>Eastern Europe points the way to America's future under Donald Trump
telegraph.co.uk
Interesting article about how the old definitions of left and right are falling apart as populist nationalism takes hold. Nations in eastern Europe and now the US seems to be embracing a path that is socially conservative, but with big government spending on welfare and infrastructure.
article
No thoughts?
Is a nationalist populist state with strong welfare and government spending Sup Forums approved?
Actually i agree with the article on basic premise that you need to look to central/eastern europe to see political future. There are some mistakes thou. In our parliament there is no left-wing party at all at this moment. I think that in the future there will be need for technocratic liberal party based on sound sicentific policies but still upkeeping the traditions of right wing-governments.
those flags are backwards. stars go in upper left.
The real path can be dated back to 1951
A mixture of gullibility and cynicism had been an outstanding characteristic of mob mentality before it became an everyday phenomenon of masses. In an ever-changing, incomprehensible, world the masses had reached the point where they would, at the same time, believe everything and nothing, think that everything is possible and that nothing was true… Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to being deceived because it held every statement to be a lie anyhow. The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that, under such conditions, one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism; instead of deserting the leaders who had lied to them, they would protest that they had known all along the statement was a lie and would admire the leaders for their superior tactical cleverness
-Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism
We've known politics is multi-dimensional for a long while. Even the developers of the Tropico games have a more sophisticated understanding of politics than main stream meteor.
Left is always good.
What do you make of the broader premise, that the traditional left wing/right wing politics and positions are now blurred beyond recognition?
While some of what she says may be true the whole passage reeks of ivory tower preaching. That's certainly an aspect of the rejection of the political order. People are tired of the 'government knows best' approach. We want our voices heard, even if the result is painful.
It was written in 1951, the passage is about the rise to power of hitler and mussolini.
you think that's where we're headed? I see the new politic as healthy desu. I've watched my entire life globalism trample underfoot everyone in its path, with the only real benefit going to those capitalists who already had the money to benefit of a globalised economy.
> I've watched my entire life globalism trample underfoot everyone in its path
Have you now?
>stars go in upper left
Nigger do you think leftists understand the flag code? These are the same people who don't get what putting it upside down means
national socialism
It is inevitable as society will reach further automatization and technological progress. Both ideologies failures become apparent. Why shouldn't you adapt best of both worlds? With a due course of time people realize that certain promises by left and right are impossible to realize.
There are many ways this can be played on. Why such a paradigm shift is dangerous to rich, internationalist elites? Because it makes control of these people difficult. There is no longer divide et impera situation, which enables pushing laws helping rich people and their various agenda they have in mind.
Pretty much yes. I'm coming up 30. When I was in 3rd year uni the global economy crashed leaving me and many like me with fucked prospects. The manufacturing base that sustained so many towns and cities has been gutted with no regard to what was to replace it. People who have good degrees cannot find work cause employers know they can hold out for an Indian or chink with the same degree, experience and willing to work for less.
I wonder what age category you fall into? Too young to have seen it yet, or told old to have been affected?
>Why such a paradigm shift is dangerous to rich, internationalist elites? Because it makes control of these people difficult. There is no longer divide et impera situation, which enables pushing laws helping rich people and their various agenda they have in mind.
Very nice.
>When I was in 3rd year uni the global economy crashed
.. And that was caused by "globalism"?
A technocratic party will eventually be tainted by dubversive pseudoscience.
(((they))) have manipulated the education study system so much that a PhD holder in gender studies is now viewed as an intellectual by normies.
*subversive
...
>Left-right paradigm
This is probably the biggest bullshit in modern politics.
You simply cannot compress hundreds of policies in one word.
For example, let's take the so called "leftists": Bernie Sander and Hillary Clinton are basically polar opposites. Sanders is a pseudo-communist with minority pandering populism. Clinton is a oligarch that will say what her corporate and banker overlords want.
Mean while the "right wing" candidates: we had a Theocrat and old-school conservative Ted Cruz, we have a Nationalist Trump, we had a Libertarian Rand Paul, all with completely different set of policies and agendas under the same "right wing" flag.
The only reason we have left-right paradigm is because we have a two party system in most(if not all) western countries.
*sigh*
Doesn't matter whether or not I approve, but it looks like even more debt is our future. At least we may have something to show for it, even if it bankrupts the country.
It was caused by greed. The same people pushing for globalisation were the people largely to blame. That the world economy was to integrated and built on the pile of sand that is international finance the effects were felt everywhere.
The struggle for jobs that sees many people may age severely underemployed is a direct result of globalist intent.
That's kinda the point the article makes. It expressly says that globalisation is the reason that the old definitions are falling apart. The eastern euro parties mentioned for example have strong welfare and gov spending, but are socially conservative and nationalist. ie. aspects of what was traditionally considered left or right.
Given technological progress and automation has ensured that more and more of the wealth lands in fewer and fewer hands, do you not see gov spending, on both welfare and infrastructure, as worthwhile for social cohesion?
Not in my country, yet. Journalists are horrendously bad, but that is why PiS is fundamentally planning on altering education system. I actually oppose of this, that we couldn't reform current educational system to suit our needs, that a total rebuild is not necessary. Unfortunately I lost, mighty Kaczynski will have his way and we will have 8(+1 year 0 class) years basic education. After they are done with basic education universities will be next on reform list. They need 8 years to fully transform Poland and permanently change it for generations. This will provide good launcing platform for liberal, nationalistic, technocratic nat-soc party.
Aren't you kind of assuming that it would even be possible for markets to be as healthy as they were without extensive international trade?
You don't have me convinced that globalism is the cause or even the symptom of a broken system. If anything is to blame, it's american brand capitalism. Which is not something Trump is going to do anything about.
Socialism is always bad.
Fuck the poor!
It's not about social cohesion it's about the tremendous amount my nation has. Perhaps some day we'll have a zero scarcity world, but that's a long ways off. I'd rather not have generations of indentured servants to foreign or domestic powers to pay of the debt as a price in achieving that goal.
All you have to do is realize that debt is artificial construct of current economic FIAT system. We are moving towards energy based economic system, but we still have long way. Debt can always be erased, or there can be a war, but in modern times no-one wants a war with so powerful weapons we have nowadays (nukes among others). These weapons also solidify societal structures of societies in certain manner, but that's discussion for another thread, perhaps.
Blaming globalism for absolutely everything might be a bit reductionist, but the push for it has been at the behest of those who will benefit the most, corporations. If we consider it really took of under Thatcher and Reagan, and the ideology driving them (privitisation, rolling back the state, devotion to the free market) then it is fair to blame 'globalisation' on the suffering on many in the west.
You're right that debt is unsustainable. Breaking out of the globalised system, that works exclusively for the elite, will be painful. They will out to punish us. Look at Trump. Look at Brexit. All the 'experts' warned us of threat to the market. But in the UK, investment is up and unemployment is down. Almost like the forecasts are prejudice.
That doesn't apply to the east.
The old definitions of left and right had fallen a long time ago, I don't understand how somebody can still be blind to this fact.
>socially conservative, but with big government spending on welfare and infrastructure
This is literally what "right-wing" means in Europe. Free market was never a part of that, and only thanks to american cultural influence this intellectual abomination has been planted here.
This article is retarded, and clearly written from atlantic, "republican" standpoint.
>Free market was never a part of that, and only thanks to american cultural influence this intellectual abomination has been planted here.
Maybe true where you are. Thatcher made the right and free-marketism one and the same in the UK. Though yes, you're right. The lines have been blurring for a while, with the ostensibly workers-orientated Labour party embracing the free market. I think the takeaway from the article is something that has been known or spoke of for a while now on Sup Forums, that the new divide is between nationalists and internationalists.
>that the new divide is between nationalists and internationalists
But the problem with that is in the mainstream politics there's really only one side of that - the internationalists. Guys like Putin, Orban and others, despite appearances, all strive towards the same goal, with the only difference being in which hands will the decisive power rest. With that in mind, can we honestly say that there *is* such conflict (nationalists vs. internationalists)? I seriously doubt it.
Based Stein. Trump has to pay for breaking his promises!
Well from the article, Hungary took active measures to put the nation above international finance. I don't think anybody is making the case for complete isolationism. But to me, nationalism makes sense. Nationalism in the sense of using the state to keep jobs in country and to negotiate good deals that serve the nation instead of international capital.
>With that in mind, can we honestly say that there *is* such conflict (nationalists vs. internationalists)? I seriously doubt it.
I disagree. Some Sup Forumsacks will be familiar with the new conflict taking this shape. For long enough the MSM refused to acknowledge the kickback was against globalism. But with Trump and Brexit, among others they can no longer sweep it under the rug.
Here's a few articles where they discuss 'globalism'. Something you didn't see in the MSM til very recently.
washingtonpost.com
>A More Perfect Union Needs Both Nationalism and Globalism
bloomberg.com
Even here the articles chide us plebs for not understanding globalism. But people are starting to understand 'it' well enough. 'it' being the will of governments and corporations overruling any concerns of the citizens.
this this this this fucking this
the NSDAP was this. Mussolini was this in spades.
things are simply going back to normal
>In our parliament there is no left-wing party
PIS are catholic communists.