The Right is Giving Up on Democracy - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Traditional 'common sense' values and duty to the state.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14731380
quetzalcoatl wrote:I find it difficult to accept the thesis that social democrats object to democracy as a concept.


Sorry, perhaps I wasn't clear.

I think that social-democrats do accept democracy as a concept, but they lack the tactics that the Jacobins and communists have historically used in attempting to bridge the gap to a more perfect form of democracy.
#14731396
The Immortal Goon wrote:I would agree with this.

Though I think much could be done to contextualize this into the ancient world, there wasn't really a right-left as we know it now. That term and thinking comes from the great French Revolution, which absolutely defined what we think of as, "right," and, "left," as the people against extending further democracy sat on the right; the people that wanted to extend democracy further sat on the left.

In rhetoric, even the Jacobins (who ran a tyranny) did so in the name of democracy. Their constitution, which was by far the most democratic, was to be implemented when the internal and external war was finished.

The reaction, again explicitly called the right, objected not as much to the tyranny (though in fairness to do so would have been suicidal) as against the democracy.

Hence, first Napoleon, and then the conservative founding fathers (like him) went out of their way in the Vienna System to make sure that another democracy could never rise again in Europe. This was, explicitly, right-wing in name and rhetoric and political theory and everything.

Those that pushed more equality were always on the left, both in the US and Europe.

The seeds of this are reflected still in the DNA of the extreme and more moderated right. I've posted this before, so forgive me.

Fascism is the ideology of the petite-bourgousie in decay. When confronted by the haute-bourgousie on the one hand, and the proletariat on the other, they have little to do. But, when conditions are correct; when the haute-bourgousie are in serious danger, when the proletariat are rising, than the haute-bourgousie has a purpose for the use of fascism:



This is, incidentally, exactly what the libertarian Founding Fathers said was great about fascism:









The Von Mises institute today continues the interpretation:



As does the CATO Institute that keeps fascists on its staff.

Milton Friedman's grandson concluded that the future of capitalism could not be democratic:



Then you have the fascists themselves that set themselves up as the defenders of a natural hierarchy (that is, opposed to democracy) to which the market is part, and a way to defend this "natural" way against the democratic hordes:











Fascism and libertarianism aren't the same thing, but they come from the same people with the same impulse. It's the cry of the doomed petite-bourgousie, stuck firmly between two historic classes, with nothing to sustain itself but populist visions of destroying its enemies and creating a fanciful utopia. But it is not a class of historic relevance, and its cries are always in vain. This is the opposite, in the words of both fascists and libertarians, of the the doctrine of the conditions of the liberation of the proletariat.

Even in this very modern conflict against the Marxists, for both the fascist and the libertarian the main thrust of the argument was against the democracy that they represented.

Note that this is not exactly the same as the social-democrats that object not to the (real) left's tactics (both Jacobin and socialist) in order to secure a perfected democracy, but democracy itself as a conception.


Goon, don't bother bringing logic in Dump supporters like Donald and BlackJack, to them you don't exchange words, you exchange lead.
#14731397
Thank you Immortal Goon for that post, saving it on Word in my hard drive for further quotation in the future, if necessary. The reactionaries dragged their feet until the post-WW2 period when public support was through the roof for a Welfare State, and in the 1980s-onwards saw an opportunity to reverse & chip away as much as they could.
#14737357
I wonder what will happen to the Left, in the wake of the Right's disavowal of democracy.

The more American liberals hunker down on the sociocultural front, the worse their state. Time and time again I've heard arguments against Trump's hate-inciting rhetoric, which, valid as they are, have no meaning anymore for the opposition, who have become used to accusations of bigotry.

What the Left needs to do is address the economic concerns of the white, working-class demographic that abandoned it during the election. Corruption, no less than hate, is a reality. After all, I could list many of Trump's dangerous personal flaws and many more of his blatant lies, but would I sway a single Trump supporter? No.

The reason for this is simple: Republicans and Democrats don't share a sociocultural language anymore. Their moral differences, for now, are irreconcilable. Instead, the Left needs an economic pitch, and it needs one fast—before it becomes any more an accomplice of the establishment that Republicans are so seeking to dismantle.
#14737383
What the Left needs to do is address the economic concerns of the white, working-class demographic that abandoned it during the election.


During the election? :lol: Try the last 30 years and you might be more accurate.
#14737386
Ah. Reading about this some more and finding you're right. This election was a nail on the coffin. My apologies if I sometimes don't have the facts straight—I'm just now getting back into politics.
#14747104
Decky wrote:During the election? :lol: Try the last 30 years and you might be more accurate.


The left hasn't abandoned the "white working class," they have been their only champions for the past 30 years. Whos on the side of unions? The left. Who wants higher working standards? The left. Who wants to actually improve health care for the working class? The left. Who has been against the "free trade deals" forever? The left. The assault on the "white working class" has been performed by the right, and even by Mr. Donald Trump himself!

Even Hillary didn't "abandon" the white working class, she just didn't spend time trying to drive home the point that her policies which helped the working class also helped the WHITE working class. It was a messaging issue, not a policy issue. Oh, and the media absolutely refused to talk anything about policies or mention what she would actually do for the white working class.
#14747111
Even Hillary didn't "abandon" the white working class, she just didn't spend time trying to drive home the point that her policies which helped the working class also helped the WHITE working class. It was a messaging issue, not a policy issue. Oh, and the media absolutely refused to talk anything about policies or mention what she would actually do for the white working class.


Nonsense. Hillary definitely abandoned the white working class during her campaign. She is a fossil who believed blaming white men for everything would get her votes from women and minorities. Who knows what she personally believes, but she thought this would get her elected.
Edit: You are right she did not try hard enough to get her agenda across. Her smug confidence in winning was apparent and another reason she lost. She was so convinced she could not lose with the media in her pocket that she did not put out any serious effort.
#14747230
Nonsense. Hillary definitely abandoned the white working class during her campaign. She is a fossil who believed blaming white men for everything would get her votes from women and minorities. Who knows what she personally believes, but she thought this would get her elected.


I object to calling her a fossil but other than that I think this is about right. I think she took white male voters for granted without a doubt. I think she (and just about everyone else) "forgot" that there is nothing unusual about white men and their wives/girlfriends/sisters/mothers voting alike. The most important political dialog in this country happens around the dinner table.



Edit: You are right she did not try hard enough to get her agenda across. Her smug confidence in winning was apparent and another reason she lost. She was so convinced she could not lose with the media in her pocket that she did not put out any serious effort.


She put forward an effort but she spent her time preaching to the converted. She took voters for granted and it cost her the opportunity of a lifetime.
#14747232
recurnal wrote:I wonder what will happen to the Left, in the wake of the Right's disavowal of democracy.

The more American liberals hunker down on the sociocultural front, the worse their state. Time and time again I've heard arguments against Trump's hate-inciting rhetoric, which, valid as they are, have no meaning anymore for the opposition, who have become used to accusations of bigotry.

What the Left needs to do is address the economic concerns of the white, working-class demographic that abandoned it during the election. Corruption, no less than hate, is a reality. After all, I could list many of Trump's dangerous personal flaws and many more of his blatant lies, but would I sway a single Trump supporter? No.

The reason for this is simple: Republicans and Democrats don't share a sociocultural language anymore. Their moral differences, for now, are irreconcilable. Instead, the Left needs an economic pitch, and it needs one fast—before it becomes any more an accomplice of the establishment that Republicans are so seeking to dismantle.


The exact opposite is true. The Democrats have definitely abandoned, not just the white working class, but the working class in general and are on their knees sucking corporate cock alongside the Republicans. They are, at this point, from a policy perspective, completely indistinguishable.

The only way they have left to compete is through insults in the media and obstructionism in Congress. They're like two companies selling an identical product, and all they can do to increase profit is to dump all their money into marketing.
#14747262
The "left," if by that you mean the Democrats, are like the Weimar Social-Democrats wringing their hands about parliamentary procedure while the right openly tells them that they will refuse to cooperate with any half-measures and will only allow their own plans to succeed by any means necessary. The right was prepared to at least threaten an insurrection if they lost the election, the Democrats are trying to show everyone how they can appease a force that promised to imprison their leaders and destroy their institution.

It may not be this time, but eventually this congo-line led by the American Nazi Party and KKK to the right, followed faithfully by the Trumpites; whose hips are held by the Republican Party; being followed loyally by the Democrats; then the Greens endorsing the Democrats and on and on...This congo-line is going to have to come to an end.

And it's not going to be following it around that stops it.

Image
#14747263
Saeko wrote:The exact opposite is true. The Democrats have definitely abandoned, not just the white working class, but the working class in general and are on their knees sucking corporate cock alongside the Republicans. They are, at this point, from a policy perspective, completely indistinguishable.

The only way they have left to compete is through insults in the media and obstructionism in Congress. They're like two companies selling an identical product, and all they can do to increase profit is to dump all their money into marketing.


In addition to mainstream fake parties, we now have fake alternatives as well. Trump is giving us straight-up corporatism, slapping a populist label on it, and voila! A fake insurrection.

Even real parties have evolved into fakes. Corbyn alluded to the fact that the right offered solutions to real problems, fake as those solutions were. The left committed suicide by aligning itself with the dying neoliberal order, all because of its insane commitment to internationalism.

So what alternatives - real alternatives - actually remain? I think Ian Welsh summed it up well:

Because neo-liberalism has failed, and is finally seen, clearly, to have failed, there are now only three options.

1) Right Wing Populism
2) Left Wing Populism
3) Police State Extension of the Current Order

That’s it. Choose your sides, neoliberalism will only be viable if you’re willing to go full surveillance and police state.


Trump seems to vacillate between 1 and 3. Inevitably, because he is weak willed and insecure, he will stumble his way toward option 3.
#14749569
quetzalcoatl wrote:In addition to mainstream fake parties, we now have fake alternatives as well. Trump is giving us straight-up corporatism, slapping a populist label on it, and voila! A fake insurrection.

Even real parties have evolved into fakes. Corbyn alluded to the fact that the right offered solutions to real problems, fake as those solutions were. The left committed suicide by aligning itself with the dying neoliberal order, all because of its insane commitment to internationalism.

So what alternatives - real alternatives - actually remain? I think Ian Welsh summed it up well:



Trump seems to vacillate between 1 and 3. Inevitably, because he is weak willed and insecure, he will stumble his way toward option 3.



Trump is giving us straight up fascism, which is what you'll find between 1 and 3. He's not vacillating, while he is comically insecure (with his tiny hands and long ties), you've simply fallen for the stage act into thinking the rest.
#14749570
(with his tiny hands and long ties)


Nothing personal, because you are one of many, but how do liberals justify these type of comments to themselves? You say you stand for a lack of prejudice and all of your comments demonstrate absurd prejudice. Really, you object to Trump because he has small hands and wears ties you don't like. :knife:
#14749664
Really, you object to Trump because he has small hands and wears ties you don't like. :knife:


Yup. That's it for sure. Its especially the ties.

But hey. Give they guy a chance.
#14749832
One Degree wrote:Nothing personal, because you are one of many, but how do liberals justify these type of comments to themselves? You say you stand for a lack of prejudice and all of your comments demonstrate absurd prejudice. Really, you object to Trump because he has small hands and wears ties you don't like. :knife:


My comment has nothing to do with prejudice. In haste, I did make a mistake in wording, so if you would - it's not Trumps small hands that bother me, it's his defensiveness about them. That is not prejudice, because it is based upon actual events and actions. But nice try at trying to stuff words into my mouth and making those hypocritical. :D

And it's his defensiveness which is so worrisome. Insecure people in power do VERY scary things to try and "prove" themselves.
#14749912
Insecure people in power do VERY scary things to try and "prove" themselves.


I believe the fallacy in your reasoning is insecure people do not run for president, ego maniacs do.
#14749977
One Degree wrote:I believe the fallacy in your reasoning is insecure people do not run for president, ego maniacs do.


This isn't reasoning, it's observation. Fallacies do not apply. Trump actions point to a severe insecurity. His ridiculous comb over and hair. His defensiveness about the size of his hands. His assaults on women.
#14749978
This isn't reasoning, it's observation. Fallacies do not apply. Trump actions point to a severe insecurity. His ridiculous comb over and hair. His defensiveness about the size of his hands. His assaults on women.


So, kind of like Benjamin Franklin or JFK? :lol:
#14749982
I don't think Trump is either an egomaniac or insecure. I think he is a very smart man. Look. He played the world like a cheap drum. Masterfully. He still has us holding our collective breath.

If he were either he would have failed. He most certainly did not.

If you are looking for egomania or institutional insecurity, look at the media that got him elected.

On edit:

If I were playing it like he is I would show extreme defensiveness over trivia. It intimidates the hell out of the opposition.
You can’t wall off the islands

them some short migrants

Liars and ruthless people change the world too. […]

Irish general election: full results Seán C[…]

Trump Pardons...

I am waiting for the fools who have fallen for Ob[…]