Quantcast
Rise of the far right in Europe. - Page 47 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content

Welcome to the new and improved TLW!

 

Some of you may experience issues logging in and will get an 'incorrect password' error. Don't worry, you haven't typed it in wrong and your password hasn't been changed. You will need to reset it though in order to log in. Click the reset password link and you will receive an email with your new temporary password. Once logged in, you need to choose a new password (or restore to your old one) otherwise you will be locked out again.

 

If you have an out of date email address linked to your account, then you won't receive the new password. If that's the case then you'll need to email me (dave @liverpoolway.co.uk) or send me a tweet @theliverpoolway and I'll update your password manually. 

 

Any other problems or questions just let me know.

 

Thanks

Dave

Sugar Ape

Rise of the far right in Europe.

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, SasaS said:

What do you think are the reasons why Brazilians elected him president?

 

What is Ne Moe Imya's take on this?
 

My take is ... I'm almost too depressed to have a take, to be honest.

 

The short version is that Brasil is in trouble. One thing that the foreign press hasn't really reported on as much is how big an effect the whole corruption scandal had on the whole political outlook of the everyday Brasilian people. You had your standard run-of-the-mill elites-are-stealing-money-from-everyone scandal and for ONCE they actually managed to capture and imprison everyone involved.

 

And I do mean everyone. Like, for once it wasn't just the fall guys but they actually put presidents and CEOs in prison.

 

But then the problem was that it was the leftists who were in charge so they got most of the blame (even though both sides had been doing it for years, it just happened that when the news broke it was Lula's turn with his hand in the cookie jar). And the companies involved were so connected and had their tentacles all over the economy that when they went down, so did a solid tenth or so of the jobs in the country.

 

So now you have massive unemployment and absolute distrust of the establishment; almost no surprise that Bolsonaro was able to win. The "good news" here is that unlike Trump, the only ones who are going to suffer from our new president is Brasilians - we don't have an army to go threatening half the world with. No, for Brasil it will just be Brasilians who suffer.

 

I can't wait for the world to move past the whole new "neo-fascist" wave that seems to have grown so popular. I just hope it happens before my sons are old enough to be drafted to fight in some senseless and utterly needless world war.

 

Sorry I'm so down, it's been a tough day or two at ranch NMI.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The global precariat (existence without predictability or security), of which I am a part, are victims of the drastic social changes in the post WW2 period. We have almost no economic, social or cultural capital. Unless you redress that imbalance there's a lot in this class that have nothing to lose from chaos and extreme violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hades said:

The global precariat (existence without predictability or security), of which I am a part, are victims of the drastic social changes in the post WW2 period. We have almost no economic, social or cultural capital. Unless you redress that imbalance there's a lot in this class that have nothing to lose from chaos and extreme violence.

In Europe, the USA and much of the rest of the West, the numbers of the precariat and those in absolute poverty declined dramatically in the first 35 years after WW2. In that period, the redressing of the balance that is needed again now actually took place, to some degree, and societies became fairer.

 

The situation you're talking about  (in the West, at least) only really kicked in around 1980.

 

My only other quibble with that post is the last sentence. The precariat may think they have nothing to lose from chaos and violence, but if the chaos and violence leads (as it often does) to Fascists taking power, then history tells us that the precariat will lose everything that they do have.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

In Europe, the USA and much of the rest of the West, the numbers of the precariat and those in absolute poverty declined dramatically in the first 35 years after WW2. In that period, the redressing of the balance that is needed again now actually took place, to some degree, and societies became fairer.

 

The situation you're talking about  (in the West, at least) only really kicked in around 1980.

 

My only other quibble with that post is the last sentence. The precariat may think they have nothing to lose from chaos and violence, but if the chaos and violence leads (as it often does) to Fascists taking power, then history tells us that the precariat will lose everything that they do have.

 

The generous welfare state and the degeneration of morals and nationhood laid the seeds for the rampant greed of the boomers, destruction of the family unit and of local communities. I believe in welfare, but I don't support single motherhood or having children one can't afford or raise with a stronge sense of morality. The cruelty of austerity and welfare policy now is because of the excesses of all classes.

 

As for your second point, people that have nothing to lose won't stop until they are dead or in prison. They would rather go their deaths for a fascist than be disrespected any further by what they see as condescension by liberals. The fact that the elite aren't much different from each other doesn't register to them. It's all about the respect they're 'taking back'. Unless you speak to that fundamental lost respect, they won't listen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By definition, the precariat have something to lose. The surest way for them to lose it all is to follow a Fascist. 

 

The German working classes were somewhat worse off in 1945 than in 1933 (when they thought they had nothing to lose).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goddam Russkies stirring up online hatred of Islam.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/russian-trolls-top-priority-in-uk-is-stirring-hatred-of-islam-ptlck6nq7?fbclid=IwAR1nf-ywlStiWKlqIIjNk4l-zhJCZscfvtB32GRs9WRcQiFXKv6-7F_fmgA

 

Encouraging division over Islam has been the primary tactic of Russian trolls targeting Britain on Twitter, according to research.

 

Tweets about Islam far outnumbered those about Brexit and were also more widely shared, an analysis of nine million posted by a troll factory in St Petersburg found. Last month Twitter released the dataset of the tweets, which had been posted by 3,841 blocked accounts affiliated to the notorious Internet Research Agency.

 

Initial investigations highlighted the prevalence of pro-Leave messages, including a co-ordinated push on the day of the 2016 vote. However, Demos, a cross-party British think tank, has since found that the messages most widely shared related primarily to Islam and stirring up Islamophobia.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paypal have reportedly suspended Mr. Waxy-Lemon's account due to a breach of their terms of usage. 

 

Don't they realise that he's got mansions to buy??? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matthew Goodwin argues, in yesterdays opinion piece in the G, it's not so much about immigration, but a "societal shift", although I don't quite understand the difference. And the theory of overwhelmingly positive support for the message of national populists rather than negative reaction to the "mainstream" is interesting, but it would appear that in the UK it does not hold entirely true, since the rise of UKIP seems to have been driven by a single issue (EU) rather than a prolonged support for national populism.

He also thinks populists will only get stronger and stronger. Will he eat his words again?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/08/national-populism-immigration-financial-crisis-globalisation?fbclid=IwAR2VAxa9gfOOdsvyw8C_ZeP1m4sVNi5cYCoT5EW3ECpEsk4GCJeYBlpcO-4

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put it in here even though it's not exactly far right, maybe we need a "rise of the not so far right" thread, as a more interesting phenomenon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, SasaS said:

I put it in here even though it's not exactly far right, maybe we need a "rise of the not so far right" thread, as a more interesting phenomenon. 

No, thanks for posting . It is very relative and a good piece if somewhat depressing !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SasaS said:

I put it in here even though it's not exactly far right, maybe we need a "rise of the not so far right" thread, as a more interesting phenomenon. 

The far right would be nowhere without the "I'm not far right, but..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Muzzie meth addict stabbed a cafe owner to death before being shot and killed by police here in Melbourne.

 

 

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happens when you don’t listen to people when they say they don’t want pickled gherkin on their sarnies.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on. Everyone calls each other all sorts, then shakes hands at stumps and goes to the pub/teetotal equivalent at the end of the day. That leads to more social cohesion than the physical distance between sects that requires constant ideological purity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cop didn't have to shoot him right in the chest like that. Had plenty of time to hit him in either leg or shoulder even. I'd call that murder. Even though the perpetrator was a cunt he shouldn't have been killed like that. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hades said:

Oh come on. Everyone calls each other all sorts, then shakes hands at stumps and goes to the pub/teetotal equivalent at the end of the day. That leads to more social cohesion than the physical distance between sects that requires constant ideological purity.

Spoken like a cunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sort of rebuttal and review of Goodwin's book on national populism mentioned above which is "unstinting in its generosity to rightwing populist leaders, and unfailingly compassionate to their supporters" according to the review.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/nov/15/national-populism-review-compassion-for-supporters-of-trump-brexit-le-pen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2018 at 7:44 PM, ZonkoVille77 said:

Cop didn't have to shoot him right in the chest like that. Had plenty of time to hit him in either leg or shoulder even. I'd call that murder. Even though the perpetrator was a cunt he shouldn't have been killed like that. 

Are you for real, mate? Murder? The man is clearly a threat to their lives, has already murdered one person, and they have given him every chance.

 

I'm the first person to blame racism and police brutality when it's called for but this shooting is pretty clearly justified (if obviously tragic). I can only assume you've never actually fired a gun if you think you can just "hit him in the leg or shoulder" whenever you want. There's a reason they don't train police officers to aim for anything except centre mass, and only people who get their firearms knowledge from video games and movies think otherwise.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they were quite lenient and took a risk. If he'd stabbed one or both he'd have gotten a gun with the potential to do even more damage 

 

From Wiki: 

 

Sergeant Dennis Tueller, of the Salt Lake City, Utah Police Department wondered how quickly an attacker with a knife could cover 21 feet (6.4 m), so he timed volunteers as they raced to stab the target. He determined that it could be done in 1.5 seconds. These results were first published as an article in SWATmagazine in 1983 and in a police training video by the same title, "How Close is Too Close?"[1][2]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ne Moe Imya said:

Are you for real, mate? Murder? The man is clearly a threat to their lives, has already murdered one person, and they have given him every chance.

 

I'm the first person to blame racism and police brutality when it's called for but this shooting is pretty clearly justified (if obviously tragic). I can only assume you've never actually fired a gun if you think you can just "hit him in the leg or shoulder" whenever you want. There's a reason they don't train police officers to aim for anything except centre mass, and only people who get their firearms knowledge from video games and movies think otherwise.

 

If you are happy to support murder that's your choice.

 

He should have been given the opportunity to be put on trial no matter who he murdered or how many he murdered.

 

I suppose you think the Nuremberg trials shouldn't have happened then? They should all have been shot at point blank range then instead of being put on trial for their actions?

 

I make no apologies for murderers of any sort. But there were clearly plenty of opportunities for those policemen to shoot him in the leg to take him down.

 

EDIT: Negged, for your stupid childish comment about video games. Grow the fuck up, dude.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course criminals should be put on trial whenever possible.

 

Key words there: "whenever possible."

 

To use your example, we put SOME of the Nazis on trial in Nuremburg. The ones who survived the war. When they were safely in cages, then we could try them in a court of law and pass appropriate sentence. But when they were free, rampaging around Europe and murdering people, we shot them or bombed them to death.

 

This man in Melbourne was literally murdering people and threatening the lives of everyone around him. So sure, it would have been great if they had been able to figure out a way to subdue him without threat to anyone else's life. Unfortunately, as often happens, they could not do that, and once it became quite clear that there was no way to safely arrest him, the (in my view justifiable) decision was taken to shoot him.

 

Unfortunate, certainly. Murder? Nah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10 November 2018 at 12:44 PM, ZonkoVille77 said:

Cop didn't have to shoot him right in the chest like that. Had plenty of time to hit him in either leg or shoulder even. I'd call that murder. Even though the perpetrator was a cunt he shouldn't have been killed like that. 

When firing at a moving target you go for the biggest part of the body which is always the chest area or you risk missing and you or others dying. I haven't seen the video so am assuming the fella with the knife was moving toward the armed bizzie. If so then the bizzie had no option. Might even have been suicide by cop. Fuck him. He chose to go and kill someone then wave a knife around. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×