The rise of the far right is the greatest threat to Western Civilisation

FTA69

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

What is Far Right these days? Normal run of the mill traditional conservative views seem to be called Far Right.

Even classical liberals are being labeled as such.

There is an element of that. You had a group of dopey unwashed student anarchists over here try and no-platform Jacob Rees-Mogg; it was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. A bunch of yahoos roaring at the archtypical English gentleman. A tactic normally reserved for violent neo-Nazis being deployed against a Conservative politician, you couldn't make it up.

For me far-right would encompass things like racism obviously. But more subtly and deeper is the concept of ultra-nationalism i.e. the belief that a person's right to be 'from' a place is contingent on them having a certain religion or skin colour. This would be in opposition to the concept of the citizen that all have equal stake in a state/republic etc.

In places like Turkey, militarisation and the veneration of the army as being equal to the government etc would be a factor. Often coupled with a glorification of imperialism and colonialism, something prevalent in the UK.

An important one for me is scapegoating, the idea that all problems in a country boil down to the presence of a given minority. Many of the Tommy Robinson/UKIP crowd genuinely believe that if we kick out Muslims/foreigners then the country will return to its former glory immediately. It completely takes the eye off those running the country politically and economically and puts it on some fella in a kebab shop or driving a taxi.

So is far-right a 100% concrete term? No. But then again neither are things like "democrat" or "socialist", but they definitely exist.

silverharp

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The Nazi economic stuff always confused me.

Seemed more left wing to me.

well there is socialist in the name :pac:

FTA69

mariaalice wrote: »

Great post, but you have to answer one or two-points well paid unionised semi-skilled manufacturing jobs are not coming back so what is the answer? what happened to Rover cars for example.

Why is the answer always to appease those who voter far right instead of an appeal to the 'morality' ( not sure if that is the right word ) of voting for a far-right party, in other words, educating people and asking them to do the right thing. I know that is a bit nieve.

property in Burnley is cheap by the way.

Because working class people have legitimate grievances and unless you address their material concerns around housing, jobs, services and community they won't pay you any heed and they're right too. I don't agree with supporting the far-right, but we need to understand why people do it. As for appealing to "morality", the Guardian tossers have been doing that for years and see where it's got them. Absolutely nothing will put people's heckles up and have them prepared to start throwing slaps as some university, finger-wagging type giving them lecture about "you know, the far right and Tommy Robinson are like, dicks man."

leonffrench

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote:

Seemed more left wing to me.

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote:

The Nazi economic stuff always confused me.

National. Socialism.

Frostybrew

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The Nazi economic stuff always confused me.

Seemed more left wing to me.

Socialist style economics, but only for those of Aryan descent.

euser1984

every far right need to be taken into context.

just like movements get called names hitlerism, stalinism


the far right in america is a lot different to far right movements in italy - those in italy are extreme anarchists

silverharp

FTA69 wrote: »

Because working class people have legitimate grievances and unless you address their material concerns around housing, jobs, services and community they won't pay you any heed and they're right too. I don't agree with supporting the far-right, but we need to understand why people do it. As for appealing to "morality", the Guardian tossers have been doing that for years and see where it's got them. Absolutely nothing will put people's heckles up and have them prepared to start throwing slaps as some university, finger-wagging type giving them lecture about "you know, the far right and Tommy Robinson are like, dicks man."

it kinds of looks like woke middle class tend to communism and woke working towards fascism? they are both collectivist and anti the individual though

mariaalice

The middle ground is the way to go always has been and always will be. It the extremest on both sides that cause all the trouble.

TheValeyard

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

So the greatest threats to Western Civilisation according to the scribes on AH are (this is not in ranked order btw).....

1. Fascism
2. Communism
3. Socialism
4. Feminism
5. Cultural Marxism
6. Islamism
7. Capitalism
8. Gombeenism
9. Unionism
10. Catholicism

Too many ****ing isms.....

So you're saying we need to kill the isms to save civilisation!!

SnakePlissken

Frostybrew wrote: »

There is an old saying that "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". Why would the outcome of the present situation be any different?

There's a certain irony in your use of this quote. Certain mouthy posters on Boards have labelled me a fascist, a racist, a supporter of the Far-Right, all for expressing my opinion that, as mass immigration from Muslim nations has been of absolutely no benefit both socially or economically to Germany, France, or Sweden, it would be utterly naive for Ireland to adopt similar policies in the belief the outcome here would be different.

But then, it's much easier to simply label someone as being on the far-right of the political spectrum, than, oh I don't know, debate in a reasonable and mature manner.

mariaalice

mariaalice wrote: »

The middle ground is the way to go always has been and always will be. It the extremest on both sides that cause all the trouble.

Early days yet TBF. Western democracies aren't really around that long compared with monarchies or other forms of governance... and western civilisation is experiencing a lot of stress points in recent years. Staying in the middle ground or as moderates doesn't automatically suggest the better course.

FTA69

'Middle-ground' has now become a euphemism for the continuation of a capitalist system that has led to those extremes forming in the first place. Back in the 1970s the 'middle ground' in the UK (and I use this as an example cos I live here and it's the epitome of an industrialised democracy) was a social housing program, free health care, free education and a proper skilled-job paying a decent wage. Then the 'middle ground' became Tony Blair privatising the sh*t out of everything and lauding a financial sector and media oligarchs.

Emmanuel Macron is pushing the old 'competent centrist' stuff but I've no doubt we're around a decade away from sh*t seriously going south in France when he's had his go at the helm. All of the centrist people in Italy laughing their heads off at Jeremy Corbyn and dismissing the 5 Star are now wondering what hit them.

oceanman

mariaalice wrote: »

The middle ground is the way to go always has been and always will be. It the extremest on both sides that cause all the trouble.

people are starting to get tired and fed up with the middle though...same ole same ole noting changes.

Star Bingo

mariaalice wrote: »

It the extremest on both sides that cause all the trouble.

FTA69

silverharp wrote: »

it kinds of looks like woke middle class tend to communism and woke working towards fascism? they are both collectivist and anti the individual though

I dunno about that. The one's pushing the new far-right or alt-right tend to be middle class, look at your man Spencer in America or Farage in the UK; they've never been on a council estate in their lives. Robinson is from a working class background and has enormous appeal but the people funding him and running his media aren't of that cloth at all.

I think middle class people tend toward the identity politics bullsh*t a lot more and that's a consequence of higher education; but the lad in Essex driving a delivery van and some barista in London with a degree have pretty much exactly the same material interests. Wages are too crap, nowhere to live, can't afford f*ck all, "why am I failing? My parents have a home/good job", takes ages to see the GP etc.

Working class people are no more predisposed to being right wing (look at all the seething middle-England Daily Mail brigade) than anyone else. But the only people who happen to talk to them as equals now are the far right. Although Labour's getting a little bit better.

silverharp

FTA69 wrote: »

'Middle-ground' has now become a euphemism for the continuation of a capitalist system that has led to those extremes forming in the first place. Back in the 1970s the 'middle ground' in the UK (and I use this as an example cos I live here and it's the epitome of an industrialised democracy) was a social housing program, free health care, free education and a proper skilled-job paying a decent wage. Then the 'middle ground' became Tony Blair privatising the sh*t out of everything and lauding a financial sector and media oligarchs.

it was unsustainable though, back in the 60's there wasn't a pension legacy or high state debt, now every state is borrowed up to the wazoo and for every public servant you see there might be 2 or 3 pensioners paid out of current taxation. Something has to give or happen , either a tech collapse of medical costs or mass automation so that productivity is so high that taxes go further. Blair was a plonker though I think everyone can agree on that

silverharp

FTA69 wrote: »

I dunno about that. The one's pushing the new far-right or alt-right tend to be middle class, look at your man Spencer in America or Farage in the UK; they've never been on a council estate in their lives. Robinson is from a working class background and has enormous appeal but the people funding him and running his media aren't of that cloth at all.

I think middle class people tend toward the identity politics bullsh*t a lot more and that's a consequence of higher education; but the lad in Essex driving a delivery van and some barista in London with a degree have pretty much exactly the same material interests. Wages are too crap, nowhere to live, can't afford f*ck all, "why am I failing? My parents have a home/good job", takes ages to see the GP etc.

Working class people are no more predisposed to being right wing (look at all the seething middle-England Daily Mail brigade) than anyone else. But the only people who happen to talk to them as equals now are the far right. Although Labour's getting a little bit better.

Farage isn't a fascist though, I doubt be would have looked out of place in English politics back 40 or 50 years ago. all the lefty obsessions are mainly middle class ones , trendy gender issues for example don't feature in your average working class area.

Calhoun

Its crazy how in the past couple of years the right particularly in Europe is growing. As pointed out in this thread already, it boils down to something as simple as listening to citizens, rather than condescendingly forcing opinion on them.

Best Irish example i can think of was the Immigration centre in Roscommon, some of the people voiced opposition to it being used at the time. Their main concern was a local hotel that they had hopped would have been used to attract business to the town was being used, rather than the old immigration centre that already existed which was let to go into disrepair.

Did the government and the media of the day try and have dialogue with them? No they branded them as racists and moved along until they found some lemmings willing to give a good welcoming soundbite.

FTA69

silverharp wrote: »

Farage isn't a fascist though, I doubt be would have looked out of place in English politics back 40 or 50 years ago. all the lefty obsessions are mainly middle class ones , trendy gender issues for example don't feature in your average working class area.

He's not a fascist no, I wouldn't call him one either. He's a very right wing conservative in my opinion, but his party has been a rallying ground for far-right individuals. Robinson is a fascist, having been a member of umpteen fascist organisations and currently palling around with proper racists.

I agree with the trendy stuff. I'm pro women's rights, gay rights and anti-racist. I think certain groups in society have it harder on some subjects for different reasons. But the current identity alphabet soup in which class is one on a tube map of identities is b*llocks.

Class comes down to who has power, who controls society and its wealth. That's the crucial issue. Not some non-binary student who wants to sh*t in the girl's jacks.

Frostybrew

silverharp wrote: »

it was unsustainable though, back in the 60's there wasn't a pension legacy or high state debt, now every state is borrowed up to the wazoo and for every public servant you see there might be 2 or 3 pensioners paid out of current taxation. Something has to give or happen , either a tech collapse of medical costs or mass automation so that productivity is so high that taxes go further. Blair was a plonker though I think everyone can agree on that

It should be sustainable as our economy has been producing a surplus since the 20's. Since the 80's that surplus has been distributed to fewer and fewer people, leaving the State underfunded.

Whether or not our present economy is sustainable long term is in question; due to population increase and the possibility of resource depletion and habitat destruction.

mariaalice

silverharp wrote: »

Farage isn't a fascist though, I doubt be would have looked out of place in English politics back 40 or 50 years ago. all the lefty obsessions are mainly middle class ones , trendy gender issues for example don't feature in your average working class area.

They don't feature in most peoples lives middle class or not and it's all fanned by social media and the internet so maybe the person who said the internet and social media are the biggest threat to western civilisation is right.

pumpkin4life

Calhoun wrote: »

Its crazy how in the past couple of years the right particularly in Europe is growing. As pointed out in this thread already, it boils down to something as simple as listening to citizens, rather than condescendingly forcing opinion on them.

Best Irish example i can think of was the Immigration centre in Roscommon, some of the people voiced opposition to it being used at the time. Their main concern was a local hotel that they had hopped would have been used to attract business to the town was being used, rather than the old immigration centre that already existed which was let to go into disrepair.

Did the government and the media of the day try and have dialogue with them? No they branded them as racists and moved along until they found some lemmings willing to give a good welcoming soundbite.

The rise of the right in five sentences:

Middle class left wing lad: Oh look at all those poor refugees! Let's invite them into our county!

Working class lad: Where are they going to go?

Middle class left wing lad: Well your area of course! Nowhere near me! I just want to feel good about myself because I'm pro gay!

Working class lad: But now you've no checks and we've got an increase in crimes and rapes and we don't have communities anymore and I can't get a house because there's way more demand now and my life is way worse these days.

Middle class left wing lad: Shut up you racist.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

JohnnyFlash

FTA69 is talking a huge amount of sense. I probably wouldn't agree with some of his/her politics, but there needs to be a realization from both the centre-right and centre-left that the neo-liberal doctrine they both embraced in the late 70's and early 80's has had some deeply negative connotations. Most moderate people in Europe want a market economy with strong social democratic structures. The postwar ideologies that brought prosperity to Western Europe and kept the tyranny of communism and fascism from the door.

The Financial Times just released a brilliant podcast about this actually: https://www.ft.com/content/31bfd147-9054-420f-8755-7585b4be1598

Well worth a listen, and like most things from the FT, surprisingly moderate in their editorial approach.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

FTA69 wrote: »

Back in the 1970s the 'middle ground' in the UK (and I use this as an example cos I live here and it's the epitome of an industrialised democracy) was a social housing program, free health care, free education and a proper skilled-job paying a decent wage.

And many of those same policies of giving free everything to everybody, while powerful labour unions demanded unsustainably high wages for unproductive state-run industries, drove the UK into the hands of the IMF in 1976 and led to the landslide election of Thatcher in 1979.

James Brown

The right are worried about social media and people having a say who don't own media companies. They stir up and use racists by distracting with talk about how tenants, the poor, the sick and foreigners are all out to take what you have while they continue to bleed the tax payer dry and make billions off of everyone else's misery.

sorry if this has been mentioned already. There is an interesting political theory called the 'horse-shoe theory'.



It is an analogy used to describe where the far left and the far right are so far from political centre, that start to resemble each other, and come around to meet each other like the shape of a horse shoe.


wiki

Cordell

FTA69 wrote: »

It's all well and good telling some 46 year old former pipe-fitter from Burnley that he should go to university and become a code writer.

Well that might just be the truth he needs to hear but not the one he wants to. And for sure it's a bigger problem when the far left/right tell him that they have a magic solution in form of nationalization, anti-immigration and anti capitalism.

Calhoun

Cordell wrote: »

Well that might just be the truth he needs to hear but not the one he wants to. And for sure it's a bigger problem when the far left/right tell him that they have a magic solution in form of nationalization, anti-immigration and anti capitalism.

Or it maybe the only truth that those telling him want their to be, there may well be other options out there but its a hell of allot easier to say this is what your getting and leave it at that.

Cordell

Which other options? Artificially create pipe fitting jobs to make him fell better about himself? It's been tried, doesn't work.

Your Face

Frostybrew wrote: »

It's a far greater danger than Islamic terrorism, gender equality, and immigration. IMO the far right comprises a failed group of ideologies, once again gaining popularity amongst morons. The last time this happened, it ended in the slaughter of millions and the almost complete destruction of Europe and the far east.

There is an old saying that "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". Why would the outcome of the present situation be any different?

Most people who aren't stupid don't like extremist politics regardless of what 'side' it's on.
People wanting a say in how their country is ran is part of the democratic dynamic.

We have learned a lot from history which is probably why the countries of the Western World are democracies, such as they are.

Twenty Grand

jacksie66 wrote: »

It's all a ploy by the government. Get us at each others throats. Left v right. Then when either side are killed off the government only has half a problem to control. The governments are the real enemies of the people, not the people themselves..

So long as people are happy to blame everything on immigrants and poor people, the government and wealthy will get a free pass to do whatever they want.

All the ills of the world can be placed at the feet of the policymakers who do not work for the people they represent, rather the people who pay them the most. Ireland is just as corrupt as the rest of the world.

oceanman

oceanman wrote: »

people are starting to get tired and fed up with the middle though...same ole same ole noting changes.

Because while the far left or the far right are dangerous, they also commit themselves to an actual ideal, or agenda. The middle doesn't. The middle is terribly wish-washy, switching one way or another depending on which way the 'perceived' electoral vote is pointing.

I'm not political, and have never been particularly interested in the political science debates that go on here at boards. Way over my head. Which is how most people I've spoken to... feel about politics too. That most of it has evolved to be nothing to do with normal people... and modern politicians are so removed from the electorate that they might as well be from a different planet.

Twenty Grand

Twenty Grand wrote: »

So long as people are happy to blame everything on immigrants and poor people, the government and wealthy will get a free pass to do whatever they want.

That doesn't really make sense, since the government will be blamed for allowing the immigrants in and any policies in place, that support immigrants over 'natives'.

As for the poor, that really depends on who that's referring to... The "poor" is no longer a simple clear cut section of society... especially in any country with a welfare state system. In Ireland, the poor wouldn't be the first choice for blame... that's more likely to be Travellers.

The government will always be blamed. Unfortunately, past governments/politicians tend to be given a free pass, in the rush to blame the present government. The government gets away with it because the public rely on voting as a sign of showing their displeasure, but ultimately it's a poor way to show anything. The Banking crash showed the contempt governments/officials had for the outrage of the public. Get voted out? Whooptie do... Back in again a few years later, when peoples anger lessens. Gotta love those short attention spans.

Ireland is just as corrupt as the rest of the world.

It is... and it isn't. You should try living in China to see how true corruption exists as part of the very fabric of a culture/society. India, Pakistan etc are also incredibly corrupt systems. Still, Ireland has degrees of corruption, but wouldn't be particularly terrible about it.

Star Bingo

Deleted User wrote: »

Because while the far left or the far right are dangerous, they also commit themselves to an actual ideal, or agenda. The middle doesn't. The middle is terribly wish-washy, switching one way or another depending on which way the 'perceived' electoral vote is pointing.

That’s not entirely the case we’re not all fence sitters. I tend to go the opposite way to which the popular opinion is pointing as it’s rarely a good sign.... the ideal is to adapt to whichever suits at any given time, and consider the more agreeable elements of both camps in search of that middle ground instead of divisive polarising extremes that drive a wedge between a people and leave them at odds with each other. Tend to find myself voting for parties I generally don’t agree with in order to attempt to readdress a balance and I’d have thought if you’re overly committed to either side you’re a blinkered extremist that can’t be shifted and that’s hardly ideal...

Star Bingo

Star Bingo wrote: »

That’s not entirely the case we’re not all fence sitters. I tend to go the opposite way to which the popular opinion is pointing as it’s rarely a good sign.... the ideal is to adapt to whichever suits at any given time, and consider the more agreeable elements of both camps in search of that middle ground instead of divisive polarising extremes that drive a wedge between a people and leave them at odds with each other. Tend to find myself voting for parties I generally don’t agree with in order to attempt to readdress a balance and I’d have thought if you’re overly committed to either side you’re a blinkered extremist that can’t be shifted and that’s hardly ideal...

My comment wasn't really directed at individuals (non-politicians), but rather political parties and those who get into power/authority. Government policies tend to seek out blocks of "votes" rather than deal with the hard issues that will cost them popularity. Naturally, they lose some popularity anyway because you can't please everyone. Getting one up on another political group is often more important than actually helping the country. Sometimes, I wonder if there's a scoreboard somewhere, showing how they've managed to score against each other, with bonus points of doing so with/without the public support.

I find those political groups that pursue the middle aren't committed to anything. Instead, everything has a some vague assurance of being addressed by them during one term or another because they're sympathetic to those who are involved.... but rarely anything productive is done.[at least on purpose, or willingly. Sometimes they're simply forced to be productive due to external issues like the EU, or Aliens from outer space]

ancapailldorcha

Deleted User wrote: »

I find those political groups that pursue the middle aren't committed to anything. Instead, everything has a some vague assurance of being addressed by them during one term or another because they're sympathetic to those who are involved.... but rarely anything productive is done.

I would disagree here. A centrist to me, be they of center-left or center-right bent is someone who would profess to follow a particular ideology such as free market capitalism who recognizes the need for pragmatism, a good example being the free market wing of the UK conservative party which hasn't dismantled much of the UK state.

ancapailldorcha

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I would disagree here. A centrist to me, be they of center-left or center-right bent is someone who would profess to follow a particular ideology such as free market capitalism who recognizes the need for pragmatism, a good example being the free market wing of the UK conservative party which hasn't dismantled much of the UK state.

Based on your example (and the part of mine that's quoted), I'm not sure how you're disagreeing with me. But.. disagree away. I certainly don't mind.

JohnnyFlash

Deleted User wrote: »

Because while the far left or the far right are dangerous, they also commit themselves to an actual ideal, or agenda. The middle doesn't. The middle is terribly wish-washy, switching one way or another depending on which way the 'perceived' electoral vote is pointing.

People across Europe have been voting for Christian and Social Democratic parties for the past 75 years now. Ireland has never had a Government that wasn't centrist, and that is healthy, and what the people wanted.

People want a nice mixture of open market economies and broad social protections. Not some middle class gimp going on about Marxism, racism, and late stage capitalism. And they certainly don't want some middle class gimp going on about how all the problems of the world are to blame on immigration and social progress.

JohnnyFlash

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

People across Europe have been voting for Christian and Social Democratic parties for the past 75 years now. Ireland has never had a Government that wasn't centrist, and that is healthy, and what the people wanted.

And times are'a'changing. People are no longer willing to simply accept what their parents accepted, or rather what they themselves accepted in their 20s. There is a gradual move away from the traditional parties because, well, they're all ****. As the older generation dies off, I'm expecting to see some rather interesting shifts in public perception and reactions to the behavior of politicians here.

People want a nice mixture of open market economies and broad social protections. Not some middle class gimp going on about Marxism, racism, and late stage capitalism. And they certainly don't want some middle class gimp going on about how all the problems of the world are to blame on immigration and social progress.

Oh, you're probably right... I really have no idea. I'm just basing my opinions around conversations I've been part of since I returned last year. There is a heap of bitterness simmering under the surface though, and no expectation that the 'popular' politicians or political parties care to help.

topper75

FTA69 wrote: »

That's what's happening now. If someone told you 12 years ago that a man like Farage and his mates would take Britain out of the EU, that Corbyn is posed to be the next Prime Minister, Trump is the President, that a bunch of loolas would take over Italy etc you'd think they were mental. But that's the world we live in now.

However today the people driving project Europe and austerity and deindustrialisation aren't the "liberal left". This sort of capitalism has its roots in Thatcher and Reagan and is currently being perpetuated by conservative parties at the behest of big business. It's not the Guardian dickheads who (painful as they are) are causing stagnating wages and flogging off public services.

I have to confess that you have given me food for thought and I was probably overly quick to stick a left label on the situation. There is the workers rights left of old (integrity) and the Guardian dickheads as you called them. Yes perhaps there is a certain strain of neo-liberalism in there behind this new drive to undermine sovereignty. Wealthy industrialists who live at a remove stand to gain most from the dark picture I painted. They have new cheap labour that won't organise. They have a society with no cohesion and therefore incapable of revolt.

Wibbs

topper75 wrote: »

They have new cheap labour that won't organise. They have a society with no cohesion and therefore incapable of revolt.

They also have a society that will find it increasingly difficult to have social welfare low cost healthcare and the like. You can have "open borders" or a social welfare system, it's bloody hard to sustain both. This means the worker ants are even less likely to complain as safety nets fade. It also means more control and profit of things like medical services. Observe the US if you want to see that organised theft taken to its extreme. Insurance companies and banks love this kinda thing too. When you have such apparently disparate groups like Guardian "lefties" and the extremely wealthy, big biz and libertarians agreeing on something it's a good plan to be wary. Always follow the money.