Rise of the far right in Europe.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Why is this in any way insightful? 

 

His actions within his country were certainly not affected by these reports (probably not even within the US were these informative to the public as a whole). Certainly he was condemned and ultimately defeated.

 

Are you trying to suggest a parallel between a fella who was elected and this?

Why is the study of history from contemporary sources insightful?

 

Yeah. Good question.  Why does anybody bother learning anything?

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Why is this in any way insightful? 

 

His actions within his country were certainly not affected by these reports (probably not even within the US were these informative to the public as a whole). Certainly he was condemned and ultimately defeated.

 

Are you trying to suggest a parallel between a fella who was elected and this?

The point is that if we focus on Fascism and Nazism through the prism of WWII, we end up looking for monsters. Not surprisingly, we don't find them among our current political leaders; but we do find elected leaders who are spoken of as being controversial, outspoken, unpredictable, politically incorrect, tough, occasionally gaffe-prone, never dull, etc. etc.

 

History teaches that the monsters don't initially appear as monsters. They appear as populists, from outside a jaded political mainstream and before you know it they're doing monstrous things, like locking children in cages (Trump), arresting people who try to save refugees from drowning (Salvini) or engineering a crisis that will cause deaths from shortages of medicines (Johnson).

[Rico1304]

3 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The point is that if we focus on Fascism and Nazism through the prism of WWII, we end up looking for monsters. Not surprisingly, we don't find them among our current political leaders; but we do find elected leaders who are spoken of as being controversial, outspoken, unpredictable, politically incorrect, tough, occasionally gaffe-prone, never dull, etc. etc.

 

History teaches that the monsters don't initially appear as monsters. They appear as populists, from outside a jaded political mainstream and before you know it they're doing monstrous things, like locking children in cages (Trump), arresting people who try to save refugees from drowning (Salvini) or engineering a crisis that will cause deaths from shortages of medicines (Johnson).

Cults of personalities you say? Johnson is facing a real threat of a vote of no confidence days after being placed in charge. 

 

Anyone who opposes JC has been told to fuck off out of Labour.  

[Bjornebye]

7 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Cults of personalities you say? Johnson is facing a real threat of a vote of no confidence days after being placed in charge. 

 

Anyone who opposes JC has been told to fuck off out of Labour.  

With all due respect mate, Johnson is a fucking idiot. 

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

With all due respect mate, Johnson is a fucking idiot. 

He’s a fucking buffoon. I wouldn’t trust him to toss a coin. He’s an embarrassment.  

 

But to pretend that this populists, from outside a jaded political mainstream  doesn’t apply to JC is mental. 

 

Theres hundreds of posts on here that portray the guy as the second coming. 

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

He’s a fucking buffoon. I wouldn’t trust him to toss a coin. He’s an embarrassment.  

 

But to pretend that this populists, from outside a jaded political mainstream  doesn’t apply to JC is mental. 

 

Theres hundreds of posts on here that portray the guy as the second coming. 

I like Corbyn. His heart is in the right place. Do I think he should run this country? No. I don't think he is strong enough.

 

But if you had to choose between the two, only a raving mad lunatic would pick Johnson. 

[TheHowieLama]

16 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The point is that if we focus on Fascism and Nazism through the prism of WWII, we end up looking for monsters. Not surprisingly, we don't find them among our current political leaders; but we do find elected leaders who are spoken of as being controversial, outspoken, unpredictable, politically incorrect, tough, occasionally gaffe-prone, never dull, etc. etc.

 

History teaches that the monsters don't initially appear as monsters. They appear as populists, from outside a jaded political mainstream and before you know it they're doing monstrous things, like locking children in cages (Trump), arresting people who try to save refugees from drowning (Salvini) or engineering a crisis that will cause deaths from shortages of medicines (Johnson).

Yep, bad stuff done by people who are elected. So democracy at work. You don't like the outcome of some of it. I don't like the outcome of some of it.

 

But to compare any of these with a fella who declared himself unilaterally Leader for Life (and who was ironically a committed socialist for most of his time prior) is not really learning anything. Cuz they are not in any way connected to the current political climate. I will be on your side as soon as an elected head of state in a Western Country (read Europe/US) makes a similar declaration.

Unless you want to talk about some of the guys in South America who have done the same. But they are on the left.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

33 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Cults of personalities you say? Johnson is facing a real threat of a vote of no confidence days after being placed in charge. 

 

Anyone who opposes JC has been told to fuck off out of Labour.  

I never said anything at all about personality cults.

 

The Conservative Government is facing a Parliamentary vote of no confidence; there is no such move from within the Conservative Party. 

 

People who have spent the last 4 years actively working against the Labour Party and spreading lies about its members have been told to fuck off.  Others who disagree with Corbyn - including many those who resigned in the various flouncey coup attempts and those who stood for leadership against him - get the same mix of support and opposition that any MP gets.

 

So, apart from each of your three sentences being wrong, cool post.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

15 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 (and who was ironically a committed socialist for most of his time prior) 

 

Oh, mate!

 

You really need to read some history. And politics. Urgently.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

17 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

 

Unless you want to talk about some of the guys in South America who have done the same. But they are on the left.

 

PS

Which South American lefties unilaterally declared themselves leader for life?

[TheHowieLama]

2 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Oh, mate!

 

You really need to read some history. And politics. Urgently.

You are saying Mussolini was not a Socialist? Erm....

[Bjornebye]

1 minute ago, TheHowieLama said:

You are saying Mussolini was not a Socialist? Erm....

 

 

 

[TheHowieLama]

Sorry to burst the bubble lads.

[TheHowieLama]

4 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

PS

Which South American lefties unilaterally declared themselves leader for life?

Castro?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

Castro?

Cuba is in the Caribbean. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, TheHowieLama said:

You are saying Mussolini was not a Socialist? Erm....

Apologies.

I thought you were referring to Hitler (and falling for the "Nazis are Socialists" line). Mussolini was, indeed, a Socialist in his 20s. The bad shit started after he abandoned Socialism. 

[Bruce Spanner]

Had a bit of a set to with some EDL chaps a few weekends back outside Downing Street, apparently there is a bunch that do the rounds every weekend going to any protest which they deem against their political beliefs and try to get a rise out of people, charming. 

 

Anyhow I may have called him a thick cunt. He did not respond well!

 

As an aside some of the dim fuckers were wearing MAGA hats, which made me chuckle at the irony.

[cloggypop]

Flying thickets

[Bjornebye]

28 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Had a bit of a set to with some EDL chaps a few weekends back outside Downing Street, apparently there is a bunch that do the rounds every weekend going to any protest which they deem against their political beliefs and try to get a rise out of people, charming. 

 

Anyhow I may have called him a thick cunt. He did not respond well!

 

As an aside some of the dim fuckers were wearing MAGA hats, which made me chuckle at the irony.

When you say 'a set to' do you mean a bit of argy bargy, handbags and hand gestures or did you go full on Annie Road and beat the scruffy bastards all over Westminster? 

[Rico1304]

Poor Milo has been complaining he’s skint.  Sad that isn’t it?  

[moof]

Deplatforming doesn’t work though, does it 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

[Rico1304]

No one likes a paedo.  

[Boss]

On 22/08/2019 at 00:37, AngryofTuebrook said:

Apologies.

I thought you were referring to Hitler (and falling for the "Nazis are Socialists" line). Mussolini was, indeed, a Socialist in his 20s. The bad shit started after he abandoned Socialism. 

Hitler could be construed as a socialist. His socialism was racially based, as opposed to class based. It was about the ascendency of the Aryan race as opposed to Marx's ascendency of the proletariat. Ideologically they are similar. Hitler said himself -

 

“There is more that binds us to Bolshevism than separates us from it. There is, above all, revolutionary feeling . . . I have always made allowance for this circumstance, and given orders that former Communists are to be admitted to the Party at once. The petit bourgeois Social Democrat and the trade-union boss will never be a National Socialist, but the Communist always will.”

 

[Pidge]

What's the context for the quote?  Is it referring to pre-war when the Nazis were looking for activists to seize the zeitgeist, or later when he was pretending to be best buds with big Joey?