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.
you can't really engage with the rationale of anti-european people at its face and then leave it at that. treat it not as reasonable people but as a thing that you'd like to stop.
with that in mind, i think policy elites need to pay far more attention to the messaging and rhetoric component and how the public receives them.
for example, immigration and cultural backlash can't be helped by stressing the humanity and productivity of immigrants. you'd need to be rhetorically tough on crime, defend some sort of duty to integrate, and appear serious about at least acknowledging some of these nativist concerns all the while preserving the interests of immigrants.
sovereignty is another issue. national citizens and politicians have an easy target in the european commission or european central bank etc when something goes wrong. some of the blame is fair, some of it is not. it's a basic structural problem that will necessarily occur. the left doesn't like european government because of the tyrannical junker bank, the right thinks the european court of human rights is a spawn of globalist jews. only the professional government people even stand up for the institutions.
even if you guys survive this round, the long term stressors need to be looked at
I dunno if strong rhetoric is going to cut it at all. Cameron tried to do this and it backfired horribly. People will usually go with the original if they have the choice and this just looks like a desperation move to appease voters. It might even give populist parties more advantage because they can claim that they were right all along.
There's nothing wrong with taking a strong and confident stance against the demagoguery. It's always worked quite well here in Germany and we've largely managed to keep the populists at bay, at least for now.
You also don't need to be tough on crime. The good thing about the law is that there's no toughness or softness about it, the law is simply the law. This is the kind of discourse you don't want to get into in the first place.
the german people are noble and informed. can't always expect that from every country.
the rhetoric point i think is more along the lines of preventing moderates from crossing over into the extremist camp, not giving them space to paint you in a certain way.
On February 07 2017 04:58 LegalLord wrote: This support didn't come out of nowhere. When your centrists ignore you, you are forced to push for more extreme and aggressive solutions for your problems.
Maybe it's time to admit the centrists were correct the whole time, if the far-right are almost always lying scumbags?
Anybody who's more afraid of immigrants than a quasi-Orwellian egotist running the government isn't thinking rationally.
The centrists weren't right. They were ignoring the plight of an important portion of the population and forced them to make a populist choice. That is something that they are slowly starting to realize - and a few Trump-like winners later perhaps they will understand what has to change.
Enlighten us, what has to change?
The FN has no domestic policy. At all. They went from neo liberal to far left in a decade, and their supporters don't give a shit. The only important thing is that muslims are evil and foreigners take our jobs. Oh, and Putin is great and american super evil. Except Trump.
Again. What has to change and how are those operetta nazis giving the right answers?
On February 07 2017 01:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
On February 06 2017 22:59 Acrofales wrote:
On February 06 2017 22:22 Dangermousecatdog wrote: An autocratic democracy is just a democracy in name only. How can you have a bottom-up autocratic society anyhow? By definition, in any autocratic society, power is concentrated at the top. One of the crucial ideaas of democracy is that everyone has equal rights. No class, no caste should have power in itself to rule over another. If it does, then it is no longer a democracy. There has only been a few examples of autocratic but liberal governments, but I am hard pressed to think of any democratic but authoritarian governments, simply by the expedient that an authoritarian government cannot be democratic in the first place.
Plenty of Latin American autocracies were democracies that just went on for longer than intended. Look at Bolivia right now: Evo Morales is nearing the end of his 3rd term (constitution allows 2 terms, but he found a loophole that allowed him to be electable for a third term). There was a referendum about a change of constitution allowing him to run for a 3rd (4th) term, which voted against the change. Yet he is still making noises about wanting to run in 2019 (and I fully expect that he'll find a way to do it).
Chavez in Venezuela was similar. No voter fraud was necessary, and the opposition wasn't forbidden (and isn't in Bolivia). It's just impotent in the face of a charismatic leader. Venezuela right now is, of course, a democracy in name only, but such is the slope from democracy to dictatorship (and even now, Maduro does not have absolute power, and has to deal with a democratically chosen parliament that opposes him).
Not sure why you are using either of these countries as an autocratic democracy. Neither can be called democracies. Neither have a free media or freedom of speech as we understand it. Having some sort of parliament is hardly an indicator of democracy either. It's actually pretty normal for autocratic countries in the present and past, stretching all the way to the medieval ages, to have some sort of parliament/diet/council of some sort. Though I generally agree there is a slope, I think I place democratic/not democratic in a different place to you.
I think Bolivia is a lot more democratic than you give it credit for. If you don't consider Bolivia a democracy, you'll probably have to exclude quite a few countries you probably do consider democratic, based on your ideas for freedom of press. For instance, Hungary, Romania, and Mexico.
That said, lack of freedom of press is not Bolivia's greatest threat to democracy (that is obviously Evo Morales' authoritarian traits).
You are completely mistaken. The lower the score, the better it is. Bolivia(49) is considerably worse than Italy(31), Romania(38) or Hungary(40). Unless you think countries such as USA(21), Germany(20), and even Sweden(11) are also less democratic than Bolivia.
remember how most people from Germany in here kept saying we're going to get Merkel no matter what since her CDU was always above 30% while the SPD was around 20%?
Well now with Schulz being the candidate for the SPD they're pretty even and actually pulled ahead recently:
still pretty stupid to get a coalition since even if the SPD wanted to go with the far-left Die Linke and the greens that's still only 48%... so SPD + CDU/CSU still looking fairly likely but it's a bit more open
On February 07 2017 04:58 LegalLord wrote: This support didn't come out of nowhere. When your centrists ignore you, you are forced to push for more extreme and aggressive solutions for your problems.
Maybe it's time to admit the centrists were correct the whole time, if the far-right are almost always lying scumbags?
Anybody who's more afraid of immigrants than a quasi-Orwellian egotist running the government isn't thinking rationally.
The centrists weren't right. They were ignoring the plight of an important portion of the population and forced them to make a populist choice. That is something that they are slowly starting to realize - and a few Trump-like winners later perhaps they will understand what has to change.
Enlighten us, what has to change?
The FN has no domestic policy. At all. They went from neo liberal to far left in a decade, and their supporters don't give a shit. The only important thing is that muslims are evil and foreigners take our jobs. Oh, and Putin is great and american super evil. Except Trump.
Again. What has to change and how are those operetta nazis giving the right answers?
What has to change is a larger respect for the working class and others who do not benefit from a more "global" world while others do so well that they would never want to give that up. Part of that is of course the immigrants who push for a downward spiral in working conditions for the unskilled and semiskilled. There's the cultural element of course, but that's a very standard thing that conservatives should be worried about too.
Do populists have the answers? No, probably not. But maybe they'll break apart enough crumbling pillars of the current system (e.g. the EU) that it will force others to rebuild in a more effective way. The status quo is leading to worse and worse outcomes for a lot of people so that needs to change.
Few populists do a good job in office and given where the FN comes from I seriously doubt it would be different. But it might do what needs to be done for a more realistic system.
globalism isn't the problem for europe though, it's more like lack of growth opportunities due to a variety of factors, but primarily dominant market players choking off new growth.
the macron proposal of creating some space for low barrier of entry employers by lowering licensing requirements for small businesses is much needed
On February 07 2017 08:45 Toadesstern wrote: remember how most people from Germany in here kept saying we're going to get Merkel no matter what since her CDU was always above 30% while the SPD was around 20%?
Well now with Schulz being the candidate for the SPD they're pretty even and actually pulled ahead recently:
still pretty stupid to get a coalition since even if the SPD wanted to go with the far-left Die Linke and the greens that's still only 48%... so SPD + CDU/CSU still looking fairly likely but it's a bit more open
I don't think they are ahead just yet. INSA is known to always overestimate the SPD a bit and underestimate the CDU a litte but I'm so happy that there is actual competition for the Bundestag/Chancellor this year. Let's hope the hype stays.
On February 07 2017 08:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On February 07 2017 05:05 LegalLord wrote:
On February 07 2017 05:00 LightSpectra wrote:
On February 07 2017 04:58 LegalLord wrote: This support didn't come out of nowhere. When your centrists ignore you, you are forced to push for more extreme and aggressive solutions for your problems.
Maybe it's time to admit the centrists were correct the whole time, if the far-right are almost always lying scumbags?
Anybody who's more afraid of immigrants than a quasi-Orwellian egotist running the government isn't thinking rationally.
The centrists weren't right. They were ignoring the plight of an important portion of the population and forced them to make a populist choice. That is something that they are slowly starting to realize - and a few Trump-like winners later perhaps they will understand what has to change.
Enlighten us, what has to change?
The FN has no domestic policy. At all. They went from neo liberal to far left in a decade, and their supporters don't give a shit. The only important thing is that muslims are evil and foreigners take our jobs. Oh, and Putin is great and american super evil. Except Trump.
Again. What has to change and how are those operetta nazis giving the right answers?
What has to change is a larger respect for the working class and others who do not benefit from a more "global" world while others do so well that they would never want to give that up. Part of that is of course the immigrants who push for a downward spiral in working conditions for the unskilled and semiskilled. There's the cultural element of course, but that's a very standard thing that conservatives should be worried about too.
Do populists have the answers? No, probably not. But maybe they'll break apart enough crumbling pillars of the current system (e.g. the EU) that it will force others to rebuild in a more effective way. The status quo is leading to worse and worse outcomes for a lot of people so that needs to change.
Few populists do a good job in office and given where the FN comes from I seriously doubt it would be different. But it might do what needs to be done for a more realistic system.
Should the United States be dissolved following a similar (lack of) logic? If not, why not?
On February 07 2017 08:55 oneofthem wrote: globalism isn't the problem for europe though, it's more like lack of growth opportunities due to a variety of factors, but primarily dominant market players choking off new growth.
the macron proposal of creating some space for low barrier of entry employers by lowering licensing requirements for small businesses is much needed
This is not just a problem in the EU. The US has the same problem with big oligopolies (due to mergers etc.) And a lack of competition. Increased regulation has only made the problem worse.
more info: -sunday, the govt. passed OUG(emergency ordinance)14/2017 to abrogate OUG13/2017(linked with penal code changes). the new ordinance needs to pass through the parliament(be voted on by Senate then later by Chamber of Deputies) to become law, in 30 days from when it was registered with the parliament; PSD+ALDE have the majority in parliament so things are in the air somewhat(if 14/ fails to pass, 13/ will come in full effect). - people protested sunday regardless; some because they had plans to do so anyway and others because they didn't believe the politicians; it culminated with and cross country presence was estimated ~500.000 people. - CCR(constitutional court) still needs to decide then make a statement on the constitutionality of OUG13 by 10 feb.
The Israeli Parliament (Knesset) legalized 4,000 West Bank settlements on Monday.
The 60-52 vote in the Knesset sets Israel on a collision course with Europe, although the Trump administration has signaled ready to accept West Bank settlements.
That is the first time Israel has moved to endorse settlements officially. The bill legalizes settler homes built arbitrarily on private Palestinian land, against a 40-year legal precedent. It forces Palestinians to relinquish their land for a price to be determined by Israeli courts. The bill has been previously condemned by the Obama Administration, the UN, and the EU.
It is also perceived as violating the Israeli rule of law.
On Sunday, Israel’s Attorney General, Avichai Mandelblit, said that the so-called Regulation bill is in direct violation to the Fourth Geneva Convention against the protections granted to occupied populations. The Attorney General also warned the bill runs against Israel’s constitution.
On the eve of the vote, UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Nickolay Mladenov, urged Israel warned that the bill would have far-reaching legal consequences for Israel and would “greatly diminish the prospects for Arab-Israeli peace.”
During the debate on Monday, Labour Party opposition leader Isaac Herzog warned that this was the first time Israel introduces the bill against the government’s legal advisor and that Israel will be taken to The Hague tribunal.
i blame it on Trump obviously; next is to annex settlements in West Bank.
Retroactively legalizing the occupation of privately own land previously recognised as illegal by the Isreali court. No problems there. Totally the right thing. No problems there with land ownership and rule of law, just move the undesirables away.
On February 07 2017 20:39 xM(Z wrote: more info: -sunday, the govt. passed OUG(emergency ordinance)14/2017 to abrogate OUG13/2017(linked with penal code changes). the new ordinance needs to pass through the parliament(be voted on by Senate then later by Chamber of Deputies) to become law, in 30 days from when it was registered with the parliament; PSD+ALDE have the majority in parliament so things are in the air somewhat(if 14/ fails to pass, 13/ will come in full effect). - people protested sunday regardless; some because they had plans to do so anyway and others because they didn't believe the politicians; it culminated with https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVKTDOCkfPs and cross country presence was estimated ~500.000 people. - CCR(constitutional court) still needs to decide then make a statement on the constitutionality of OUG13 by 10 feb.
Thanks for for the infomation about Romania which appears to not be given much attention in most media. What are your thoughts in general?
@oneofthem - supportive means helping; the whole tacit, non-explicit granting of liberties to <parties i work with> is a red flag that comes with a direct responsibility allegation;
@Dangermousecatdog - i don't know exactly what you're looking for here so i'll ramble on things. PSD electoral campaign (ran by +
An aggressive and creative campaign run by Israeli strategists Moshe Klughaft and Sefi Shaked helped the Romanian Center-Left Social Democratic PSD Party win a landslide victory in last week’s election.
The PSD won 45.67% of the vote, compared to 20.4% for its nearest competitor at a time when right-wing parties are sweeping elections in Europe.
was based on populist reforms(tax cuts, salary hikes, massive spending, investment plans and so on) which for some looks to be what a country facing recession or stagnation should do. PNL(center right) ran with austerity plans and some technocratic ideas and ideals. i mean, who would you expect to win here?.
going with analogies now: PSD is to Romania what Trump(and republicans to some extent) is to US(incredibly self-serving, conservative(playing the religious card often) and supportive of its backers) and PNL(+ others right leaning) are to Romania what Obama tried to be for US(pro refugees, pro two state solution, pro EU, pro climate change and other pro greenness stances, etc). so now with parliamentary majority, PSD thought to undo what corruption charges and prosecutions did to them during the previous center right governing; they tried to do that by amending the penal code and by pushing an amnesty law and were caught red handed. the current president(center right) posed as the champion of the rule of law and exposed them to the public; mass protests ensued.
the way our justice system is set up right now favors center right. there's a web of inner workings between SRI(intelligece service), DNA(National Anticorruption Directorate, agency especially created to combat (political)corruption), CSM(magistracy), CCS(constitutional court) and allegedly the CIA(Obama's truly) giving them an advantage. the left has some sway into all of this and managed to have the second in command at SRI resign on charges of corruption(and speculations of being a CIA agent on the sides). they tried to do the same with chief prosecutor of DNA but she didn't budge. if they would've managed to remove her, the dissolution of DNA would follow and the agency would go under our "normal/regular" anti corruption agency DIICOT. they would've had free rain to(at?) corruption.
going tinfoily now: if neither the govern(PSD) nor the president will budge on this(make concessions or something, i don't know; because the center right is somewhat corrupt too) there's a chance(<1%) the country will be split in three with Transilvania(the W) going to the germans(to EU), Wallachia(the S) going to US and Moldova(the E) to P.R.Moldova(=very pro-Russia at the moment). (Putin already gave the president of RP Moldova a map of greater Moldova which includes parts of current romanian Moldova + Show Spoiler +
Moldovan President Igor Dodon had his first official visit to Moscow this week, during which Russian President Vladimir Putin offered him an 18th-century map of Moldova.
Dodon showed the map to the press, saying that half of the current territory of Romania belongs to Moldova, reports Moldovan publication Deschide.md.
Italian cartographer Bartolomeo Borghi made the map in the 18th century, after the Russo-Turkish War of 1790-1791. The map covers the current Republic of Moldova, the Moldavia province in Eastern Romania, part of Romania’s Dobrogea, as well as some territories in today’s Ukraine.
).
if we make it through all of this, in theory, will be spearheading the soul of EU to new highs by example(practically i don't know, by math, PSD plans would bring Romania to an inflation of over 5%(currently a little over 3%, EU requires 3% max) and my bet is that they planned to finance that inflation not by borrowing but through investments made by (not only)their friends under the newly planned corruption laws and if those are gone they have nothing.
On February 07 2017 08:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On February 07 2017 05:05 LegalLord wrote:
On February 07 2017 05:00 LightSpectra wrote:
On February 07 2017 04:58 LegalLord wrote: This support didn't come out of nowhere. When your centrists ignore you, you are forced to push for more extreme and aggressive solutions for your problems.
Maybe it's time to admit the centrists were correct the whole time, if the far-right are almost always lying scumbags?
Anybody who's more afraid of immigrants than a quasi-Orwellian egotist running the government isn't thinking rationally.
The centrists weren't right. They were ignoring the plight of an important portion of the population and forced them to make a populist choice. That is something that they are slowly starting to realize - and a few Trump-like winners later perhaps they will understand what has to change.
Enlighten us, what has to change?
The FN has no domestic policy. At all. They went from neo liberal to far left in a decade, and their supporters don't give a shit. The only important thing is that muslims are evil and foreigners take our jobs. Oh, and Putin is great and american super evil. Except Trump.
Again. What has to change and how are those operetta nazis giving the right answers?
What has to change is a larger respect for the working class and others who do not benefit from a more "global" world while others do so well that they would never want to give that up. Part of that is of course the immigrants who push for a downward spiral in working conditions for the unskilled and semiskilled. There's the cultural element of course, but that's a very standard thing that conservatives should be worried about too.
Do populists have the answers? No, probably not. But maybe they'll break apart enough crumbling pillars of the current system (e.g. the EU) that it will force others to rebuild in a more effective way. The status quo is leading to worse and worse outcomes for a lot of people so that needs to change.
Few populists do a good job in office and given where the FN comes from I seriously doubt it would be different. But it might do what needs to be done for a more realistic system.
There are several problems with your narrative.
1. Unqualified jobs
It's not because of immigrants that unqualified jobs are gone. The decline of manufacturing and unqualified jobs has to do with globalization; essentially it's not that arabs took the working class jobs, but rather that working class jobs are in Bengladesh. And no amount of protectionism will change that, simply because, as consumers, we want to pay a t-shirt 2 dollars and not 12. That's simple as that.
Take France. My family comes from Lorraine. It's the rust belt of France. 40 years ago it was one of the biggest industrial powerhouse in Europe, thanks to a very powerful steel industry. Those jobs are gone, people are poor, youngster leave the area and the Front National scores skyhigh results. In my area, it does close to 50%. But guess what, there are no immgrants there. At all. You would have to travel hundreds of miles to see one.
And it's not the dirty elites that are responsible for that. It's history, and the development of technological and technical means, that gives steel corporation the possibility to get cheaper labour elsewhere. Globalization is not some horrible plot from the establishment. It's the natural development of the world at a stage where it's possible to build a product on 3 different continents.
People are unhappy, they want a responsible. The immigrants are a good target; they are weak, they don't look like us, they speak a weird language. But it's not them you have to blame, it's that 2 dollar t-shirt. And those same people who lost their jobs would never want to go back to paying a t-shirt 12 euros. In France it's proven by economists that immigrants don't "take our jobs".
2. The inequalities
Now let's go back to the States. See, the other problem that you rightfully identify are the rise of inequalities. The growth benefits a tiny elite. But mate, that has been the one and only goal of the Republican Party for 30 years. When Obama tried to talk about it, he got nuked from orbit by the GOP and its minions for talking "class warfare". There is a simple way to tackle inequalities, it's called progressive taxes.
In Europe, several left wing parties all over the continent are advocating a fairer society, more taxes on the richest and the big businesses, a stronger social system. But not the far right. The far right doesn't want to tackle inequalities. It wants the arabs out. And the working class is voting for the parties that push the hardest for deregulating the economy, privatazing their pensions and taking away free education.
You know what are concrete answers to the problems of the working class in America? Universal healthcare, free education, and a strong social safety net. Bad luck they vote for the guy who instead focuses on bombing the muslims and kicking out the Mexicans.
You talk of downward spiral. Well what about that minimum salary? What about regulations, workers right, unions? Oh, no it's" bad for the economy" (read the rich). Back to blaming the mexicans.
In the 1930's people were suffering a lot. Especially the working class. You know what they did? They voted for the one who gave them a clear ennemy. It was all because of the Jews!! The situation is no different.
There are plenty of things that should be done. We should get out of the neoliberal paradigm, of supply side economics and the idea that if you give a lot of tax breaks to the 0,1% everybody will be better off. But it's not the arabs that are responsible. It's right wing dogma and the changes of the world. The changes of this world won't be undone, and the right dogma is advocated by the far right.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YdCyLvJ.png)
