advertisement


The Rise of the Far Right

laughingboy said:
From Politico: Brussels police move to shut down Farage and Orbán’s right-wing jamboree:
https://www.politico.eu/article/bru...igel-farage-viktor-orban-right-wing-jamboree/
Click to expand...

Shouldn't Braverman be reported under the new extremism regulations?:

Leave ECHR now, Braverman urges as police move to shut down Brussels conference - Indy

BTW, regarding the conference in Brussels, that is how you deal with the far-right. Send a very clear message that they are not welcome. Labour should learn a few lessons there...
 
Nick_G said:
Shouldn't Braverman be reported under the new extremism regulations?
Click to expand...
That's a good question. It's always amusing to spot hypocrisy in people we don't agree with.
the promotion or advancement of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance, that aims to:
1. negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others; or
2. undermine, overturn or replace the UK's system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights; or
3. intentionally create a permissive environment for others to achieve the results in (1) or (2)"
Click to expand...
But as soon as we consider banning people who seem to threaten others' rights, we are in the 'paradox of tolerance' zone, where hypocrisy reigns.

In this case, one difficulty is that the NatC's rather fascist-sounding principles (here) talk about tolerance of other religions. Meanwhile, in the real world, their actual words and beliefs sometimes seem to be virulently opposed to Islam, in principle. They feel intolerant and look intolerant, while their written principles say they are not. All I can say for certain is that the tropes that they use to talk about Islam (violent, extremist, prone to terrorism) strike me as Islamophobic in the same way as tropes that others use to talk about Judaism (wealth, power and conspiracy) are antisemitic. If we recognise and ostracise antisemitic fascists for the tropes they use, should we not take the same stance against islamophobic fascists too?
 
Good article from Daniel Trilling about the EU's capitulation to the far-right on border policy:

www.theguardian.com

The EU’s new migration pact is intended to neutralise the far right – it risks empowering it | Daniel Trilling

With a heavy focus on deterrence, the agreement shows how far Europe’s centre has shifted to the right, says author Daniel Trilling
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

The real danger is not ghouls like Braverman or fools like Truss.

It's the moral cowardice of "pragmatic" centrist politicians when challenged by the far-right.
 
Nick_G said:
BTW, regarding the conference in Brussels, that is how you deal with the far-right. Send a very clear message that they are not welcome. Labour should learn a few lessons there...
Click to expand...
Not so sure. It's back on today. All that's happened is they've been given a massive PR boost - they can claim they were 'cancelled' but won.
 
Disastrous unelected PM complains about.. er, you might want to to rethink that one Liz.

DdyOtJo.png
 
paulfromcamden said:
Disastrous unelected PM complains about.. er, you might want to to rethink that one Liz.

DdyOtJo.png
Click to expand...
She does have a point, we are often told that we cant do x, y or z because the Markets wont like it. If the Markets have such power, they should be democratically accountable and transaprent.

Our MPs should too of course, but we do have huge power in the hands of unelected elites
 
The problem with all these idiots is they're catnip to the media and they've learnt the more outlandish they are, the more publicity they get, and publicity is what they crave, so they lean in to the feedback loop. If the media ignored Truss, she'd fade away.
 
kensalriser said:
The problem with all these idiots is they're catnip to the media and they've learnt the more outlandish they are, the more publicity they get, and publicity is what they crave, so they lean in to the feedback loop. If the media ignored Truss, she'd fade away.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, I wish that vile woman / thing truss just evaporate.

I consider tories / right wingers as not human in any way but an alternative species heading towards a hasty extinction. :p
 
She’s too useful for too many people. Both parties use her to show you can’t challenge Treasury thinking, the Sensibles use her to show you can’t trust party members to make political decisions, the whole political-media class use her to take the blame for the shitshow they’ve jointly inflicted on the country since the financial crash. If she didn’t exist they’d have to invent her. Or, if they hadn’t *already* invented her they’d have to invent her.
 
laughingboy said:
That's a good question. It's always amusing to spot hypocrisy in people we don't agree with.

But as soon as we consider banning people who seem to threaten others' rights, we are in the 'paradox of tolerance' zone, where hypocrisy reigns.

In this case, one difficulty is that the NatC's rather fascist-sounding principles (here) talk about tolerance of other religions. Meanwhile, in the real world, their actual words and beliefs sometimes seem to be virulently opposed to Islam, in principle. They feel intolerant and look intolerant, while their written principles say they are not. All I can say for certain is that the tropes that they use to talk about Islam (violent, extremist, prone to terrorism) strike me as Islamophobic in the same way as tropes that others use to talk about Judaism (wealth, power and conspiracy) are antisemitic. If we recognise and ostracise antisemitic fascists for the tropes they use, should we not take the same stance against islamophobic fascists too?
Click to expand...

I strongly suspect that their written principles are watered down somewhat to appeal to a larger core of voters. Make no mistake, if these people got into power they would have no regards for human rights or freedom of expression, so the equivalency is false. They would clamp down further and further and destroy any democracy we have left. They are the British equivalent of Donald Trump.

The far-right are like a cancer, that destroy communities, stoke divisions, escalate conflicts and start wars. They represent an existential threat to world peace, stability and life as we know it. We only need to look at the likes of Trump, Putin and Netanyahu, to take current excamples, as well as countless lessons we should have learnt from history. We must resist this garbage as much as possible, otherwise the cancer will spread and it will become terminal. The far-right and any other dangerous extremists should be completely unacceptable in any civilised society, beyond the pale, like rapists or paedophiles.

We need to stop communities reaching such desperation that they are taken in by the siren calls of the demagogues. It's not going to be easy, that's for sure.

I only hope it's not too late to stop the slide into oblivion.
 
Nick_G said:
I strongly suspect that their written principles are watered down somewhat to appeal to a larger core of voters. Make no mistake, if these people got into power they would have no regards for human rights or freedom of expression, so the equivalency is false. They would clamp down further and further and destroy any democracy we have left. They are the British equivalent of Donald Trump.

The far-right are like a cancer, that destroy communities, stoke divisions, escalate conflicts and start wars. They represent an existential threat to world peace, stability and life as we know it. We only need to look at the likes of Trump, Putin and Netanyahu, to take current excamples, as well as countless lessons we should have learnt from history. We must resist this garbage as much as possible, otherwise the cancer will spread and it will become terminal. The far-right and any other dangerous extremists should be completely unacceptable in any civilised society, beyond the pale, like rapists or paedophiles.

We need to stop communities reaching such desperation that they are taken in by the siren calls of the demagogues. It's not going to be easy, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
Quite agree with you. The National Conservative movement seems to have come into being in 2022 when the Heritage Foundation in the US appears to have been captured by Russia. I can't prove this, but it is the most likely conclusion given the following facts. In 2022, we see the Heritage Foundation reverse its position on Ukraine so that it stands against funding Ukraine's defence and in 2023 it forms an alliance with the Danube Institute, based in Orbán's Hungary.

The entire National Conservative movement, and everyone associated with it, are profoundly dangerous to us all.

Plausible deniability is a powerful weapon for these liars. Look at the UK. For twenty years our press and institutions have indulged Nigel Farage, giving him the benefit of the doubt despite the fact that there is a compelling body of evidence that he is a racist. But simply because he denies being a racist, the case is left open. As Hope Not Hate says:
there is an enormous gulf between his self-presentation and reality. Farage has used racism, xenophobia, sexism and Islamophobia to stir up division, has toxic connections to extreme and far-right figures across the world, and Thatcherite beliefs that he has tried to hide.
Click to expand...
British society has a challenge to surmount: it is culturally ingrained that antisemitism is completely beyond the pale, because we have seen the holocaust. That is not true of Islamophobia (or xenophobia, sexism, homophobia or transphobia for that matter). But that is the ground on which the NatCons are most vulnerable. Let them speak, let them assemble, but we need to shout them down, ridicule them and deprive them of oxygen outside their bubble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top