Is Political Arrogance dragging Europe to the Right?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

There have been some disturbing political developments across Europe in the last six months, the far right is gaining traction, I would not say it is "on the march" but the political balance of the last few decades seems to be on the slide. Brexit can't be blamed for this, the fact a British Prime Minister has backed into holding a vote on leaving the EU is a symptom of what is happening, not a cause.

Then I read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37210138

"Brexit is bad but it won't hurt us as much economically as some fear - it's more of a psychological problem and it's a huge problem politically," he said.
"If we organise Brexit in the wrong way, then we'll be in deep trouble, so now we need to make sure that we don't allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility."

Yes - the Brits need to be punished for daring to endanger the EU.

This is not a healthy attitude and it's likely to drive new wedges between EU members as they argue about just how awkward they want to be in negotiations. It's also going to sour Europe's population (even further) on the EU if said EU is seen as "nasty".

Then we have the EU dictating tax arrangements to Ireland: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37251084

Then there's Merkel's stance on immgration which seems to be stoking Xenophobia in Germany: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37269330

Merkel, by the way, has been in power for over a decade and as it looks like she's going to run again she's starting to look increasingly like a German Margaret Thatcher. By this point Thatcher had arguably lost the plot too.

[Fragony]

Are you surprised, of course it is. It's a good thing really imho, having to actually defend yourself while living the dream ohnoes, any place left in a private school?

[Husar]

I thought this was an interesting thread, but now I'm just gonna say that if we had always gone with the wisdom of the plebs, we'd still be living in caves waiting for "the powerfuls" to bring us new fire.

The EU is not responsible for xenophobia and greed, those existed long before there was an EU.
I'd think the internet has more to do with it because information is no longer filtered as much, or not in the same way as it used to be, which has both "good" and "bad" consequences.
Everyone can create his or her echo chamber while modern algorithms support that. The more these technologies permeate society, the more people find more and more others who share their views, they become less ashamed to voice them and so on.

The world is simply a terrible place and we learn more and more about how terrible it really is, the cleansing nuclear fires of WW3 can't be far away.

[Greyblades]

The EU, dominated by an elitist political class disconnected from the concerns of they profess to protect, disdainful of any who complain, prone to vindictiveness against those who rebel and less competent than they claim to be.

It's pre revolutionary france's nobility all over again, but a nobility defined not by blood but ideology.

[Sarmatian]

The EU, dominated by an elitist political class disconnected from the concerns of they profess to protect, disdainful of any who complain, prone to vindictiveness against those who rebel and less competent than they claim to be.

It's pre revolutionary france's nobility all over again, but a nobility defined not by blood but ideology.

I've decide to thank every one of your posts in which you're not completely wrong.

Yes - the Brits need to be punished for daring to endanger the EU.

Where in the article did you find that?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Genuine question: Is the political class today any more (or less) elitist than they used to be?

The answer to that must be pretty central to the PVC's (I will still call him that) question.

[Papewaio]

I thought stagnating economies with high youth unemployment might be more closely linked with a lurch to the right.

[Montmorency]

No to the topic question, but the EU leadership definitely shows poor understanding of how to respond to populist sentiment - look at what people were saying even when it was 'just' a financial crisis. The larger problem is that left-wing and internationalist (not the same thing, despite the overlap) elites have overestimated their political capital and spread themselves too thin with too many commitments. For all the complaints against them (the EU here) of overreach, they have consistently limited their policy commitments to the corporate level, seemingly assuming the backing of some underlying populist element to build its influence. Unfortunately, this does not exist as such. Imagine Pythonian peasants in the position of King Arthur - not enough action to back up the words.

Anyway, the topic question is misguided. Political arrogance doesn't understand how to pre-empt the drag to the right. The craftier rightists are very happy to sail in this blind spot until it doesn't matter any longer.

Yes - the Brits need to be punished for daring to endanger the EU.

The EU attempting to obtain favorable outcomes for itself is only punishing Britain in the sense that any exchange or negotiation must punish one party or other. Depends on your economic philosophy, I suppose. Of course they may indeed want and try to punish Britain by using leverage where they have it, but I don't think you should see that as an inherent component of a negotiation.

Interestingly, Merkel looks younger in photos these days than at any time since before the crisis (though I haven't exhaustively compared thousands of photos).

[Husar]

The EU, dominated by an elitist political class disconnected from the concerns of they profess to protect, disdainful of any who complain, prone to vindictiveness against those who rebel and less competent than they claim to be.

That's class-warfare and too simplistic.
A lot of what you say seems to depend on a few popular quotes and some "feelings" while it ignores legislation that helps us all even if not all of it is popular.

I've decide to thank every one of your posts in which you're not completely wrong.

Careful, your elitism might push him to the right and it will be entirely your fault.

Genuine question: Is the political class today any more (or less) elitist than they used to be?

The answer to that must be pretty central to the PVC's (I will still call him that) question.

I don't think so, there is just more media exaggeration, more echo chambers and the likes that blow up the feelings because someone can profit from that. As I said above, the idea that all EU politicians despise the people seems to be based mostly on relatively superficial observations and perhaps a few token laws and regulations.

I thought stagnating economies with high youth unemployment might be more closely linked with a lurch to the right.

Didn't Spain and Greece have a lurch to the left whereas the countries which do not have these problems had the lurch to the right?
At least the lurch to the right seems to be smaller in the troubled countries, my impression is the northerners move more to the right because xenophobia has become more acceptable again or just become more public again. The USA with Trump seem to have a similar movement though and they're not in the EU IIRC. I'm pretty sure Trump has a higher share of the votes than the AfD even.

[Montmorency]

Didn't Spain and Greece have a lurch to the left whereas the countries which do not have these problems had the lurch to the right?
At least the lurch to the right seems to be smaller in the troubled countries, my impression is the northerners move more to the right because xenophobia has become more acceptable again or just become more public again. The USA with Trump seem to have a similar movement though and they're not in the EU IIRC. I'm pretty sure Trump has a higher share of the votes than the AfD even.

Both the left and the right.

Don't think xenophobia has not exploded in Southern Europe. In fact, I would suggest it was higher latently than in the north.

[Husar]

Don't think xenophobia has not exploded in Southern Europe. In fact, I would suggest it was higher latently than in the north.

Quite possible, but then it would just surface instead of anyone making people "go there" i.e. change their views, no?

[Brenus]

"I thought stagnating economies with high youth unemployment might be more closely linked with a lurch to the right." Yes, that too.
I am not sure that Europe is going to the Right. In France, voters are going to abstention, which favours the Right, itself merging with extreme-right.
But, you still have no taste for extreme-right demonstrations or actions...
Which is strange, somehow, due to the last killings...

[spmetla]

I think it's more just naivete and disillusion than arrogance.

The EU as we know it know was really a product of the 90s: the economy was good, the cold war over and Russia was cooed, lots of new member States joined or started to join, the Euro was hammered out and agreed to be implemented in the bright new millennium. The only European war was in the baltic fringe and didn't require any major ground involvement by NATO. Everything was nice, the future looked great and the success of Europe was ready to lead the world into a peaceful new era of cultural refinement.

All the high hopes and dreams didn't prepare people for the economic downturn and austerity, the return of a Russia not happy with NATO and the EU on its border, the post 9/11 reality that Islamic terrorism wasn't just something that happened in the middle east or resulted in hostages being ransomed for prisoners. The 'hordes' of Asia and Africa flooding in and politicians and bureaucrats outside of ones own nation and electoral process deciding policy.

All the while people can now insulate themselves from outside opinion by picking and choosing whatever facts they find on the internet that feel good to them be it that the Europeans are systemically been bred out, that aliens are among us, that vaccines cause autism, that the OTHER end of the political spectrum are ignorant fools and are ruining their respective countries.

In short I think the rose tinted glasses have been removed and people no longer trust the politics that led them when all was well, so now the turn to extremes of left and right to try and go back to when things made sense to them.

[Pannonian]

Didn't Spain and Greece have a lurch to the left whereas the countries which do not have these problems had the lurch to the right?
At least the lurch to the right seems to be smaller in the troubled countries, my impression is the northerners move more to the right because xenophobia has become more acceptable again or just become more public again. The USA with Trump seem to have a similar movement though and they're not in the EU IIRC. I'm pretty sure Trump has a higher share of the votes than the AfD even.

There's also been a lurch to the far left on the other side. Corbyn epitomises the far left as described by Orwell back in the late 1940s, and the moderate left, at least within the Labour party, have been displaced by his followers. See the explicit arguments from Idaho and Brenus in this forum that amount to anyone who disagrees is by definition to be dismissed, and it's emblematic of his support, and the antithesis of reasoning moderation. Call it identity crisis or whatever, but it all leads to post-truth politics, where evidence based arguments are ignored in favour of self-reinforcement.

[Greyblades]

I thought this was an interesting thread, but now I'm just gonna say that if we had always gone with the wisdom of the plebs, we'd still be living in caves waiting for "the powerfuls" to bring us new fire.

That's class-warfare and too simplistic.
A lot of what you say seems to depend on a few popular quotes and some "feelings" while it ignores legislation that helps us all even if not all of it is popular.

Is this another husarism or are you reall that hypocritical?

[Husar]

Is this another husarism or are you reall that hypocritical?

Can you explain what is hypocritical about those two statements in your wrong view? They fit perfectly well together.

[Greyblades]

Criticizing for class warfare while disparaging the "plebs" is hypocritical in the extreme.

[Husar]

Criticizing for class warfare while disparaging the "plebs" is hypocritical in the extreme.

It's only class warfare when the lower classes complain, didn't you know? Maybe you need to update your capitalist rhetoric.

I think spmetla provided an interesting analysis. Basically the world often changes faster than the plebs can adapt and then it is up to the elites to save the day. That's why people in representative democracies are represented by their elite representatives whom they can expect to make a better decision than the plebs would themselves. Because those elites have the time and intelligence to analyse the topics in ways the plebs can't be bothered because they're too busy standing next to conveyor belts doing the same things over and over day in, day out to keep the economy growing.
If the plebs then begin to question this god-given order of the democratically capitalist world, that is what we call class warfare.

Even the founding fathers of the US agree with my assessment that letting the plebs decide everything is a bad idea:
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-...lect-president

On the convention’s first day, delegate Edmund Randolph of Virginia warned that “none of the [state] constitutions have provided sufficient checks against democracy.” A week later, Massachusetts delegate Elbridge Gerry said “the evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy.” Father of the Constitution James Madison referred to “the inconvenience of democracy,” and Alexander Hamilton to the “imprudence” of it.

And there is more:

Because the potential electorate was so much more state-oriented in political thinking, if everyone could just vote for a person whom they thought would make a good president, they would mostly vote for a favorite son of their own state. The favorite sons of the most populous states – Virginia, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania -- would tend to get the most votes, which made small-state delegates nervous. (There’s an irony here: Despite the Framers efforts to work around this problem, the first 10 presidential elections were all won by candidates from Virginia or Massachusetts.)

So we can clearly see that the average pleb does not have a wide enough horizon to comprehend the problems we face in a world where the plebs let the other elites build global corporations on a scale the plebs can't really understand. The political class are supposed to be the elites who keep that in check and provide a better life for all the plebs. Now if the plebs can't even comprehend the problems, how can you expect them to be able to comprehend the solutions?
(By the way, I'm not sure if the article's entire analysis is something I agree with, but I think the two quotes work on their own, too)

This, by the way, is also the failure of communism, the idea that the plebs would want to participate in the great whole, that they would care about the big picture. Because they don't, they want their own bubble and they want it to be nice for them. The AfD gets most votes in the German states with the least immigrants so far... Clearly showing that the people don't even really know why they vote for something, they just vote based on knee-jerk reactions to arbitrary fears. The people who actually live among these immigrants largely don't seem to agree with those who hardly ever met an immigrant... And you expect me to hold these people up as examples of sensible policymaking?

The point remains, class warfare is a bottom-up idea, the elites have no class because they can't afford it.

[Pannonian]

It's only class warfare when the lower classes complain, didn't you know? Maybe you need to update your capitalist rhetoric.

I think spmetla provided an interesting analysis. Basically the world often changes faster than the plebs can adapt and then it is up to the elites to save the day. That's why people in representative democracies are represented by their elite representatives whom they can expect to make a better decision than the plebs would themselves. Because those elites have the time and intelligence to analyse the topics in ways the plebs can't be bothered because they're too busy standing next to conveyor belts doing the same things over and over day in, day out to keep the economy growing.
If the plebs then begin to question this god-given order of the democratically capitalist world, that is what we call class warfare.

Even the founding fathers of the US agree with my assessment that letting the plebs decide everything is a bad idea:
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-...lect-president



And there is more:



So we can clearly see that the average pleb does not have a wide enough horizon to comprehend the problems we face in a world where the plebs let the other elites build global corporations on a scale the plebs can't really understand. The political class are supposed to be the elites who keep that in check and provide a better life for all the plebs. Now if the plebs can't even comprehend the problems, how can you expect them to be able to comprehend the solutions?
(By the way, I'm not sure if the article's entire analysis is something I agree with, but I think the two quotes work on their own, too)

This, by the way, is also the failure of communism, the idea that the plebs would want to participate in the great whole, that they would care about the big picture. Because they don't, they want their own bubble and they want it to be nice for them. The AfD gets most votes in the German states with the least immigrants so far... Clearly showing that the people don't even really know why they vote for something, they just vote based on knee-jerk reactions to arbitrary fears. The people who actually live among these immigrants largely don't seem to agree with those who hardly ever met an immigrant... And you expect me to hold these people up as examples of sensible policymaking?

The point remains, class warfare is a bottom-up idea, the elites have no class because they can't afford it.

See also the referendum vote. Famously cosmopolitan London had the highest remain vote in England, and only marginally lower than Scotland. Areas with the lowest immigration returned the highest leave votes. And immigration was cited by leavers as the number one reason why they voted that way.

This is, to a large degree, liberal democracy at its extreme, with emphasis on some aspects of liberalism, and emphasis on some aspects of democracy. There is a belief in the power of the individual, which is quintessential liberalism, and on their right to do and think anything. And there is a belief in the principle of one person one vote, which is quintessential democracy. However, there is a corresponding decline in belief in the responsibilities that come with these principles. In democracy, an uneducated vote is worth as much as an educated one, but there is a resentment against those who educate themselves, and a desire to be part of a movement of the uneducated. Detailed arguments supported by masses of evidence only produces a backlash. Showing the logic of an argument, particularly if the logic is fuzzy, only produces a backlash. Because they know, come the date of the vote, their uneducated movement will outnumber those who carefully weigh evidence.

[Gilrandir]

I wonder what group the participants of the discussion place themselves in - the plebs or the elite?

[Husar]

I wonder what group the participants of the discussion place themselves in - the plebs or the elite?

It's good that you ask, because I asked myself while I was writing about it.
I consider myself part of the plebite.

[Pannonian]

I wonder what group the participants of the discussion place themselves in - the plebs or the elite?

I wouldn't call myself social elite by any means. However, when I was taught history at GCSE (not even at a high level), I was taught how to evaluate evidence. That bare minimum of historiographical education is enough, it appears, to make me shake my head at some of the arguments that prevail. See my points in the Corbyn thread about the merits of primary evidence, especially from sources close to the subject.

[Gilrandir]

It's good that you ask, because I asked myself while I was writing about it.
I consider myself part of the plebite.

With all the disparaging descriptions appended?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Genuine question: Is the political class today any more (or less) elitist than they used to be?

The answer to that must be pretty central to the PVC's (I will still call him that) question.

Not much different I would think, in terms of the elitism attitude itself.

However, as the basis for this elitism is ideology rather than the "accident" of birth, it may be even more pernicious.

"L'ancienne regime," sort of always knew they had just lucked out and been expelled from a fortunately "blue-blooded" vaginal opening. They may have dressed it up and claimed divine right and what not, but too many of history's great captains had conquered their way into power -- to become the new blue bloods -- for them not to be aware (in their well-hidden reflective moments) that it was all just a question of holding power (feudalism's number one goal is to keep the peasants in the fields while the lords maintain the power to "protect" them, carefully siphoning off any of the 'wolves' into their men-at-arms to keep the people quiescent).

By contrast, "Le Postmoderne Regime" is based upon having the right 'outlook' on life. In it's way, it can be almost religiously intolerant of unorthodox responses and attitudes to that ideology. I think this quality may make it even more pernicious than many of the other bases for elitism that have sprung up.

Of course, I am something of an apologist for the USA, so perhaps my opinion in this is inherently suspect.

[Husar]

With all the disparaging descriptions appended?

Plebite = pleb-elite

Here is a somewhat related short interview in German: http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/demo...nolte-101.html

Basically this guy says the problem is not the democracy itself but how people perceive it. Relates to Germany and not the EU, but the issues are intertwined. He says there is a soothing knowledge about what is close and people suspect everything that is far away because they don't know it well. He says that is why people look at Berlin with worse feelings than they have for their local government and with even worse ones at Brussels.

So basically what I said from the start, you can thank me later or read up on the monkeysphere.

[Kralizec]

Then I read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37210138

"Brexit is bad but it won't hurt us as much economically as some fear - it's more of a psychological problem and it's a huge problem politically," he said.
"If we organise Brexit in the wrong way, then we'll be in deep trouble, so now we need to make sure that we don't allow Britain to keep the nice things, so to speak, related to Europe while taking no responsibility."

Yes - the Brits need to be punished for daring to endanger the EU.

What he proposes is not a punishment. You should know better.

There are aspects of the EU which are less than popular, obviously. If the EU would allow a non-member most of the privileges but few of the burdens of membership, then it would encourage others to follow suit. I know Johnson and Gove promised you guys all sorts of awesome stuff, free of charge, if you voted for Brexit but it's not the EU's fault if they're not willing to give it to you.

[Brenus]

"See the explicit arguments from Idaho and Brenus in this forum that amount to anyone who disagrees is by definition to be dismissed, and it's emblematic of his support" I like your faith in defectors. Remind me all the Soviets defectors coming with stories about Soviet Union ready to invade Europe, and the formidable new tanks, planes, just what Western Countries were so keen to hear.
But you support is a very well balance one, I suppose.

"Yes - the Brits need to be punished for daring to endanger the EU." But, but, it doesn't matter what EU will do... EU is just a nuisance, a machine to produce unemployment and red tape, an extension of Nazi War machine, taking 250 millions pounds a WEEK... Surely, EU can't damage UK, as EU NEEDS UK to survive. UK has just to tell EU and job done. No?
Australia, and others still to show-up will just queue to make deals with the country... Err, later, sure... And looks, the fall of the currency made our factories better at export... Bit of trouble for import, but hey, INDEPENDENCE DAY!!!! Better starving than slaves said the ones who don't know what hunger is.

[Fragony]

The UK has allready recovered from the initial blows. It's the funniest thing ever all these doom-scenarios, it's not the UK that has a problem but the eurocrats, they look even more useless than they already did. Juncker who is never not completily drunk as the ultimate embaressment, who does he likes wetkissing people so much really it's disgusting he basicly licks them, vulgair vulgair guy

[Pannonian]

The UK has allready recovered from the initial blows. It's the funniest thing ever all these doom-scenarios, it's not the UK that has a problem but the eurocrats, they look even more useless than they already did. Juncker who is never not completily drunk as the ultimate embaressment, who does he likes wetkissing people so much really it's disgusting he basicly licks them, vulgair vulgair guy

It's funny how people in Dutchland are so familiar with what's going on over here, moreso than people who actually live over here. Which country has the 6th biggest economy in the world?

[Fragony]

It's funny how people in Dutchland are so familiar with what's going on over here, moreso than people who actually live over here. Which country has the 6th biggest economy in the world?

Can't answer that and I won't cheat with googling

gonna do it now

edit latest I could is France on 6 and the UK on five, but it's based on GDP, ead somewhere else that it switched. Hardly the 28 days later thing