Right-wing populism.

[hollodero]

Remember it's on the rise everywhere in Europe?
Now back in summer dozens of foreign reporters were interested in Austria, for we might be the first western country to elect a right-wing populist for president.
The election was now moved to 4th of December, though. So your reporters can go home now. You might as well beat us to it.

Have no doubt here. In general, US and European politics are not to be compared. This is the exception. Trump is in line with all those right-wing populists from Europe. Wilders, Le Pen, Strache, Petry, Farage, all these fine women and gentlemen. Same patterns; the differences are just US-specific nuances. The societal cancer that is right-wing populism spread and got a hold of you. (Although I still do not get why.)

At least ours are not complete sociopaths. Go Europe.

Just one more question. If Trump is president and some European leader were to say something unflattering about him. About his hands or that Ivankas boobs are fake or whatever. Is there a chance Trump would immediately scoot towards the next camera and declare war?

[fredtoast]

(09-20-2016, 02:05 PM)hollodero Wrote:  Is there a chance Trump would immediately scoot towards the next camera and declare war?

No.  He would probably just claim that he had already declared war and the United States had won.

Reality does not matter to Trump.  He just thinks that if he says something is true that makes it so.

[Belsnickel]

(09-20-2016, 02:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: Remember it's on the rise everywhere in Europe?
Now back in summer dozens of foreign reporters were interested in Austria, for we might be the first western country to elect a right-wing populist for president.
The election was now moved to 4th of December, though. So your reporters can go home now. You might as well beat us to it.

Have no doubt here. In general, US and European politics are not to be compared. This is the exception. Trump is in line with all those right-wing populists from Europe. Wilders, Le Pen, Strache, Petry, Farage, all these fine women and gentlemen. Same patterns; the differences are just US-specific nuances. The societal cancer that is right-wing populism spread and got a hold of you. (Although I still do not get why.)

At least ours are not complete sociopaths. Go Europe.

Just one more question. If Trump is president and some European leader were to say something unflattering about him. About his hands or that Ivankas boobs are fake or whatever. Is there a chance Trump would immediately scoot towards the next camera and declare war?

That's alright, I'll follow along on Die Welt, Der Spiegel, and Deutsche Welle until the election.

Seriously though, I get what you're saying. Everything about Trump and his supporters (not the "eh, it's not Hillary" folks, but the actual supporters) is definitely akin to the right-wing populism going on in Europe right now. I can't decide whether our two-party system makes it worse, or better in our efforts to fight it off.

[*wildcats forever*]

(09-20-2016, 02:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: Remember it's on the rise everywhere in Europe?
Now back in summer dozens of foreign reporters were interested in Austria, for we might be the first western country to elect a right-wing populist for president.
The election was now moved to 4th of December, though. So your reporters can go home now. You might as well beat us to it.

Have no doubt here. In general, US and European politics are not to be compared. This is the exception. Trump is in line with all those right-wing populists from Europe. Wilders, Le Pen, Strache, Petry, Farage, all these fine women and gentlemen. Same patterns; the differences are just US-specific nuances. The societal cancer that is right-wing populism spread and got a hold of you. (Although I still do not get why.)

At least ours are not complete sociopaths. Go Europe.

Just one more question. If Trump is president and some European leader were to say something unflattering about him. About his hands or that Ivankas boobs are fake or whatever. Is there a chance Trump would immediately scoot towards the next camera and declare war?

You can add me to the camp of those who are still in disbelief over this, though this comes from one who thought he was happily married until his wife told him that he wasn't    

[BengalHawk62]

If Trump were to get elected........who does he compare most with?  Nero or Caligula?

[BmorePat87]

(09-20-2016, 02:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Reality does not matter to Trump.  He just thinks that if he says something is true that makes it so.

It helps when your surrogates repeat it, the media reports it, there's no fact checking, your campaign manager repeats it as fact and suggest you have the momentum because you told it, and then you expand on it and the whole process repeats itself. 

[GMDino]

(09-20-2016, 03:10 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: If Trump were to get elected........who does he compare most with?  Nero or Caligula?

Nero. His hands are too small for all those orgies.  

[hollodero]

(09-20-2016, 02:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: That's alright, I'll follow along on Die Welt, Der Spiegel, and Deutsche Welle until the election.

Seriously though, I get what you're saying. Everything about Trump and his supporters (not the "eh, it's not Hillary" folks, but the actual supporters) is definitely akin to the right-wing populism going on in Europe right now. I can't decide whether our two-party system makes it worse, or better in our efforts to fight it off.

Worse, only in a sense though. I'll try to explain.
Right-wing populism offers no facts, no arguments, no solutions, no sense of competence. All those things are presented as establishment keeping the honest people down (or something like that). The very first thing right-wing populism does is to replace facts and rationality with emotions. Then you can say anything, fact-checking is no longer the point - if you get the people to want to believe the messages that respond with their feelings (mainly fear, hate, all those emotions cleverly created by those demagogues). That is the main base for their success. That, and the fact that people choose to be dumb. Not trying to be condescending, it's just how it is.
Which also means - it's only effective in opposition to a government. Only then.

Austrias contributions to the world have been very small since WWII, and given what they were before that that is probably a good thing. There's one sad exception: We might be patient zero regarding right-wing populism. We had it back in the 80/90. (Now why us, it's not just that we are Nazis, it's more that we feel particularly inferior and insecure. Still everyone thinks he personally is bright. That's what allows right-wing populists to easily "give them an idea" about how facts are fiction and fiction is fact and how they get owned by powerful people and their "conspiracies" that "others don't see through". You get the idea.

How we got rid of them - another politician from another party simply called them on their bluff. And invited them to form a government.
Now the right-wing party was stronger, but they willingly gave away the Chancellor anyway. (What did Trump offer Kasich again?). What followed was a freakshow. One new minister - in hindsight probably the smartest - bought a Jaguar and took off within a month. The rest was sheer awfulness in full display. Next election the right-wing dropped to 10%. Defeat. (For a few years.)

Now that's why I think your system is "worse". You can't just let a rising "Trump party" be a part of government so everyone can see their inaptitude and smokescreens. You would have to go through the whole "he's in power now"-thing, without any taming. And that might be quite a dangerous time.
Now the solution seems grim anyways - but there's probably really little else you could do. Demagogy can't be fought based on rational words. But you don't want to sink to their level too.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-20-2016, 02:05 PM)hollodero Wrote: Remember it's on the rise everywhere in Europe?
Now back in summer dozens of foreign reporters were interested in Austria, for we might be the first western country to elect a right-wing populist for president.
The election was now moved to 4th of December, though. So your reporters can go home now. You might as well beat us to it.

Have no doubt here. In general, US and European politics are not to be compared. This is the exception. Trump is in line with all those right-wing populists from Europe. Wilders, Le Pen, Strache, Petry, Farage, all these fine women and gentlemen. Same patterns; the differences are just US-specific nuances. The societal cancer that is right-wing populism spread and got a hold of you. (Although I still do not get why.)

At least ours are not complete sociopaths. Go Europe.

Just one more question. If Trump is president and some European leader were to say something unflattering about him. About his hands or that Ivankas boobs are fake or whatever. Is there a chance Trump would immediately scoot towards the next camera and declare war?

It seems you are speaking of specific current right wing populists and not the ideology itself.  There is nothing wrong with right-wing populism in and of itself.  At least not how I understand it.

[Belsnickel]

(09-20-2016, 03:37 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It seems you are speaking of specific current right wing populists and not the ideology itself.  There is nothing wrong with right-wing populism in and of itself.  At least not how I understand it.

The problem is that populism, much like all of the isms, doesn't exist in a vacuum. This particular set of right-wing populists is very nationalistic with a heavy-handed sprinkling of authoritarianism. I despise comparisons made to Hitler and other dictators throughout history, but this recipe is what the Nazi party thrived on. The situations are different for a number of reasons, and Trump is not Hitler, but this combination of ideologies and rhetoric is what they used to win the hearts and minds of the people.

[hollodero]

(09-20-2016, 03:37 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It seems you are speaking of specific current right wing populists and not the ideology itself.  There is nothing wrong with right-wing populism in and of itself.  At least not how I understand it.

Maybe so. Populism is something inherent to politics and not tied to the left or right in the first place. And the right wing is a legit point of view in the political debate. Not mine, but legit.
So what I call "right-wing populism" is rather a new trend of demagogy that works in the manners described above - and incorporated by the people mentioned. That's how I understand "the right-wing populists", which might differ from your definition.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-20-2016, 04:21 PM)hollodero Wrote: Maybe so. Populism is something inherent to politics and not tied to the left or right in the first place. And the right wing is a legit point of view in the political debate. Not mine, but legit.
So what I call "right-wing populism" is rather a new trend of demagogy that works in the manners described above - and incorporated by the people mentioned. That's how I understand "the right-wing populists", which might differ from your definition.

I'm in no way an expert in political ideology so what I think of as right wing populism may no longer be accurate.  I'm pretty sure I'm not a populist, but I actually have no idea what label you would use for me.  American Libertarian is pretty close I guess.

[hollodero]

(09-20-2016, 05:15 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm in no way an expert in political ideology so what I think of as right wing populism may no longer be accurate.  I'm pretty sure I'm not a populist, but I actually have no idea what label you would use for me.  American Libertarian is pretty close I guess.

I tried to define it, but I'm no expert either. And labels are always a difficult thing to attach to someone. I have no idea how to label you. You're supporting any candidate in your race? Johnson?

[Belsnickel]

(09-20-2016, 05:15 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm in no way an expert in political ideology so what I think of as right wing populism may no longer be accurate.  I'm pretty sure I'm not a populist, but I actually have no idea what label you would use for me.  American Libertarian is pretty close I guess.

Nobody really fits into a neat little box. Part of the problem with political parties.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(09-20-2016, 03:19 PM)hollodero Wrote: Worse, only in a sense though. I'll try to explain.
Right-wing populism offers no facts, no arguments, no solutions, no sense of competence. All those things are presented as establishment keeping the honest people down (or something like that). The very first thing right-wing populism does is to replace facts and rationality with emotions. Then you can say anything, fact-checking is no longer the point - if you get the people to want to believe the messages that respond with their feelings (mainly fear, hate, all those emotions cleverly created by those demagogues). That is the main base for their success. That, and the fact that people choose to be dumb. Not trying to be condescending, it's just how it is.
Which also means - it's only effective in opposition to a government. Only then.

Now that's why I think your system is "worse". You can't just let a rising "Trump party" be a part of government so everyone can see their inaptitude and smokescreens. You would have to go through the whole "he's in power now"-thing, without any taming. And that might be quite a dangerous time.
Now the solution seems grim anyways - but there's probably really little else you could do. Demagogy can't be fought based on rational words. But you don't want to sink to their level too.

I think you're getting left and right confused.

But anyways, why is it that you think Trump is a Far Right Populist?

[SunsetBengal]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/19/angela-merkel-admits-mistakes-asylum-seekers-election

Interesting read, for sure.

[6andcounting]

(09-20-2016, 03:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem is that populism, much like all of the isms, doesn't exist in a vacuum. This particular set of right-wing populists is very nationalistic with a heavy-handed sprinkling of authoritarianism. I despise comparisons made to Hitler and other dictators throughout history, but this recipe is what the Nazi party thrived on. The situations are different for a number of reasons, and Trump is not Hitler, but this combination of ideologies and rhetoric is what they used to win the hearts and minds of the people.

Trump's campaign would have ended 8 months ago if one of his primary opponents could have put these 4 sentences together. Literally every single person he's run against has played into his hand and got themselves embarrassed.

[treee]

-Both parties are, when it matters, subservient to specialized interests that harm the average person.

-Both parties are interested in keeping it a 2 party system, despite how much they pretend to despise each other.

-Both parties are full to the brim with career politicians that you wouldn't trust to run an ice cream store, let alone a country.

[hollodero]

(09-20-2016, 07:38 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I think you're getting left and right confused.

But anyways, why is it that you think Trump is a Far Right Populist?

Left and right? Sure antiquated terms somehow. What we define "right" these days is mostly being nationalistic and anti-immigrant. Which indicates that the labels are not what they used to be, although still in use.

Trump is a right-wing populist I said. I really didn't say "far right". Right-wing populists might be quite "left" sometimes. 

What makes him a right-wing populist... I already tried to lay out the patterns (replacing fact-based debates with emotion-ridden talking points is the main operating clue). Here are some more similarities between Trump and the right-wing populists that spread all over Europe.

- Being anti-immigrant (see: they're rapists and whatnot)
- Being nationalistic (Make it great again!)
- Being opportunistic (see his reaction to Orlando)
- Referring to a core culture threatened by inferior cultures (e.g. being anti-islamic)
- Operating with people's fear (that's not just "my take", people's emotions are addressed, not their brains. Things he says are mainly fact-free. See what I said above.)
- Emphasizing Law and Order (threats are everywhere, only I can keep the country safe)
- Presenting themselves as anti-establishment, e.g. presenting them and their voters "victim" of the "establishment's opinion-making" when facing critizism
- Addressing disadvantaged people, suggesting they fell - or will fall, see "fear" - victim to the establisment denying them their fair share (by allowing abuse of social systems etc.)
- Being anti-intellectual
- Offering wild, radical promises (See: Mexico paying for a giant wall)
- Using right-wing rhetorics. Like putting things out without any verification ("I don't know, I'm just hearing" and all that - here it's "I'm just asking questions")
- A strange love for Putin
- The use of social media
- The dividing of society
- The tendency towards establishing a "strong man" fixing things radically and without consideration of the established processes.
- Editing in: Being anti-pluralistic. Based on the "silent majority" rhetoric they establish some kind of claim only they represent the "true" nation and their people and others - politicians and their voters - are corrupted by elites and not really part of the rightful societal spectrum.
- ...

All those things are clear similarities. To me.
Now there are differences, of course. Trump is much more of an egomaniac and really without any political "base" (the Reps are no base, at this point they are just eunuchs and deserve to perish - just my opinion). Trump is even far more radical in his whole anti-establishment, anti-PC rhetorics. The complete and deliberate lack of decency is astounding - even if you're a supporter you can't overlook that. See all his sexist comments towards that FOX reporter and Cruz' wife and then some. No politician ever - being at least in some way part of the political establishment - would have survived the things he gets away with. Money plays a big part here, a part that is not all that important in Europe. Americans also seem to have a certain special trust in billionaires, they are successful, therefore they might just know how to handle things. Maybe even more calvinistic, their success shows that God loves them and they are blessed or something like that. That wouldn't work here in that manner. And so on, bla.

Of course I'm biased here, right-wing populism is a new political low to me. I tried to be objective, but I can't. But to me there's no denying the similarities between Trump and the political figures of Europe that we slapped with the term "right-wing populist".

Hope I could answer your question.

[BmorePat87]

(09-20-2016, 07:38 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I think you're getting left and right confused.

But anyways, why is it that you think Trump is a Far Right Populist?

No, it's pretty spot on for what he is describing. If he were referring to far left populism, he'd say "keeping the working class down" and "opposition to corporations".