Christofascists seeking to seize our country

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

But the WEF are a conspiracy correct? just trying to figure out where the line is... Seems to me the line is if you are with the principle or not.

The WEF are a conspiracy by that definition, but that doesn't make the theories about their intentions true. Theory is the key word, and is maybe too strong of a word. Supposition is often more appropriate.

[Ozy_Flame]

Woke to progressives: Staunch social justice advocate who’s abreast of contemporary political concerns and respects the rights of all communities to say and be heard.

Woke to conservatives: political correctness gone awry, to a point where I'm personally inconvenienced because I don't like change and social movements that threaten tradition could potentially disrupt my lot in life.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Itse

At this point, any country who dismisses the more or less fascist political movements in their country are just fools.

Rise of fascism and the moderate right turning to far-right is the political story of the 21st century so far. (Which is exactly why you hear so much about "wokeism taking over".)

They're not movements you can beat without organized resistance.

It’s not former supporters of the moderate right (the professional middle class) who are turning to the far right. The far right draws support from the working class and uneducated who have abandoned the left, a process that has been going on for decades but has been accelerated by globalism and the increasing prominence of cultural issues in politics. Moderates (ie Macron) are getting it in the neck from both extremes as the liberal consensus crumbles.

The liberal left needs to find a way to win the uneducated working class back onside. And unsurprisingly, sneering at their backwards, unsophisticated cultural beliefs doesn’t work.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s not former supporters of the moderate right (the professional middle class) who are turning to the far right. The far right draws support from the working class and uneducated who have abandoned the left, a process that has been going on for decades but has been accelerated by globalism and the increasing prominence of cultural issues in politics. Moderates (ie Macron) are getting it in the neck from both extremes as the liberal consensus crumbles.

The liberal left needs to find a way to win the uneducated working class back onside. And unsurprisingly, sneering at their backwards, unsophisticated cultural beliefs doesn’t work.

I guess I could have rephrased that differently.

Both things are happening. The moderate right is turning far-right, and outright fascism is also rising.

Depends on the local flavor of sociopolitics to what extent they are the same movement.

In the US, these people all vote GOP (if they vote, not all of them vote). In a multiparty system like Finland, or Canada I would expect, they're more likely to be more separate.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It’s not former supporters of the moderate right (the professional middle class) who are turning to the far right. The far right draws support from the working class and uneducated who have abandoned the left, a process that has been going on for decades but has been accelerated by globalism and the increasing prominence of cultural issues in politics. Moderates (ie Macron) are getting it in the neck from both extremes as the liberal consensus crumbles.

The liberal left needs to find a way to win the uneducated working class back onside. And unsurprisingly, sneering at their backwards, unsophisticated cultural beliefs doesn’t work.

What does seem to work in getting them onside is lying to them about everything, whipping them into a froth to go protest things they don't understand, and targeting their most primal fears. Are you saying the left should follow that strategy? Seems to work, even if it is working to destroy society.

[TheIronMaiden]

I think it is that the center has moved. 30 years ago ( maybe even 15 years ago) it was casual to be homophobic and to promote biblical morality so long as you were not explicitly racist. This is no long a centrist opinion. For the most part moderates find homophobia intolerable, and extreme.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

I think it is that the center has moved. 30 years ago ( maybe even 15 years ago) it was casual to be homophobic and to promote biblical morality so long as you were not explicitly racist. This is no long a centrist opinion. For the most part moderates find homophobia intolerable, and extreme.

That's basically the only position that has not moved to the right.

Open racism on the right is totally okay now, as long as you're putting it to words in somewhat civil ways, and even when you're not. In economics, many Tea Party positions like absolutism on taxation are now just complete mainstream right wing positions even in the Nordics. Thinking that all social security should just be over is totally acceptable position on the right. Abortion rights are a battle ground etc.

There are many in the GOP who were absolutely serious about wanting the US to default on it's loans, because that's how seriously they think the government should massively downsize (and when they say downsize, they mean social security and things like FDA, not military or the police obviously).

The GOP is completely insane, but the overton window has moved so far into insanity that people aren't even really reacting to it, not in the US or in Europe.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Groups of all different persuasions are and should be allowed to run candidates wherever they want, including far left, far right, religion-based, and neo-nazi, provided they aren't explicitly promoting hate or other illegal speech/actions. The public will decide if they want to vote for them or not.

What ought to be concerning is that groups with relatively radical views are organizing to control mainstream political parties, library boards, etc. They're doing it through legal democratic processes but it's under the radar for most people. The problem is a lack of organized pushback.

Case in point: Take Back Alberta. I suggest that instead of bemoaning this we should organize a CP jihad to vote against them at the next UCP AGM.



What are their views?



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...-ucp-1.6834387

He also argues that NDP and progressives want to depopulate society for the sake of the environment. "You are the carbon they are trying to reduce."

Honestly? Ya, that's kind of the point. Fewer people but better and smarter should be the goal. Notice how I said "fewer" and not "round everyone up and kill them"? Population decline is a good thing in most cases because population growth usually occurs exponentially, so getting it to drop (without major horrific events) is usually a very slow process.

So yeah, let's reduce useless sacks of carbon a little. Case in point? These groups of a-holes.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Itse

Thinking that all social security should just be over is totally acceptable position on the right.

It really isn’t. Few Republicans of any prominence are calling for cuts to social security and medicare (Trump slapped down some who recently floated the idea), and none have proposed scrapping them. They’re the third rail of American politics.

Today’s populist right is not just regular conservatism on steroids. Look at Brexit. The City of London finance mavens - and really the entire business class of the UK - supported remain. The Red Wall of traditional work-class England had other ideas and de-camped to the populist right. The far right has made more gains in former Communist Eastern Europe than elsewhere in Europe, and the AfD is most popular in the depressed former East Germany. Economically, the policies of people like Orban don’t look a lot like Reaganite or Thatcherite economic liberalism. Part of their appeal to the working class is national control of business, and more redistributive policies.

It’s too long ago for most people here to remember, but the Free Trade debate here in Canada was highly contentious. The left were fiercely opposed to the deal, painting it as a right-wing capitalist scheme to fleece working-class Canadians and rob them of autonomy. And yet today, support for global trade deals and the free flow of money and people across borders is more associated with the establishment liberal left than with the populist right. As recently as Obama’s first term, Democrats routinely expressed opinions about immigration that would get them branded Trumpist bigots today.

The stance of the right/left over globalization and trade have basically flipped in the last 20 years. Not coincidentally, this era has seen the working class shift allegiances to the populist right and the corporate class re-align to the left.

The polarization we’re seeing in the West isn’t the left becoming more left and the right become more right. It’s a fundamental reconfiguration and alignment of politics. The populist part of the populist right means anti-corporate, anti-globalist, anti-establishment. It appeals to a very different population than the prudent, middle-class conservative voter of yesteryear who wanted lower taxes and a better business environment.

[sketchyt]

I find it so embarrassing when adults use the word 'woke' as an insult. Grow up.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It really isn’t. Few Republicans of any prominence are calling for cuts to social security and medicare (Trump slapped down some who recently floated the idea), and none have proposed scrapping them. They’re the third rail of American politics.

Today’s populist right is not just regular conservatism on steroids. Look at Brexit. The City of London finance mavens - and really the entire business class of the UK - supported remain. The Red Wall of traditional work-class England had other ideas and de-camped to the populist right. The far right has made more gains in former Communist Eastern Europe than elsewhere in Europe, and the AfD is most popular in the depressed former East Germany. Economically, the policies of people like Orban don’t look a lot like Reaganite or Thatcherite economic liberalism. Part of their appeal to the working class is national control of business, and more redistributive policies.

It’s too long ago for most people here to remember, but the Free Trade debate here in Canada was highly contentious. The left were fiercely opposed to the deal, painting it as a right-wing capitalist scheme to fleece working-class Canadians and rob them of autonomy. And yet today, support for global trade deals and the free flow of money and people across borders is more associated with the establishment liberal left than with the populist right. As recently as Obama’s first term, Democrats routinely expressed opinions about immigration that would get them branded Trumpist bigots today.

The stance of the right/left over globalization and trade have basically flipped in the last 20 years. No coincidentally, this era has seen the working class shift allegiances to the populist right and the corporate class re-align to the left.

The polarization we’re seeing in the West isn’t the left becoming more left and the right become more right. It’s a fundamental reconfiguration and alignment of politics. The populist part of the populist right means anti-corporate, anti-globalist, anti-establishment. It appeals to a very different population than the prudent, middle-class conservative voter of yesteryear who wanted lower taxes and a better business environment.

You have very valid points there.

(This could be start of an interesting conversation, if I had the time/energy to get into it.)

[Bonded]

The main difference is that pre-pandemic these candidates would never hit the main stream in Canada. Now they are and they are winning. If the Republicans win in the States again then I think it will really start to get pushed more. If the left and moderates don't show up to vote against the curtailing of Roe Vs Wade and other social regressive policies in the States then I am not sure what will and the far-right will be watching up here as well.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It really isn’t. Few Republicans of any prominence are calling for cuts to social security and medicare (Trump slapped down some who recently floated the idea), and none have proposed scrapping them. They’re the third rail of American politics.

Today’s populist right is not just regular conservatism on steroids. Look at Brexit. The City of London finance mavens - and really the entire business class of the UK - supported remain. The Red Wall of traditional work-class England had other ideas and de-camped to the populist right. The far right has made more gains in former Communist Eastern Europe than elsewhere in Europe, and the AfD is most popular in the depressed former East Germany. Economically, the policies of people like Orban don’t look a lot like Reaganite or Thatcherite economic liberalism. Part of their appeal to the working class is national control of business, and more redistributive policies.

It’s too long ago for most people here to remember, but the Free Trade debate here in Canada was highly contentious. The left were fiercely opposed to the deal, painting it as a right-wing capitalist scheme to fleece working-class Canadians and rob them of autonomy. And yet today, support for global trade deals and the free flow of money and people across borders is more associated with the establishment liberal left than with the populist right. As recently as Obama’s first term, Democrats routinely expressed opinions about immigration that would get them branded Trumpist bigots today.

The stance of the right/left over globalization and trade have basically flipped in the last 20 years. No coincidentally, this era has seen the working class shift allegiances to the populist right and the corporate class re-align to the left.

The polarization we’re seeing in the West isn’t the left becoming more left and the right become more right. It’s a fundamental reconfiguration and alignment of politics. The populist part of the populist right means anti-corporate, anti-globalist, anti-establishment. It appeals to a very different population than the prudent, middle-class conservative voter of yesteryear who wanted lower taxes and a better business environment.

A lot of good points, but the point that the liberal left is more aligned with globalism is the biggest lie that is being told.

What happened with free trade is exactly what the left said would happen. We have destroyed workers wages, opened up more to exploitation and have accelerated the wealth transfer to the rich. The only reason it is "associated" with the liberal left is through constant propaganda and lies from the right.

We ended up going so far all in on globalism that we can't just turn back the clock without serious repercussions. This is where the left now stands, we see the issue but we also know that fast changes or attempts to block it will result in a lot more pain for the working class. We are constantly standing up for people who dismiss us as "globalists" and instead align with the liars who stand the most to gain.

I think there is a lot more to dissect and agree with where you are coming from, but what I feel gets lost in your comment is that it is the ownership class who first came up with the ideas and are now convincing the working class that it was the lefties who came up with them, which is pure fiction.

My frustration with the "rural" or "uneducated" is that we are doing our best to work for their interests, to actually protect workers from exploitation, to ensure workers get their fair share of the fruits of their labour - and ended up being dispised by these same people because they gullibly buy into the lies of the ownership class who aligns much more with the right.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Bonded

The main difference is that pre-pandemic these candidates would never hit the main stream in Canada. Now they are and they are winning.

They’re taking over at the nomination level, where a small fraction of citizens participate. Only something like 25 per cent of Albertans were opposed to vaccine mandates. So being antivaxx is not mainstream in Alberta. But there are enough of them that they could take over a party at the nomination level.

Same with abortion in the U.S. The policies pushed by the Republicans aren’t very popular even in the U.S. - less than 15 per cent of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all cases.

Ideally, holding unpopular ideas would make those parties unelectable in a general election. But in our polarized political culture, people often vote against a party, rather than for a party. And if the stuff the other party stands for is even more outside your comfort zone, then you’ll hold your nose and vote for the kooks on your side rather than the kooks on the other side.

And so we get governments that promote all sorts of non-mainstream policies.

[GGG]

Canada needs an open primary system.

For both party leaders and MP/MLAs everyone should be able to select a party to vote for the delegate of. This should allow for the silent majority to voice an opinion in leadership and MLA races.

In Alberta outside of maybe 4 elections in history your vote hasn’t mattered and it is only by joining the party in power that you got a say in representation and leadership. There shouldn’t be a poll tax on democracy which looking at Alberta provincially and federally in most ridings there is.

This leads for the relative low cost ability to coordinate influence be it corporate, foreign actor, or special interest group. Find non-competitor ridings and win the nomination or back both in competitive ridings. The cost to sway a nomination is far less than the cost to influence an election.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

It really isn’t. Few Republicans of any prominence are calling for cuts to social security and medicare (Trump slapped down some who recently floated the idea), and none have proposed scrapping them. They’re the third rail of American politics.

Today’s populist right is not just regular conservatism on steroids. Look at Brexit. The City of London finance mavens - and really the entire business class of the UK - supported remain. The Red Wall of traditional work-class England had other ideas and de-camped to the populist right. The far right has made more gains in former Communist Eastern Europe than elsewhere in Europe, and the AfD is most popular in the depressed former East Germany. Economically, the policies of people like Orban don’t look a lot like Reaganite or Thatcherite economic liberalism. Part of their appeal to the working class is national control of business, and more redistributive policies.

It’s too long ago for most people here to remember, but the Free Trade debate here in Canada was highly contentious. The left were fiercely opposed to the deal, painting it as a right-wing capitalist scheme to fleece working-class Canadians and rob them of autonomy. And yet today, support for global trade deals and the free flow of money and people across borders is more associated with the establishment liberal left than with the populist right. As recently as Obama’s first term, Democrats routinely expressed opinions about immigration that would get them branded Trumpist bigots today.

The stance of the right/left over globalization and trade have basically flipped in the last 20 years. Not coincidentally, this era has seen the working class shift allegiances to the populist right and the corporate class re-align to the left.

The polarization we’re seeing in the West isn’t the left becoming more left and the right become more right. It’s a fundamental reconfiguration and alignment of politics. The populist part of the populist right means anti-corporate, anti-globalist, anti-establishment. It appeals to a very different population than the prudent, middle-class conservative voter of yesteryear who wanted lower taxes and a better business environment.

This is a good post but using the word “Left” to describe these government entities is a misnomer from an economic point of view. There are no economically left governments right now. Have you seen the creation and expansion of government owned industry? Increases in public sector spending as a portion of GDP outside of Covid? I dont really think “the fiscal left” exists.

There is a case for the social left certainly but to frame it as the left now believes in free trade isn’t quite correct. The left no longer exists economically

[timun]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

They’re taking over at the nomination level, where a small fraction of citizens participate. Only something like 25 per cent of Albertans were opposed to vaccine mandates. So being antivaxx is not mainstream in Alberta. But there are enough of them that they could take over a party at the nomination level.

Same with abortion in the U.S. The policies pushed by the Republicans aren’t very popular even in the U.S. - less than 15 per cent of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all cases.

Ideally, holding unpopular ideas would make those parties unelectable in a general election. But in our polarized political culture, people often vote against a party, rather than for a party. And if the stuff the other party stands for is even more outside your comfort zone, then you’ll hold your nose and vote for the kooks on your side rather than the kooks on the other side.

And so we get governments that promote all sorts of non-mainstream policies.

Eco's 13th essential characteristic of fascism: "selective populism".

Ur-Fascism is based upon a selective populism, a qualitative populism, one might say. In a democracy, the citizens have individual rights, but the citizens in their entirety have a political impact only from a quantitative point of view — one follows the decisions of the majority. For Ur-Fascism, however, individuals as individuals have no rights, and the People is conceived as a quality, a monolithic entity expressing the Common Will. Since no large quantity of human beings can have a common will, the Leader pretends to be their interpreter. Having lost their power of delegation, citizens do not act; they are only called on to play the role of the People. Thus the People is only a theatrical fiction. To have a good instance of qualitative populism we no longer need the Piazza Venezia in Rome or the Nuremberg Stadium. There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.

Because of its qualitative populism Ur-Fascism must be against “rotten” parliamentary governments. One of the first sentences uttered by Mussolini in the Italian parliament was “I could have transformed this deaf and gloomy place into a bivouac for my maniples” — “maniples” being a subdivision of the traditional Roman legion. As a matter of fact, he immediately found better housing for his maniples, but a little later he liquidated the parliament. Wherever a politician casts doubt on the legitimacy of a parliament because it no longer represents the Voice of the People, we can smell Ur-Fascism.

This is precisely what groups like Take Back Alberta are doing, and why they're doing it.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Groups of all different persuasions are and should be allowed to run candidates wherever they want, including far left, far right, religion-based, and neo-nazi, provided they aren't explicitly promoting hate or other illegal speech/actions. The public will decide if they want to vote for them or not.

What ought to be concerning is that groups with relatively radical views are organizing to control mainstream political parties, library boards, etc. They're doing it through legal democratic processes but it's under the radar for most people. The problem is a lack of organized pushback.

Case in point: Take Back Alberta. I suggest that instead of bemoaning this we should organize a CP jihad to vote against them at the next UCP AGM.



What are their views?



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...-ucp-1.6834387

100000000% this.

You cannot change the system by complaining on a message board. You have to work within it, to change it.

I know people hear hate the UCP. And by and large they definitely do suck right now and are moving in a bad direction, but the ONLY way to change the paradigm in Alberta, where the UCP is going to be the majority party 9/10 elections, is to become a UCP member and vote and change the party.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is a good post but using the word “Left” to describe these government entities is a misnomer from an economic point of view. There are no economically left governments right now. Have you seen the creation and expansion of government owned industry? Increases in public sector spending as a portion of GDP outside of Covid? I dont really think “the fiscal left” exists.

There is a case for the social left certainly but to frame it as the left now believes in free trade isn’t quite correct. The left no longer exists economically

Biden’s $1 trillion infrastructure bill is the biggest public spending bonanza in decades. The student loan amnesty was a $300 billion public gift to core supporters. He’s proposing to increase the corporate tax rate to 28 per cent.

In Canada, Trudeau rolled back Harper’s planned increase to the age for OAS eligibility, and mandated increases to CPP contributions. We’re also going to see Canada follow suit with massive public spending on green industrial subsidies.

We certainly don’t hear anyone on the left or centre-left today calling for restraint in government spending.

[Hack&Lube]

I want a fiscal right, social left, and science-driven (rather than religious/superstitious) policy making. Is that so hard?