The rise of right populism

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

It's a current trend you see in some (important) countries:

The majority of the population in a country is unstatisfied with the work of the current government.

The consequence is that more and more small right populistic parties take the chance to get this target group - with success!

With "big" speeches they badmouth the current government and promise improvement, a politics mainly for the home population. Foreigners will be discredit for the most part.

Economically and socially the country isolates more and less with dramatical consequences (like Brexit).

The causes are hard to determine:

Economically the collapse of Greece made lots of people to wish their country to leave the EU. But it's only a very little argument.

Socially the refugee politics spilts the people: Many people are afraid of over-emigration and disassociation.

results:

• Brexit
• Trump became US president
• Viktor Orban, president of Hungary
• Austria almost voted for a right populist as Federal Chancellor
• some other countries like France or Netherlands could have a right populistic government in the future because their approval rises

Trump's success will decide about the future.

If he can prove himself, the right populism will grow up even faster and affect other countries.

What's your opinion of it?

Are you a bit afraid of the cohabitation in the entire world?

Edited November 11, 2016 by Ayama Wirdo

[eclipse]

You don't need to ask such loaded questions. ;/

I can attempt to predict what the future holds, but I ultimately can't see it. Therefore, I'm going to continue to live my life, and hope that the things out of my direct control don't kill me.

[Res]

There's a definite cycle. It's a current trend, and yet an age-old trend. In some ways it feels inevitable; just as economic recessions are always going to be inevitable. I'm afraid in the short term, yes. On the other hand, history also dictates that we'll push through this cycle and see prosperity and peace again. The issues are when, and what happens in the meantime.

What HAS changed is technology. Any new large-scale war would see so much that's unprecedented. And it has the potential to be bigger and scarier and have longer lasting effects than before.

[Sasori]

I would't be too scared of the Netherlands getting a populistic goverment. The PVV has made every effort in making sure that not a single party wants to govern alongside them and coalitions are absolutely neccesary in my country to rule. A party getting more then 50% of the vote is practically impossible with 10 other parties all competing. So the PVV will be stuck in the opposition for a very long time to come.

Anyway i'm not a fan of populism. They generally portray the world as much simpler then it really is to get votes and when things go their way they don't perform all that well. Either with the Brexiteers who had no idea what to do when they won or with the PVV who ran away when the situation got though.

its probably something we just need to get out of our system. They are popular now so let them prove that they have what it takes. If they do perform well then good for them, but if things like Brexit turn out to be a disaster then I think people won't fall for the same tricks again.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Sasori

[Life]

I'm not scared. I'm happy.

"Well Life, of course you're happy! You're a right wing populist who is full of hate and bigotry!"

​I think it should go without saying that I'm not (the bigot comment is subject to debate regarding my stance on transgenders but I have never stated nor believed that they don't have rights). What I am is part of the Israeli working class (I have been a line cook for almost 3 years) and we feel the same (the only difference is that our right wing populist literally spits on conservatism) as the American/Canadian/British working classes.

What I am is a conservatarian (conservative with libertarian leanings) who feels that the government isn't receptive to my needs. The government doesn't exist to fellate itself. It exists to govern the people and is answerable to the people. So when someone like Donald Trump or Marie La Penn lets us air our grievances, do you really blame us for doing so?

When the media constantly puts out pieces that excoriate the working class and tell us that we are bigots and backwards for our opinions, why shouldn't we rail against the media?

You don't have to agree with my principles. That leaves room for debate and much of it is productive on both ends. But understand when we believe that the government and media work hand in hand against what we believe is our own interests, we won't capitulate to it and we will give them the finger in the strongest way possible: With our votes.

Dave Rubin tweeted something vitally important which explains why Trump won. He actually gets it.

"It's almost as if you endlessly call people racists and bigots they'll eventually get fed up and turn on you."

That's what we did. We turned on you. My rant against political correctness (in the Race to the White House thread) should have pointed it out but a lot of you dismissed it out of hand. I personally have been trying to take myself out of this forum because this place has gotten pretty toxic but I haven't been able to do so since I'm a bit of a glutton for punishment.

​We are not evil. We are just tired of being called evil. So we struck back and did it in the most fair way possible. By voting. If anything, respect the fact that we went the legal way instead of going straight to violence. We don't hate you. We just want our voices to also be heard. That's why the middle finger feels so sweet even though we had to knowingly bargain our souls to do so.

Sorry for the soapbox. But I needed to get that off of my chest.

[Yojinbo]

It's worth pointing out that a lot of these so-called right populist parties actually cater to left-wing ideals quite heavily in europe. In France, Front National's party program, for instance, is full of calls for socialization to the point where economically they actually stand left of the reigning Socialist Party. Part of the austrian FPÖ's recent election program has been about the introduction of a minimum wage of ~1500€/month and the german NPD, among several other right populists and extremeists, are openly anti-capitalistic - often far more so than left-wing parties.

That's why a lot of voters in europe are moving from social democrat parties to right populists. So it's not so much that people are increasingly assume a right-extreme ideology as much as they've been abandoned by the moderate left and helplessly exposed to the EU's heavy-handedly oppresive neoliberalism.

[UNLEASH IT]

As a liberal who has become increasingly disgusted with our behavior over the past 5-6 years, I feel like this movement is the result of our arrogance and the lack of empathy towards people who express different views to us, who we are too eager to dismiss with ridicule and condemnation, which in turn breeds feeling of hatred and spite. A small part of me is actually glad that Trump won, simply because it popped that bubble of liberal smugness that we've had for a long time.

[Time the Crestfallen]

As a liberal who has become increasingly disgusted with our behavior over the past 5-6 years, I feel like this movement is the result of our arrogance and the lack of empathy towards people who express different views to us, who we are too eager to dismiss with ridicule and condemnation, which in turn breeds feeling of hatred and spite. A small part of me is actually glad that Trump won, simply because it popped that bubble of liberal smugness that we've had for a long time.

For now at least. I fully expect that bubble to grow back over Trump's presidency, twice as strong as ever. People as a whole are notoriously bad at learning from mistakes you see.

[UNLEASH IT]

For now at least. I fully expect that bubble to grow back over Trump's presidency, twice as strong as ever. People as a whole are notoriously bad at learning from mistakes you see.

Yeah, I see that in the media, where people condemning the people who supported Trump as idiotic, hateful racists (i.e. the exact same rhetoric that galvanised support for Trump and propelled him to the presidency). And the thing is, in the rust belt states that ultimately decided the election, white working class voters actually supported Obama in both 2008 and 2012. So how can you have the audacity to call these people racists?

Edited November 10, 2016 by UNLEASH IT

[Etrurian emperor]

On one hand I think its possible that the support for populism will decrease when it becomes apparent that their leadership isn't a viable way forward.

Populist rule just has to disappoint their supporters. I don't see a way around that. Most experts agree that populist policies are damaging or not even possible and I'm willing to bet that the populist knows this. Their policies aren't made with the intend of responsible government but to get votes from frustrated people. If the Populist follows up on their campaign promises those very people who voted for them might be worse off for it, but if they try a more responsible approach they will be seen as breaking campaign promises.

Rule also requires compromise and Populist are so popular because they are so proudly unwilling to compromise....as long as they do not have the responsibility to rule yet. They can afford to promise all sorts of things because they don't have the power to put those words into actions yet.

Perhaps people just need to see a populist crash and burn to learn better in the future.

On the other hand, I think populist voters may not be fully rational in their decisions. You could argue that their dislike of the establishment is valid but you could also say that they don't hold their candidate to the same standards. People who distrust the lying elites never seemed even a bit bothered that Trump lied the most of everyone in this election and no matter what Trump said or did his voters never changed their minds about him. From everything Trump has said it seems that only ''pussygate'' has made his supports doubt him a little.

Perhaps a large group of populist voters hate the establishment so much that they support anybody who claims to be against it and that nothing their candidate or the establishment says or does will change their minds about that.

Its possible that a populist disappointing his followers in power will decrease their influence but its just as possible that populist voters just won't admit their candidate failed.

I'm a bit conflicted on the smug behavior towards populist voters as described by Unleash It. I certainly don't like nor respect them but I'm not going to be needlessly combative when talking to one either.

I'm perfectly willing to believe that populist voters aren't bad people and perhaps some are just as annoyed as others when their candidate crosses a line once again. I'm a lot less willing to consider it merely a coincident that most populist candidates really do hold some racist views or have pretty big skeletons in the closet. If our populist leader goes out of his way to call a ban on Islamic religious headgear a ''Head filth tax'' or instruct his audience to chant ''less! less! less! (Marokans)'' than its easy to spot bad faith. Similarly no one forced Trump to drop the word ''Rapist'' when talking about Mexicans. I heard the populists in Austria have some sort of SS origin but don't know enough about Austria to confirm its true...but if it is than that origin does deserve a mention, as does the shady past of the French front national considering the old leader resisting the normalization of his party doesn't seem to be without support. You can still vote for those guys but you lose the ability to claim they aren't racist, its not like being a racist disqualifies someone and all he stands for. You can support someone despite that person being a racist rather than because of it, and personally I find racism an unpleasant attribute of lesser importance than their political plans.

Populist leaders and supporters may not like it if openly racist groups vocally supports them but those racist groups certainly do like to support the Populists and there are reasons for that.

[Res]

I'm a bit conflicted on the smug behavior towards populist voters as described by Unleash It. I certainly don't like nor respect them but I'm not going to be needlessly combative when talking to one either.

I'm perfectly willing to believe that populist voters aren't bad people and perhaps some are just as annoyed as others when their candidate crosses a line once again. I'm a lot less willing to consider it merely a coincident that most populist candidates really do hold some racist views or have pretty big skeletons in the closet. If our populist leader goes out of his way to call a ban on Islamic religious headgear a ''Head filth tax'' or instruct his audience to chant ''less! less! less! (Marokans)'' than its easy to spot bad faith. Similarly no one forced Trump to drop the word ''Rapist'' when talking about Mexicans.

Yes.

I was struggling to find the words yesterday, because I do understand the issues people've had with the democratic party and with Clinton. I understand wanting to protest. But voting for Trump is still a vote against anyone who isn't white or straight, regardless of your personal views/problems. My sister-in-law wrote this yesterday, which I largely agree with:

I am very sympathetic to our much-essayed poor white rural voters who are scared and desperate. I have tried to tell liberal friends who sneer about idiot rednecks to read Hillbilly Elegy, to point out that condescending to people who are genuinely struggling and have no easy way out isn’t making things better, to discuss ways in which liberal policies had unintended side effects that were making the issues they tried to solve worse.

But the poor white rural voters – as well as, more significantly, the middle-class and wealthier voters who make up a higher proportion of Trump supporters than poor voters - have chosen to elevate themselves by stepping on someone else’s neck. They are doing it deliberately, because they believe someone’s neck has to be stepped on (understandable: this has been true for most of the history of the world) and they’d rather it not be them.

I have read so many well-intending people talk about how you shouldn’t be upset with friends for voting for Trump and shouldn’t unfriend them (THE HORROR) and need to reach out with compassion them in order to move forward. It is true that to reach genuine understanding, both “sides” must reach out. That means Trump supporters need to extend to us the same compassion we have been told to extend to them, and they have not.

This bizarre presentation of white Trump voters (again, not as overwhelmingly poor and jobless they’re made out to be in so many editorials) as these fragile beings whom anti-Trumpers must coddle is just as condescending as liberals deriding them as ignorant rednecks. They are humans. They are humans who have made a choice to hurt other humans.

Nazis were humans who made the choice to hurt other humans. Oooh, look at how I tied that together in a super subtle way! It’s great to say everyone’s entitled to their own opinion and we should respect it but there are a few thousand years of history showing us that sometimes people do, in fact, hurt and kill others because of their opinions. And those people almost never think they do what they do out of hatred or racism or sexism, only to survive.

They are not doing this from ignorance of the consequences – they know what Donald Trump is, how he behaves, and they approve of it.

[Eail]

I'd say more than anything we're simply tired of being painted as "Poor, stupid, slack jawed hicks" that don't have any idea what we're doing. Quite frankly the attitude of the left

Yes.

I was struggling to find the words yesterday, because I do understand the issues people've had with the democratic party and with Clinton. I understand wanting to protest. But voting for Trump is still a vote against anyone who isn't white or straight, regardless of your personal views/problems. My sister-in-law wrote this yesterday, which I largely agree with:

I am very sympathetic to our much-essayed poor white rural voters who are scared and desperate. I have tried to tell liberal friends who sneer about idiot rednecks to read Hillbilly Elegy, to point out that condescending to people who are genuinely struggling and have no easy way out isn’t making things better, to discuss ways in which liberal policies had unintended side effects that were making the issues they tried to solve worse.

But the poor white rural voters – as well as, more significantly, the middle-class and wealthier voters who make up a higher proportion of Trump supporters than poor voters - have chosen to elevate themselves by stepping on someone else’s neck. They are doing it deliberately, because they believe someone’s neck has to be stepped on (understandable: this has been true for most of the history of the world) and they’d rather it not be them.

I have read so many well-intending people talk about how you shouldn’t be upset with friends for voting for Trump and shouldn’t unfriend them (THE HORROR) and need to reach out with compassion them in order to move forward. It is true that to reach genuine understanding, both “sides” must reach out. That means Trump supporters need to extend to us the same compassion we have been told to extend to them, and they have not.

This bizarre presentation of white Trump voters (again, not as overwhelmingly poor and jobless they’re made out to be in so many editorials) as these fragile beings whom anti-Trumpers must coddle is just as condescending as liberals deriding them as ignorant rednecks. They are humans. They are humans who have made a choice to hurt other humans.

Nazis were humans who made the choice to hurt other humans. Oooh, look at how I tied that together in a super subtle way! It’s great to say everyone’s entitled to their own opinion and we should respect it but there are a few thousand years of history showing us that sometimes people do, in fact, hurt and kill others because of their opinions. And those people almost never think they do what they do out of hatred or racism or sexism, only to survive.

They are not doing this from ignorance of the consequences – they know what Donald Trump is, how he behaves, and they approve of it.

As we see here, seems to be fairly focused on seeming kind while putting down everyone that doesn't agree with them.

Every single person that I know that voted for Trump in my age demographic is disgusted not simply with the current system as it stands, but how the left has been treating the people that are "beneath them", coddling minorities and treating them like children that don't understand right from wrong. Demonizing the right and for several years throwing insult after insult of racism, misogyny, and being "literally Hitler" for daring to speak out against what has been the social norm.

The Regressive Left made Donald Trump with how they acted, and now I and others like me get to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Buckle up buttercup, because you're the one along for the ride now.

[Tryhard]

​I think it should go without saying that I'm not (the bigot comment is subject to debate regarding my stance on transgenders but I have never stated nor believed that they don't have rights).

Uh, dude. You said transgender people forfeit their humanity (as one of the commonly understood pre-requisites for well... human rights) and even referred to yourself as bigoted in this regard when pushed on it. I don't think you're inherently homophobic, racist or sexist from what I've seen but that is a red flag for that particular thing. Whatever, I couldn't care less about the rest.

I don't think populism itself is a bad thing, but I feel as though there are going to be many false promises that will not fall through associated with the recent events (in the case of Brexit, already happened).

There could easily be a progressive branch of populism breakthrough that could offer many of the things that this brand of right-wing populism claims to care about and would do so better, but something like this is not in a strong state at present.

[Etrurian emperor]

I'd say more than anything we're simply tired of being painted as "Poor, stupid, slack jawed hicks" that don't have any idea what we're doing. Quite frankly the attitude of the left

But don't you see the paradox there?

People claim they are tired of politicians lying to them. These same people then flock to the politician who lies the most in the entire election.

People claim they are tired of being called ''stupid and don't have an idea what they are doing'. Those same people then go for a high risk option, either by putting their economy at real risk in Brexit, going for a person with no experience like Trump and clamor for ideas most expert deem to be sup-par.

People are tired of being called racist but then flock to persons going out of their way to make racist remarks.

I can get people being tired of that but how does voting for populist prove any of that wrong? It seems more like a kneejerk reaction that ends up proving those detractors right.

[Res]

People are tired of being called racist but then flock to persons going out of their way to make racist remarks.

I was struggling for the words, but this.

I haven't seen anyone who voted for Trump attempt to call out his racist, sexist and xenophobic remarks.

The left certainly isn't perfect; no one is. Pretty much everyone makes remarks at some point in their lives that are sexist or racist or homophobic or xenophobic. It doesn't necessarily make someone 'a racist' or 'a misogynist'. I've been called out for remarks I've made myself, and I've tried to apologize and amend my words where necessary.

Yesterday I saw plenty of calls to leftists to be introspective and examine their faults, but I saw no calls to people on the right to do the same.

As for the coddling, I personally try to source articles from people within the communities themselves; white liberals talking over others absolutely is a problem.

[UNLEASH IT]

I was struggling for the words, but this.

I haven't seen anyone who voted for Trump attempt to call out his racist, sexist and xenophobic remarks.

The left certainly isn't perfect; no one is. Pretty much everyone makes remarks at some point in their lives that are sexist or racist or homophobic or xenophobic. It doesn't necessarily make someone 'a racist' or 'a misogynist'. I've been called out for remarks I've made myself, and I've tried to apologize and amend my words where necessary.

Yesterday I saw plenty of calls to leftists to be introspective and examine their faults, but I saw no calls to people on the right to do the same.

As for the coddling, I personally try to source articles from people within the communities themselves; white liberals talking over others absolutely is a problem.

That was mostly me lol. I guess in right wing people's minds, they don't really need to because they won. And if I have to be honest, if Hillary did win, I feel the calls for introspection on the left's part would've never happened. Especially in the liberal media, who would've just smugly grinned to themselves like they tend to do and laughed at Trump supporters for their choice. Again, I am a liberal, despite what I'm typing. I just feel like we got too smug for our own good and hopefully some time in the underdog role will allow us to reconnect with the people we turned away. My major worry though is for minorities and LGBT people, who will undoubtedly bear the brunt of this election, and it's the main reason why I couldn't vote for Trump.

On the subject of the media, it's funny that people always made fun of Fox News and Breitbart.com for being biased (which they are,tbh) when the results of this election show that major news centers like CNN, NBC, ABC, New York Times, etc. are just as biased and deluded, if not more. Which is something that people try to point out but get shot down in response.

Edited November 10, 2016 by UNLEASH IT

[Sunwoo]

But don't you see the paradox there?

People claim they are tired of politicians lying to them. These same people then flock to the politician who lies the most in the entire election.

People claim they are tired of being called ''stupid and don't have an idea what they are doing'. Those same people then go for a high risk option, either by putting their economy at real risk in Brexit, going for a person with no experience like Trump and clamor for ideas most expert deem to be sup-par.

People are tired of being called racist but then flock to persons going out of their way to make racist remarks.

I can get people being tired of that but how does voting for populist prove any of that wrong? It seems more like a kneejerk reaction that ends up proving those detractors right.

Yeeeeah, I agree with all this. People should be tired of being lied to and insulted of course, but when they go ahead and do things that prove those detractors right ... well, doesn't that make the detractors right about them?

Naturally, this isn't something that's exclusive to one side and not the other. I've heard lots of vitriol from the conservative/Republican side, but I've also heard plenty of things from liberals/Democrats that really bother me, even if I agree with the principle, because they have such an us versus them mentality. There are certain people I wouldn't talk to about certain stuff because I know they're going to get mad, ignore my points, and accuse me of things I'm not (this has happened, by the way). Both sides are equally guilty in making judgments about the entire other faction and causing a divide in our country, and I think it's important to remember that no matter who won or lose, we did this to ourselves and that if we don't get our fucking act together we'll just be proving that America was never great and will never be great.

That said, between Clinton and Trump I had more personal issues with Trump because he really didn't do himself any favors with what he said about Mexicans, Muslims, women, journalists, things that don't abide by what he wants them to, etc. I still don't think he has the temperament to be a president, based on what we've seen throughout the campaign :/

[Rapier]

I think I am seeing a pattern, or looking into it too much.

My theory is that both wings are defective ideologies, and it is the synthesis of their ideas that brings proggress.

Neither can provide answers to how to run a country properly, and one wing's deficiencies will give the other enough credit to promote their answers to the problems caused or negligenced by that dominating wing. People will get fed up with the current politics and vote for the alternative to see if it can patch the holes that the dominant wing couldn't.

Eventually, that same wing who once came with solutions will become the dominant wing, then fail to provide answers to how to run a country properly, and the other wing will come with new "solutions" to the problems caused or negligenced by that dominant wing...

A country leans too much to the left, and the right-wing starts popularizing itself. A country leans too much to the right, and the left-wing starts popularizing itself. Seems like a vicious cycle.

As for the rise of populism, it addresses some of the fundamental human needs (security, jobs etc.) in a language that even an uneducated person can understand, pointing a factor (or group of factors) as the "enemy" to catter supporters to a banner and promote "group/tribe thinking", promising to provide those needs to the people who decide to back up that populist party or candidate. It's a promise of heaven to many and a promise of hell to the few who are used as scapegoats.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Rapier

[Ema Skye]

That said, between Clinton and Trump I had more personal issues with Trump because he really didn't do himself any favors with what he said about Mexicans, Muslims, women, journalists, things that don't abide by what he wants them to, etc. I still don't think he has the temperament to be a president, based on what we've seen throughout the campaign :/

I get the impression from Trump that he played into every one of his detractors. He's a smart guy and I think he realized the free publicity he got from everyone. He got more media coverage than Clinton and I feel like he was trying to be provocative and combative in an effort to find supporters, because there are people that do identify with Trump in that regard. I really doubt he'll actually act on most of it (I feel like the Mexican immigrants thing is being blown out of proportion; he's fine with them but he wants them to become Americans through the legal process).

Though I say that as someone coming from the protection of my igloo and bobsled team.

People claim they are tired of politicians lying to them. These same people then flock to the politician who lies the most in the entire election.

I hope you're talking about Clinton here because Trump was brutally honest during his entire campaign.

People claim they are tired of being called ''stupid and don't have an idea what they are doing'. Those same people then go for a high risk option, either by putting their economy at real risk in Brexit, going for a person with no experience like Trump and clamor for ideas most expert deem to be sup-par.

People are tired of being called racist but then flock to persons going out of their way to make racist remarks.

I can get people being tired of that but how does voting for populist prove any of that wrong? It seems more like a kneejerk reaction that ends up proving those detractors right.

How do you expect these people to exercise their frustration in a political battle then?

I would've voted Trump if I was an American. I may have proven my detractors right but, at the end of the day, my detractors still lost and that means my frustration was heard.

[Yojinbo]

My theory is that both wings are defective ideologies, and it is the synthesis of their ideas that brings proggress.

Indeed.

Soziale Marktwirschaft in post-war germany was a successful attempt at balancing the strengths and flaws of capitalism and socialism against each other, leading to amazing progress that allowed west germany's ecomony to surpass both socialist and capitalist countries [despite having been ruined during WW2] while keeping the wealth well distributed among its citizens.

[Etrurian emperor]

I hope you're talking about Clinton here because Trump was brutally honest during his entire campaign.

Nope. I'm talking about the man who factcheckers consistently deemed as wrong on all kinds of subjects. While Trump doesn't filter his words I wouldn't say that's the same thing as him being honest with his facts.

How do you expect these people to exercise their frustration in a political battle then?

I would've voted Trump if I was an American. I may have proven my detractors right but, at the end of the day, my detractors still lost and that means my frustration was heard.

And that right there is what stops many people from fully respecting populist voters. ''My detractors still lost''. If that's a prime motivation then it just isn't a very good one. It implies that some populist have such a big axe to grind that they do not care about the result as long as they get to swing their axe. The outcome being a distaster is worth it if they can stick their middle finger to the establishment. ''Your frustration being heard'' is all fine and dandy but ultimately leadership is not about that.

What leaders need to do is manage the affair of state and its that what voters should expect from them. Frustrations aren't unimportant but in the grand scheme of things they should be outranked by many, many things.

There is a difference between populist voters who genuinely believe in what the populist says or voters who are genuinely racist, and voters who vote populist primary so they can show their middle finger no matter the result. I hold much more respect for the former group than the latter.

I think the Brexit is a good example of that divide. Some people who are so anti EU are idealists. They believe in the nation state and don't feel anyone other than Britain should have any say in their affairs. The possible economic damage that they lose is compensated for the independence they feel they would gain. That's one group that chose ''freedom over fear''

The other group just REALLY hated the establishment and wanted to proudly show it. The doomstay scenario coming true was a calculated risk and the countries well being was the acceptable collateral damage for that.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Etrurian emperor

[Rapier]

Indeed.

Soziale Marktwirschaft in post-war germany was a successful attempt at balancing the strengths and flaws of capitalism and socialism against each other, leading to amazing progress that allowed west germany's ecomony to surpass both socialist and capitalist countries [despite having been ruined during WW2] while keeping the wealth well distributed among its citizens.

I'm a bit dense when it comes to politics, but isn't social-democracy doing (or, well, trying to do) the same thing?

[Res]

That was mostly me lol. I guess in right wing people's minds, they don't really need to because they won. And if I have to be honest, if Hillary did win, I feel the calls for introspection on the left's part would've never happened. Especially in the liberal media, who would've just smugly grinned to themselves like they tend to do and laughed at Trump supporters for their choice. Again, I am a liberal, despite what I'm typing. I just feel like we got too smug for our own good and hopefully some time in the underdog role will allow us to reconnect with the people we turned away. My major worry though is for minorities and LGBT people, who will undoubtedly bear the brunt of this election, and it's the main reason why I couldn't vote for Trump.

On the subject of the media, it's funny that people always made fun of Fox News and Breitbart.com for being biased (which they are,tbh) when the results of this election show that major news centers like CNN, NBC, ABC, New York Times, etc. are just as biased and deluded, if not more. Which is something that people try to point out but get shot down in response.

Honestly, I was referring to what I saw on Facebook, there weren't that many of us posting in here the past two days. Not a call out, I promise!

Also, in my experience, although I'm probably just fortunate, my friends on the left (I hesitate to use the word 'liberal' because most of them disavow themselves of that label and I've seen more anti-liberal rhetoric from my friends on the left than my friends on the right - so much so that I'm not even sure what the definition is anymore) have been posting criticisms of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party, and, indeed, Obama, for months, if not years. So from a personal perspective I'm certain the criticism would've continued regardless of who won - but you are likely right about much of the 'liberal' media.

And bolded for yes, they're the real losers here.

I suppose what I wished to say was, people on the left don't want to get so introspective that no one's calling out anyone on the right. I actually saw this with a few of my anti-liberal leftist friends; they spent so much time calling out their fellow leftist friends this election period that some of them are now saying they regret not speaking up against Trump just as much. They felt it was kind of a given that everyone could see how awful he was. Meanwhile people on the right sit smugly as they watch the left implode and continue to shit all over everyone as they please.

It kind of feels like when men walk into any feminism discussion and continue to shout 'but what about men's right issues' (while ignoring anything at all pertaining to women's rights) until the women are forced to acknowledge them and to avow to fight for men, too. Then the men waltz right back out and continue to do nothing; it feels as if they didn't actually care for men's rights, just wanted to see women fall into a self-deprecating tangle to the extent that nothing happens on either side. Or when how people on Facebook changed their profile to pictures of a heart over Florida when the Pulse shooting happened, condemned the loss of life, but failed to mention how nearly all the victims were Latinx members of the LGBT community - then those self-same people voted for Pence to be their VP.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Res

[RJWalker]

India is currently governed by a hard right wing, Hindu nationalist party. And by most accounts, it is doing better than when it was governed by the other, centre-left party. I voted for the second one.

Keep in mind that the second party is the Indian National Congress. It was founded during British Rule and was the de facto leader of the independence movement for a good 40+ years at least. They've held power for pretty much all of India's independence. Only 4 or 5 terms have not had the INC as part of the government. You would think that a party with so much history would not be defeated. Yet in the 2014 election, they got their ass to handed to them. Usually in recent years, due to the number of parties in India, no single party can get the necessary majority to lead government, resulting in political alliances between parties. Not in 2014. The right wing hindu nationalist party, Bhartiya Janata Party completely dominated. This was the result of the left getting arrogant and generally being mired in controversary and scams involving powerful ministers. Not even the Prime Minister was free from serious scam accusations (not baseless accusations either).

Point is, the left got arrogant after so many years in power. The second point is that our country has not gone to shit because a right wing party holds power.

Edited November 10, 2016 by Ranger Jack Walker

[Yojinbo]

I'm a bit dense when it comes to politics, but isn't social-democracy doing (or, well, trying to do) the same thing?

As far as germany is concerned, the soziale Marktwirtschaft was the defining concept of the social democrats for the longest time, even though the term was initially coined by the conservatives. It's meaningless now though - soziale Marktwirtschaft ist no longer a thing. The social democrats have sold out everywhere and instead of representing the working peoples' interests they are now just another defunct appendix of the international casino-capitalism. Many former supporters of social democratic parties became disillusioned and started to vote "right populists" who pretend to defend their interests, which is why the term "right populist" is so misleading - that's why I always put quotation marks on it. A lot of their supporters have a left-wing / social democratic background.