Posts
| ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4733 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10801 Posts
The big social-democratic parties openly embrace them during Demonstration/strikes and have trouble calling them out for the damage/crimes they commit. Therefore it doesn't seem that "fringe" to me, they don't make up the majority of these parties but they are not some strange and rare occurence. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4733 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12318 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10801 Posts
And they clearly cather/embrace the extremes whenever there is something to gain from it. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12318 Posts
On May 08 2018 20:03 Velr wrote: I also don't know how "center" it actually was when compared to other major parties in europe, a study a few years ago iirc made their agenda/policy out to be the most leftist in europe... If you can find that again I'd genuinely like to read that. Even if it's in german, in which case I wouldn't "like" it, but I'd still do it =) | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On May 08 2018 18:49 TheDwf wrote: I don't understand why you always come back to USSR or keep arguing as if today's socialists were "marxist-leninists". Except for fringe groups, no one on the left has any nostalgia for the USSR and no one has this for model. On May 08 2018 19:27 Velr wrote: At least in Switzerland if you go on a "Left"-March you find every kind of Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist/Maoist idiot groups you can imagine. They don't have real political power but saying these people don't exist is very dishonest and our main social-democratic party clearly panders to them a bit... Or at least doesn't call them on their bullshit. Thanks for agreeing with me, fellow.  | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10801 Posts
https://www.watson.ch/imgdb/aef5/Qx,E,0,0,1239,875,516,364,206,145/1128090840977546 https://www.watson.ch/imgdb/9880/Qx,B,0,0,628,1258,261,524,104,209/7368298465343622 They are pretty self explanatory even if you don't want to read german  .In general you could say, that the "SP" is very left but not overly immigration friendly and the SVP makes the FN and the FPÖ look like progressives... Its pretty basic, it just compares statements of the parties on various political issues. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12318 Posts
At first glance the order of the parties for Switzerland seems fine at least, even if their position on the scale seems weird. I see a lot of stuff that make me question the graph though, like LibDems to the left of Labour really? Or UMP right of FN... Or M5S leftwing... There's no way our liberals are right of Tories either. It's possible that some of the stuff is outdated I guess, or that they used some criterias of determining the degree of left and right that aren't intuitive to me, but so far I can't say I'm convinced. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10801 Posts
Iirc they took those basic questionaires form before the EU election and put the parties in the graphs according to that. Its also from 2014, iirc M5 is seen as left of center but very anti immigration - as the graph shows? Or did something drastically change there that i didn't realise? 2014 was iirc before Corbyn "overtook" Labour? You could argue that the Blairish labour wasn't left/socialist at all .Its for sure not the most sophisticated graph or analysis but its pretty interesting anyway. Separeting the immigration question from the basic left/right scheme seems like a pretty neat idea in general. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12318 Posts
On May 09 2018 00:14 Velr wrote: Its very basic and simple. Iirc they took those basic questionaires form before the EU election and put the parties in the graphs according to that. Its also from 2014, iirc M5 is seen as left of center but very anti immigration - as the graph shows? Or did something drastically change there that i didn't realise? 2014 was iirc before Corbyn "overtook" Labour? You could argue that the Blairish labour wasn't left/socialist at all .Its for sure not the most sophisticated graph or analysis but its pretty interesting anyway. Separeting the immigration question from the basic left/right scheme seems like a pretty neat idea in general. I take your point for Labour, but I would have thought the LibDems were centrists even then. Maybe I'm misinformed. I see M5s as populist opportunists without a clear ideology that say stuff from the left and the right as it serves them. They do side with UKIP in the European Parliament and over 50% of their voters would rather do a coalition with Lega than anyone else, so there's that. Not really my type of leftwingers. As for separating the immigration question... At first glance I'll say it seems like a weird choice when nationalism is supposed to play a part in differentiating the right and the far right, and nationalism is obviously connected to immigration issues. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On May 08 2018 19:27 Velr wrote: At least in Switzerland if you go on a "Left"-March you find every kind of Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist/Maoist idiot groups you can imagine. They don't have real political power but saying these people don't exist is very dishonest and our main social-democratic party clearly panders to them and its not hard to find members that still "defend" Lenin... I'm sure you would also find some that defend Mao and Stalin, but i tend to not actually talk about politics with such people, its as fruitfull as talking with an actual neo-nazi. is there nothing positive to learn from lenin? | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On May 08 2018 22:56 Velr wrote: I just found these right now: https://www.watson.ch/imgdb/aef5/Qx,E,0,0,1239,875,516,364,206,145/1128090840977546 https://www.watson.ch/imgdb/9880/Qx,B,0,0,628,1258,261,524,104,209/7368298465343622 They are pretty self explanatory even if you don't want to read german .In general you could say, that the "SP" is very left but not overly immigration friendly and the SVP makes the FN and the FPÖ look like progressives... Its pretty basic, it just compares statements of the parties on various political issues. The French part of the second image is horribly wrong, unless they do not use a classical left-right axis and measure something else. (Just saying.) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Corruption is impossible if you constantly overthrow the goverment? | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On May 08 2018 18:49 TheDwf wrote: I don't understand why you always come back to USSR or keep arguing as if today's socialists were "marxist-leninists". Except for fringe groups, no one on the left has any nostalgia for the USSR and no one has this for model. Better leave that kind of straw man to antisocialist right-wingers. I'm not just talking about the USSR, I know that apologistsa are a fringe group (although apparently popular on the internet), I'm also talking about people who rally against globalisation, technology or all forms of free trade. People who think that if you can just go back to the times of the 60s where finance was small and migration didn't exist and the working class looked homogenous then all will be well again. There is no such coherent society anymore and people are not just more individualist because of capitalism, but also because technology has made the times of big national corporations with a streamlined workforce obsolete. That is not coming back. Even left wingers recognised this, people like Bookchin in the 80s and 90s pointed out that there is no hope for left-wing politics without recognising that people are more and more diverse and that you can't just organise people around class warfare or economic inequality. If you go to a SPD meetup today you don't really get the idea that anyone has a plan on how to make left-wing politics work in 10 or 20 years and how to address say automation or the fact that we need a ton of knowledge workers to not fall behind to every other continent. You hear old people talk about pensions and you hear young people rallying against trade and the banks. Not that conservatives have much bigger plans either, but nobody ever expected them to have them anyway, but people expect social democrats to come up with some sort of plan to improve on the status quo. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On May 09 2018 01:54 Plansix wrote: Corruption is impossible if you constantly overthrow the goverment? that sounds more Jeffersonian to me | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On May 09 2018 02:06 Nyxisto wrote: I'm not just talking about the USSR, I know that apologistsa are a fringe group (although apparently popular on the internet), I'm also talking about people who rally against globalisation, technology or all forms of free trade. People who think that if you can just go back to the times of the 60s where finance was small and migration didn't exist and the working class looked homogenous then all will be well again. Then you're talking to the other side, and it is none of my concern. There is no such coherent society anymore and people are not just more individualist because of capitalism, but also because technology has made the times of big national corporations with a streamlined workforce obsolete. That is not coming back. Even left wingers recognised this, people like Bookchin in the 80s and 90s pointed out that there is no hope for left-wing politics without recognising that people are more and more diverse and that you can't just organise people around class warfare or economic inequality. Good thing serious left-wing parties incorporated feminism, ecology, antiracism, LGBT+ rights, public services, etc. in their programs then. | ||
|
Archeon
3260 Posts
On May 08 2018 05:22 TheDwf wrote: Ah, capitalism and its "self-made man" myths. Anyway, whether the wealth is inherited or not, past some threshold—say, more than a few millions—it can only be built through exploiting the work of thousands of others, and that's what makes it illegitimate. As for "risk taking," when you consider all the situations in which capitalists merely privatize public goods or the results of public research, or passively take advantage of a monopolistic rent, or directly milk the State by selling it stuff (e.g. weapons)... Not to mention "too big to fail" banks and the hundreds of billions of public money to cover their failures and mistakes. Ah people who only criticize without actually ever talking about solutions for underlying problems, let alone produce alternatives. I've known enough people I'd consider self-made-men who produced small to medium companies with very little budget and at times no education to know it's not entirely a myth, at least not in Germany during the "Wirtschaftswunder" (economic miracle). @exploitation: And that is different in what way in any other system? You can't produce large quantities without having other people involved in the production complex and naturally there are going to be hierarchies with benefits for those that are at the top. It's not like any communist country has actually ever passed that stage. Also exploitation is a very strong word for fairly broad conditions, I definitely don't feel exploited in the company I'm working in, despite being fairly bottom of the pack. That doesn't mean that exploitation doesn't happen especially if you consider the entire global trade situation with Africa and Asia, but that's not any different in any other system. And yes, intertwining politics and economics is a problem, but again it's not like other systems don't have that (in fact it's part of the plan in communism). I'm not a fan of conglomerates and wish the institutions in place would have enough effect to keep them down, but I understand the difficulties in keeping them down when they start becoming very influential within areas once they grow big enough. "Don't block the deal or I'm gonna move and this area will have 30% of the populace unemployed" isn't exactly something politicians can say no to. On May 08 2018 06:04 GreenHorizons wrote: The "this works better than any other system" almost always neglects to mention that the capitalists will illegally assassinate democratically elected/ and otherwise selected leaders, kill countless civilians, and apply inhumane economic sanctions in order to keep it that way. Which is the usual superpower bullies lesser nations case and has nothing to do with capitalism per say. As if the UdSSR or powerful caste systems were ever any different. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Pre-president, for sure. The Presidency showed him to be more pragmatic when he could no longer be the demagogue heckler of those in power. Lenin reminds me a little of Jefferson in his desire to use will of the working class to influence national direction. Though, Jefferson was quite comfortable hanging out with the aristocracy. But aristocracy was also far more comfortable with revolutionaries at the time too. | ||
| ||
