Right-wing populism.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(09-21-2016, 12:38 AM)hollodero Wrote: 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.

There is lots of misconceptions in your post.

- Being anti-immigrant (see: they're rapists and whatnot)

Protecting your country from criminals that come here illegally is not being anti-immigrant.

There's lots of problems with people that come here illegally. first they are not properly vaccinated, so that is a big health issue.
second, most are not educated, therefore will end up being a drain on the system, will need to work illegally, so under the table, pushing drugs etc type of jobs to support themselves.

Trump has stated many times, he has no problems with Immigrants as long as they come here thru the front door.


- Being nationalistic (Make it great again!)
Uhm, that was previously one of Bill Clinton's lines back in 1992 when he ran for Presidency?
Anyways, this part is really stupid, anyone that is running for the head office puts their nation first. To do so otherwise is political suicide. I've never heard of anyone's slogan as "Let's eff this country up!"

- Being opportunistic (see his reaction to Orlando)
Both sides pushed their own agenda's with this one. Gun Control vs Immigrant Control.

- Referring to a core culture threatened by inferior cultures (e.g. being anti-Islamic)
It's not about being Anti-Islamic, it's about Islamic being anti-western.
Not sure where you are going with this one, Islam considers all other cultures to be inferior, so it's only natural that other cultures feel threatened when you see the heads of other people getting chopped off for no real reason, or women being stoned, or daughters being killed for being raped by their fathers/brothers etc to keep the Family Honor intact. Men own the women/children, LGBT's getting tossed off the highest roofs. The majority of their culture is the opposite of the Western Culture, yet we are not supposed to feel threatened by people that keep promising to kill us and send our culture backwards (we already put child labors laws up and still trying to make women equal to men)? And they are not just threats to our Western Nations, some have been carried out already.

- 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.)

So it's our imagination that the FBI statistics back up what Trump said about Illegals? How about Terrorist Attacks on US Soil? How about lack of jobs, because they've moved overseas? Maybe if you provide some examples.

- Emphasizing Law and Order (threats are everywhere, only I can keep the country safe)
Might have something here, but wasn't there just another Riot last night? How about this past weekend? Bombs in NYC? Stabbings in Minnesota? Now we do have Laws and Order, but not all laws are followed. Legal Citizen Safety should not be a Politicians concern?

- Presenting themselves as anti-establishment, e.g. presenting them and their voters "victim" of the "establishment's opinion-making" when facing critizism
I'll give you half of this one. He is somewhat anti-establishment. He knows how the game works and has admitted to playing it when it suited him. Can you provide me some examples of the 2nd half of your comments?

- Being anti-intellectual
Are you referring to Trump being stupid? Or his followers or both?
Just because someone is Anti-Intellectual doesn't mean that they are incapable of making solid decisions. I would judge a leader more on their ability to Listen to all parties and find a middle ground. Some of the smartest people in the world have made some of the dumbest decisions. Why? Because they are incapable of listening to others.


- Offering wild, radical promises (See: Mexico paying for a giant wall)
Yea a little crazy sounding, but not out there. He'll get it figured out someway. He's already come up with a couple of ways to get it from them.

- 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")
zzzzzzzzzzzzz again not specific to the Right only.

- A strange love for Putin
I don't care much for him, but he does get Shit done. He also doesn't apologize nor insult his fellow country men by calling them deplorable or lazy.

- The use of social media
How can it be a Right thing when both sides are doing it.

- The dividing of society
I would say the media has caused this more so than Trump.