|
A sharp schism has become more prominent recently as a disaffected working class has reacted to the perceived elitism and mistreatment on the part of the liberal left intelligentsia. In Brexit, we saw traditional labour voters, one of the supposed core beneficiaries of left-wing initiatives, 'rebel' against the rest of the left and vote in a nationalistic, more right wing fashion. In America, a similar phenomenon has happened with the Republican Party and the democrats. Where white working class voters were once a core voting demographic for the democrats, they are now a republican bloc. We all know neoliberalism and unrestrained greedy capitalism is the cause of this. But that hasn't proven to be the most persuasive argument against proven winners such as scapegoating immigrants. Efforts to help these people are too readily perceived as condescending and elitist, with the side effect of a more open and tolerant society, metropolitanism and globalism, as a complicit driving force in the waves of deindustrialisation. This loss of culture and jobs is arguably inevitable, and yet it is no less painful for that and the left still has no way better than the nationalism of the right to soothe these wounds. A key challenge for the left is to bring the white working class back to the fold in struggling for a more equitable society. One that will benefit them and all the other groups the left represents. A united front here would severely damage the grip of the wealthiest minority on our society. One thing is clear, a self satisfied smugness and otherisation does not sway the opinions of this key bloc. Do you believe there is a way of bringing these people back into the fold whilst not capitulating to any of their sentiments on race, immigration, etcetera. Perhaps by finally figuring out a way of showing them who the real enemies are? It would be a shame if the origination of a future left wing government was due to racial and age demographic shifts dragging the remaining opposition kicking and screaming into a better society. It would be better if we could find a way to adjust the messaging, strategy of attitudes of the left in some way to accommodate those disaffected whilst still retaining the principles of equality and tolerance.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 13:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
Internationalism is being realized but capitalism depends on dividing people up into any number of bins in order to leverage them against one another. Bernie Sanders is to Hillary Clinton as Derek Smart is to Chris Roberts. The Spice must flow.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
The unemployed will vote for those who promise them jobs. The working poor will vote for those who promise them better pay. The left abandoned class warfare and focused instead on fighting against discrimination of minorities, which is a worthwhile goal but not the first worry of the poor from the demographic majority. The reactionaries in the meanwhile are promising that jobs will come back if we just pick on some scary spooky minorities.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Labour hasn't been left wing for decades. The reason its traditional voters are rebelling is because of this, and the fact they've been totally left behind while watching their communities radically change, to no benefit to them. You can reconcile the ideas pretty loving easily if you have an actual left wing movement. The problem is we don't; liberals are not left wing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Right. But Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. And Bernie Sanders in the US represented genuine moves to the left on a number of issues. So what went wrong? Why were/are they not seeing much success?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
For some reason there's a need to qualify that it's the white working class in particular that has issues. What actually sets them apart from other members of the working class? It seems the only difference is (trigger warning) privilege.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:Right. But Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. And Bernie Sanders in the US represented genuine moves to the left on a number of issues. So what went wrong? Why were/are they not seeing much success? Jeremy Corbyn has a coordinated media campaign against him and his party planned a coup before he was elected. People take one look at that and go "welp, he's hosed". Because he is. computer parts posted:For some reason there's a need to qualify that it's the white working class in particular that has issues. I've not checked a breakdown of Corbyn supporters but to say they're not represented by whites is clearly untrue. The biggest socioeconomic defectors of Brexit were Britons of asian descent, likely as a result of being told their families aren't welcome while we remain in the EU. This is a correct gamble, as now Britain is going to be desperate for immigrants, and will take what it can get. Spangly A fucked around with this message at 14:17 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:Right. But Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. And Bernie Sanders in the US represented genuine moves to the left on a number of issues. So what went wrong? Why were/are they not seeing much success? Bernie Sanders represented moves to the left on issues of economic origin. When it came to a lot of stuff, he clumsily staggered into it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Jeremy Corbyn has a coordinated media campaign against him and his party planned a coup before he was elected. Sweden had the exact same situation back in 2011 when Håkan Juholt got elected party leader of the Social Democrats. He faced heavy internal opposition from the party board and a extremely harsh media treatment from our left-wing yellow paper Aftonbladet and was out again in just 9 months. That Corbyn has made it at long as he has is nothing short of a miracle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Jeremy Corbyn has a coordinated media campaign against him and his party planned a coup before he was elected. It remains a fact that white working class individuals have a higher propensity to support parties like ukip (including former labour voters). Spangly A posted:Jeremy Corbyn has a coordinated media campaign against him and his party planned a coup before he was elected. It's a self fulfilling prophecy though. A lot of people I talk to say he won't find success with the wider electorate. Why not? Why does a significant proportion of the electorate, the ones who stand to gain a lot from his leadership, not support him on these issues? They are perfectly willing to support farage when he is lambasted up and down in a lot of media. a neurotic ai fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:It remains a fact that white working class individuals have a higher propensity to support parties like ukip (including former labour voters). What real choice do they have though?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:
I'd like to see data supporting this, because from what I see Brexit supporters are more likely to be in non-immigrant areas: https://twitter.com/GuardianData/status/746360238786383872/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw Unless your definition of "defectors" is "voted more for Leave than normal" which is weasely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
The white working class on the whole are racist as gently caress and will happily vote for anybody who makes the right noises about immigration and race no matter the (normally detrimental) effects their other policies will have on them. That's the uncomfortable truth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:The white working class on the whole are racist as gently caress and will happily vote for anybody who makes the right noises about immigration and race no matter the (normally detrimental) effects their other policies will have on them. That's the uncomfortable truth. It may be true that the white working class hold a larger proportion of racist viewpoints than other demographics, but surely this is not an inherent and immutable quality? The question to ask is why are they more racist and negative towards the 'other' than other groups? What can we do to meaningfully change that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
I dunno if the middle class are less racist, I reckon their bigotry is just better cloaked with more patronising, paternalistic language. One need only look to the pages of the Guardian to see all kinds of near-genocidal rhetoric whereby the mass slaughter of all kinds of foreigners is considered justified for whatever interventionist cause celebre liberal imperialism has picked for itself this week. The white working class may be more nakedly and vitriolically racist, but they don't direct policy that kills people on the basis of race or religion nearly as much as the civilised chattering classes. edit: The longer that the myth persists that the white working class are uniquely racist, the more politicians triangulate and focus their efforts on poaching the racist vote. However, that racism did not emerge from the working class organically, it was imposed from above by demagogues and oligarchs with the collusion of a largely middle class press apparatus. TomViolence fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:I dunno if the middle class are less racist, I reckon their bigotry is just better cloaked with more patronising, paternalistic language. One need only look to the pages of the Guardian to see all kinds of near-genocidal rhetoric whereby the mass slaughter of all kinds of foreigners is considered justified for whatever interventionist cause celebre liberal imperialism has picked for itself this week. The white working class may be more nakedly and vitriolically racist, but they don't direct policy that kills people on the basis of race or religion nearly as much as the civilised chattering classes. Right. But, I'm not talking about them. The middle classes who voted conservative and have always voted conservative (or have simply believed in those policies and been red forked) are not the ones I'm interested in. I'm talking about the bulk of people who go for ukip and Trump, of which I imagine guardian readers make up very few of. These people were a key demographic of the left in the past. Can they be again?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I'd like to see data supporting this, because from what I see Brexit supporters are more likely to be in non-immigrant areas: What he means is that the groups with highest standard deviation were British Asians. Although for what it's worth I knew plenty of Brits from Africa who also voted Leave, but I admit that's anecdotal. Thing is that you have to remember that EU membership's Visa-free travel does gently caress-all for Asians or Africans, and it tended to be wealthier people from those countries who could afford to immigrate here, so they're less likely to fall into the same category as the un(der)employed white working class.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:Right. But, I'm not talking about them. The middle classes who voted conservative and have always voted conservative (or have simply believed in those policies and been red forked) are not the ones I'm interested in. I'm talking about the bulk of people who go for ukip and Trump, of which I imagine guardian readers make up very few of. The role of the bourgeois chattering classes can't be entirely ignored, though. Their marginalising of working class concerns and viewpoints when they serve as the self-appointed gatekeepers of left-wing, progressive politics creates just the sort of void the reactionary right looks to fill in the national conversation. The white working class is not racist (or considered such) by accident; it was not them that abandoned left wing politics, it was left-wing politics that abandoned them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:Right. But, I'm not talking about them. The middle classes who voted conservative and have always voted conservative (or have simply believed in those policies and been red forked) are not the ones I'm interested in. I'm talking about the bulk of people who go for ukip and Trump, of which I imagine guardian readers make up very few of. These people were a key demographic of the left in the past. Can they be again? In many of these cases (certainly in America) the underlying motivations of people haven't changed, it's been the strategies of the political organizations that have changed. For working class whites (the ones you want to chase), the underlying motivation has been white nationalism. This hasn't changed versus 100 years ago when they were in favor of massive expansions of social programs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Unless your definition of "defectors" is "voted more for Leave than normal" which is weasely. Lol go gently caress yourself, what I said was completely clear. The deviation was clear and explainable. It could even have swung it if anyone had taken the effort to canvas the wider asian-descent community, or done absolutely anything to stop the campaign of hate. Brexit was divided most strongly by income. This broke down for certain groups of people. I explained why and how. computer parts posted:Yeah you're going to have to do better than that to explain why rich minorities would support a campaign led by white supremacists because they were oppressed by white supremacists. once again, British asians had the strongest standard deviation from the socioeconomic divide, in favour of leave, because the EU fundamentally disadvantages them. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Spangly A fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Lol go gently caress yourself, what I said was completely clear. The deviation was clear and explainable. It could even have swung it if anyone had taken the effort to canvas the wider asian-descent community, or done absolutely anything to stop the campaign of hate. Yeah you're going to have to do better than that to explain why rich minorities would support a campaign led by white supremacists because they were oppressed by white supremacists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Yeah you're going to have to do better than that to explain why rich minorities would support a campaign led by white supremacists because they were oppressed by white supremacists. Like I said - the EU's free movement of people is effectively a "gently caress everyone else" system in the eyes of people from the other continents. Actual-journalist (this is rare these days) John Harris interviewed Sikhs and Hindus in places like Birmingham who bought into the tabloid's hegemonic propaganda that public services were wholly in financial trouble because of the EU's 'open border' policy. They weren't 'racist' per se, but felt that population control needed to be exercised and the idea of a regulated as opposed to wide open border seems sensible under such an interpretation. Remember that Britain basically has Fox News 1 to 5 and the BBC going "BOTH SIDES" so it's very hard to get the truth of "the Tories are loving up public services" out there. Or "immigration is actually at fine and sustainable levels" for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:The role of the bourgeois chattering classes can't be entirely ignored, though. Their marginalising of working class concerns and viewpoints when they serve as the self-appointed gatekeepers of left-wing, progressive politics creates just the sort of void the reactionary right looks to fill in the national conversation. The white working class is not racist (or considered such) by accident; it was not them that abandoned left wing politics, it was left-wing politics that abandoned them. computer parts posted:In many of these cases (certainly in America) the underlying motivations of people haven't changed, it's been the strategies of the political organizations that have changed. So these two posts are sort of saying contradictory things here. One is saying that that lot of the white working class is more inherently nationalistic, and the other is saying that the bourgeoise left has pushed them towards that. Either way, the question then is why is the former true and can we change it, or, is there a way to successfully shatter the stranglehold the liberal left has on progressivism. My goal is egalitarian internationalism, and I tend to view that as most compatible philosophically with left wing ideals. Left wing rhetoric has been coopted a lot by the bourgeoisie, you are correct. This is not all bad, as corporations adopting more positive stances towards different identities (as an example) is most assuredly better than the situation we had before. But there are plenty of people out there, college educated millennials for example, who are pushing for more radical left wing change, but are seeing no support from the older working classes. Too often I have been accused of not understanding the working class (that My ideology is supposed to aid) because I don't sympathise with their beliefs about immigration or other social/cultural beliefs. a neurotic ai fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Here's an article while I dig up the polls Here are the polls, computer parts England is not America and it is not white, please stop being a stupid oval office tess you were right about black voters, they deviate stronger than Asian-descent. Ashcroft really needs to pull his finger out and do a bigger sample to be more specific. I also hadn't noticed Muslims deviated nearly as far to remain as BAME did for leave, but that's pretty predictable given they were the target for most of the Leave campaign. Spangly A fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
personally i find it heart warming that being a loving moron is something that respects no race or class divide 
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:The role of the bourgeois chattering classes can't be entirely ignored, though. Their marginalising of working class concerns and viewpoints when they serve as the self-appointed gatekeepers of left-wing, progressive politics creates just the sort of void the reactionary right looks to fill in the national conversation. The white working class is not racist (or considered such) by accident; it was not them that abandoned left wing politics, it was left-wing politics that abandoned them. You actually have that entirely wrong, the white working class DID in fact abandon left wing politics, and they did it almost entirely because of race. That's what the realignment starting in the 1960's was largely about. Going into the mid 20th' century, working class whites were the core of the Democratic party's voting base. Also at that time, black Americans tended to be aligned with the Republican party. These were the voters who put FDR into power, and which brought about all the new deal policies the left still idolizes today. The New Deal was also whites-only, and this is where poo poo like redlining has its start, as blacks are systemically excluded from the new and growing investment in the public good. On the way out of the mid 20th' century, the civil rights movement came to the forefront. Democratic leadership decided to align on the side of civil rights, and we got the landmark legislation, judicial rulings, and executive actions of the civil rights movement. White working class Democrats started fleeting the party in droves, as blacks joined in. Nixon started laying the groundwork to win these former-New Dealers over to the Republican side, and the South begins to flip from being a bastion of votes for the Democratic party to being a bastion of votes for the Republican party. As the late 20th' century closed in, Ronald Reagan came along and completed the work Nixon started. Reagan built a political coalition which dominated US politics ever since, and has only started to crumble over the last 8 years. The 3 big pillars of Reagan's coalition was big business money, evangelical votes, and former New Deal Democrat votes. Now, how the hell did Reagan get people who voted in FDR as president 3 times to vote enthusiastically for systematically destroying the New Deal? He perfected dog-whistle racism. Suddenly welfare isn't something for hardworking folks like you down on your luck, its for "welfare queens" leaching off of your tax dollars (who is that welfare queen?). Suddenly Nixon's war on drugs is full scale, "junkies, thugs and crack dealers" are going to be locked up for good, to make the streets safe again for people like you (who are those junkies, thugs and crack dealers? Where are these streets, and who lives there?). Suddenly unions are no longer groups of workers like you banding together to fight greedy bosses, now they're full of lazy thieves (who are these lazy thieves?). The Republican party becomes completely unrecognizable as "the party of Lincoln". Former New Deal Democrats proved themselves incredibly eager to vote for dismantling every social safety net they benefited from, as long as it meant denying them to "undeserving others". Now the economic chickens have come home to roost, and the current state of the Republican party is the result. OtherworldlyInvader fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Sep 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
OtherworldlyInvader posted:You actually have that entirely wrong, the white working class DID in fact abandon left wing politics, and they did it almost entirely because of race. That's what the realignment starting in the 1960's was largely about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
OtherworldlyInvader posted:You actually have that entirely wrong, the white working class DID in fact abandon left wing politics, and they did it almost entirely because of race. That's what the realignment starting in the 1960's was largely about. I was chiefly talking about the British political context, which is the one I know best about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:It may be true that the white working class hold a larger proportion of racist viewpoints than other demographics, but surely this is not an inherent and immutable quality? The question to ask is why are they more racist and negative towards the 'other' than other groups? What can we do to meaningfully change that? Of course there is nothing inherent about racism, it is structurally imposed as others have said on this thread. Nationalism also plays a huge role. I think for a lot of the white working class nationalism fills the hole left by the decimation of industry and the subsequent unemployment and poverty of many white working class communities. Pride in nation and (to an extent) race replaces local pride and pride in industry. The best way to eliminate white working class racism is ending neoliberalism and stopping the constant anti-migrant anti-foreigner racist propaganda of the press. Putting that into practice is a whole other matter. As for short term solutions I am at a loss.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:Of course there is nothing inherent about racism, it is structurally imposed as others have said on this thread. Nationalism also plays a huge role. I think for a lot of the white working class nationalism fills the hole left by the decimation of industry and the subsequent unemployment and poverty of many white working class communities. Pride in nation and (to an extent) race replaces local pride and pride in industry. This pride feels like a sort of limited tribalism, and one that I feel is usually pretty corrosive. Why is it certain demographics of people don't require these strong in group/out group structures and some do? I suspect higher echelons of society can afford to be more individualist I guess? But I don't think individualism is the answer either. quote:The best way to eliminate white working class racism is ending neoliberalism and stopping the constant anti-migrant anti-foreigner racist propaganda of the press. Putting that into practice is a whole other matter. As for short term solutions I am at a loss. The problem with 'ending neoliberalism' is that this group often forms a key part of the bulwark preventing us from doing so. It becomes a catch-22 because we need their attitudes to change to go about the work of dismantling it. As for the anti-migrant propaganda, surely one possible solution is to get them to see the media as 'shills' and false in the same way Trump supporters see the media. They just flat out ignore it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:This is why you need to wall off discussions about the US from discussions about Europe. Its the same song in a different tune for much of Europe. Immigrants increasingly come in in, social safety nets start withering and leftist parties suddenly start "betraying their voters" while far right nationalist parties are on the rise to "take their country back". The details and narratives vary from country to country, but the overall trend is predictable. Social democracy is a hell of a lot easier when its all "us" and very little "them".
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Increasing labor protections by dismantling at-will employment would also help strengthen anti-discrimination laws already on the books. A rare intersection that actually impedes businesses from doing what ever racist poo poo and helps working class people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
The aspect of dogwhistle has been becoming more prominent in the UK as we slowly shift away from outright campaigning on racism, but otherworldly's point about the return of the deserving vs undeserving poor is a fairly classic play. Around the 70s the US shifted towards this being a racial issue, in the UK it's still very much a class issue. There's a lot of media attempts to shift the undeserving poor tag over to an imaginary swarm of migrants, and a specific drive to paint All Migrants, net contributors to the UK, as Dirty Scroungers, which from a purely economic sense of resources is actually far more appropriate to describe white britons. Previously this tag was aimed at Blacks and Irish, and there's a long history of it, it's a common contextual discussion in Shakespeare's presentation of migrants and Moors in particular. The primary reason for this is that the bourgeoisie are parasites and must deflect from this at all times. This allows them to paint themselves as the opposite of what they are; contributors and protectors of the state and it's finance. We see this looking through English media presentation of the finance industry of the 80s in particular, but the rot remained at the core of the Labour party until today, with such great minds as Ed "Balls" Balls claiming he had defeated boom and bust with the infinite wisdom of bankers in early 2007. This ideological cancer is at the heart of the english speaking world, with Liberal values of democracy having falsely presented itself as the only option. The problem, then, is that the media, unregulated, serves as a distraction mechanism to enable proper use of divide and conquer, provided the ego's of murdoch et al are suitably stroked by whichever party they choose to be nice to. The actual reconcilement of the white working class and scientific socialism is an easy one; they are not seperated. You will not see a white working class person turning down a safe home for themselves and their family, an improvement in quality of life, and a sense of dignity in one's business. It's not even slightly unfair to say the white working class are incredibly misled, this is an observation of fact. So, with a lack of proper information and greater and greater attempts to monetize media and move it away from providing accurate information, there is a self-reinforcing cycle of ignorance fuelling votes for total scum, who destroy services and industries for personal gain with whichever private firm they have their eye set on, before blaming it on immigrants once more when this leads to a reduction in quality of life. The answer, pretty simply, requires the election to be already won. The left has always had academics on its side, because all evidence will always point towards state control of necessary services being the only way to ensure a lifestyle fit to meet the populations rights. Jeremy Corbyn, as an example, has evidence backed policy that would improve the lives of the working class regardless of race. Jeremy Corbyn, though, will never be prime minister, and so he can be safely mocked as a lunatic savage, having been thrown into brave new world and discussing the horrors he sees. The left can demonstrably and quickly improve life in its state; but the attempts at division will always be there, and must always be fought with staunch internationalism. The breaking point is a hypothetical time when people not only realise, say from a UK perspective, that all tories are bastards, but also that it doesn't have to be this way. A proper apportioning of blame where it is due, a condemning of failure when it is avoidable, and the offer of a life better than the one presently doled out, is and has always been the only hope of the left. As far as campaigning goes, this means messaging must be positive yet critical, and offer ideas with substance. Undoing the internalised narrative most people are entirely unaware of possessing is no small task, and will not succeed at a time when the media are free to slander and misrepresent anything that doesn't suck their dick. To return to the idea of the undeserving poor, campaigns must be focused on presenting opportunity and a better life to whoever is being addressed at the time, without allowing any idea of exclusion. A classic example of the counter to this was council houses becoming "a thing for the poor", and not "a thing for everyone". Since people quickly internalise any idea of a hostile Other, and people generally do not accurately identify poverty, this always becomes "we are being hosed over, by someone else". This may be true, but the target is obviously never going to be the actual parasite in the room. Once properly slandered, it became easy to destroy the idea of the council house with the false narrative of buying your way out of poverty, rather than poverty being a material condition created by the state. The left needs to be inclusive of minorities, for sure, but it must return to proper class analysis. There has not ever been greater inequality in the west, and the parasites must be eradicated. Tldr we're hosed, is my view.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
The American situation seems to be somewhat unique due to the historical lack of a strong socialist tendency in political life, and slavery and segregation's long hangover poisoning the well in terms of race relations. That's not to say Blighty or France or Germany haven't their own issues along similar lines, but things like the Southern Strategy and McCarthyism really seem to have done a number on the US's political landscape.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Ocrassus posted:These people were a key demographic of the left in the past. Can they be again? perhaps if you were to combine nationalist populism and socialism a 'national socialism', if you will
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
Migration is part of economic dynamics. The only constant in this world is change. I appreciate the president's arguments in favor of the TPP and wish we could transcend TV and twitter for a discourse on trade & immigration that is more than YES/NO. Since the EU is breaking down it is hard to argue for a wider American Union. Spite is a hell of a meme, but at least it is safely confined to planet Earth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Is this a serious question? It's primarily racism and changing social norms. Brown people started coming into their countries and/or began to become more prevalent in society. This brought fear to the white people who saw these people as infiltrating their culture and politics. On top of this, the youth continued their march toward becoming socially liberal. This led to many whites seeing the poor no longer as hard working factory workers but either lazy hippie kids with minimum waged jobs or colored people leeching off the system at worst. I will also say comparing America to Europe is dumb. The former is suffering from an "identity" crisis as minorities are no longer a niche segment of the country, but now a major part of the population which has conservatives fear a "Braziliation" occurring in the country. Europe is getting their feet wet with non-traditional European immigration and is getting scared.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Countries in Western Europe always had "non traditional European" immigration; that's a legacy of several of them (especially the UK and France, but also to a lesser extent Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Germany...) having had colonial empires. Turns out that when you teach your languages to people from a poor country*, they'll start thinking seriously about moving to your own land. http://ieg-ego.eu/en/threads/europe...rope-since-1800 http://migrationeducation.de/51.0.html * country may very well be poor in the first place because you've thoroughly plundered it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
England had so much migration you can find deportation notices and shipping waivers (for taking home Blackamoors and Negroes) from before it was recognisable english, that is a rather strange point. We've had non-european migration as a major point of our economy since before America was colonised
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 00:53 |
|
|
OtherworldlyInvader posted:Its the same song in a different tune for much of Europe. Immigrants increasingly come in in, social safety nets start withering and leftist parties suddenly start "betraying their voters" while far right nationalist parties are on the rise to "take their country back". The details and narratives vary from country to country, but the overall trend is predictable. Social democracy is a hell of a lot easier when its all "us" and very little "them".
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 19:47
|
|