Is Hitler the only racist left?

Furunculus, not everybody who favours lower taxes is a populist. But all the rightwing populist parties that are currently sweeping over Europe share roughly the same traits that I described, of which lower taxes is a natural part.

Once in an elected office, especially at the lower levels, these populist politicians almost invariably turn out to be such depressingly inept muppets that even their very own voters are thoroughly put off. And they usually don't have very high standards to begin with.

At the top, Europe's populist parties consist of well educated, sharply dressed people with a deliberate aura of some moderation. This top is usually very narrow. Directly below, below the first ten or twenty members of their organisation, there gapes the abyss already. That army of shady businessmen, taxi drivers, outright criminals and other muppets who fill their ranks and run for elected office. In their minds, they are the ones who ought to run the country.

Lecturing Madsen on the specifics of primate genetics or human genotypes found in Africa I think misses the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

The Devil's Advocate in me wishes to make the point that Africa has peoples from all over the globe - whites, blacks, Indians and Arabs. If he'd specified "Black" then you'd be on firmer ground. ~:smoking:

---

Oh, come on. We all know who he is referring to. He did not mean the whites in Botswana.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

He did not mean the whites in Botswana.

---

No he can't have done that; I mean, our Crown Prince may be inbred and all, but he's no monkey...

That description is more fitting of his sister's husband.... And the sister herself, come to think of it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

See, this is what you get when you vote populist. Sure, they usually sound all well and good - Less taxes! Libertarianism! No immigration! National sovereignity! Norway for the Norwegians!

But then you always end up with these sort of people. Some YouTube filth writer, elevated to the position of politician. What a laugh.

---

Great joke! :2thumbsup:



Wait, you were serious? Oh dear...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

I don't think he was a racist, as he might have actually been talking about monkeys. It's a well-known fact that monkeys in asia are more liberal and open-minded and prone to race mixing and therefore more diverse, whereas the monkeys in Africa don't believe in "mixing the monkeys" and tend to be more hard-line, secluded and inbred.

---

As long as they don't mix together, then some of those asian monkeys start to complain. Chinese example. Only to note that the western world is not the only place with rascists running around if anyone thought that (and because I've just red about it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Great joke! :2thumbsup:



Wait, you were serious? Oh dear...

---

I am afraid it is not a laughing matter. Populism is huge in Europe at the moment.



Especially for you and Furunculus: Bulgarian Ivan Krastev, who wrote a very good description of the Populism that threatens liberal democracy in Europe. A quick essay here:
http://www.eurozine.com/articles/200...rastev-en.html

I present Krastev to you two because...he is a right-leaning liberal, and the article is a scathing indictment of the EU elites and of Hugo Chavez. Which should appeal to you both. Krastev's genius is that he connects these two with Euro-far right populism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krastev

At heart, the defining feature of populism is the view that society falls into two homogenous and antagonistic groups: "the people as such" and "the corrupt elite". It proceeds to argue that politics is the expression of the general will of the people and that the social change is possible only via the radical change of the elite.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

As long as they don't mix together, then some of those asian monkeys start to complain. Chinese example. Only to note that the western world is not the only place with rascists running around if anyone thought that (and because I've just red about it).

---

I can scarcely think of more racist countries than China and Japan. A majority of Japanese consider all 'gaijin' little more than monkeys.

China semi-officially propagates the idea that the Chinese split of from the rest of humanity 500000 years ago. Chinese are humans, all the others are some sort of Neandertal apes.

I need some math help. My childrens' grandmother is Thai. So my wife is half Thai, making my children 1/4 Thai. So, are my kids only 1/8 monkey? :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

I need some math help. My childrens' grandmother is Thai. So my wife is half Thai, making my children 1/4 Thai. So, are my kids only 1/8 monkey? :laugh4:

---

I only read this because you posted here, still funny but you're getting much tamer.

Wasn't that long ago you mentioned my mum and teabagging in the same post, ah, the good old days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Furunculus, not everybody who favours lower taxes is a populist. But all the rightwing populist parties that are currently sweeping over Europe share roughly the same traits that I described, of which lower taxes is a natural part.

Once in an elected office, especially at the lower levels, these populist politicians almost invariably turn out to be such depressingly inept muppets that even their very own voters are thoroughly put off. And they usually don't have very high standards to begin with.

At the top, Europe's populist parties consist of well educated, sharply dressed people with a deliberate aura of some moderation. This top is usually very narrow. Directly below, below the first ten or twenty members of their organisation, there gapes the abyss already. That army of shady businessmen, taxi drivers, outright criminals and other muppets who fill their ranks and run for elected office. In their minds, they are the ones who ought to run the country.

---

i accept what you say, specifically, that there are a lot of populist, right-wing parties in continental politics that are deeply unpleasant, that wouldn't get the time of day here, and who i wouldn't want to give the time of day too.

i totally reject the the disdain for populism, especially when among those who laud the actions of the EU.

populism is essentially the acquiescence to the will of the electorate, something that is deeply at odds with the way the EU has handled the whole lisbon constitution/treaty, and i will always jump up and down to point out the fact.

to my mind, the disdain for popularism among much of european political commentary is nothing more than a disdain for the failings of the voter, which is really a contempt for representative democracy.

>I< do not worry about demagogues in Britain, though i do appreciate the problem is more realised elsewhere in the less 'perfect' parts of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

populism is essentially the acquiescence to the will of the electorate

---

Funny then, that no populist party gets even close to 50% of the votes during an election....

If they actually represented "the will of the people", surely they'd get much more than 50%?

nothing you say above diminishes the concept of "populism", and nothing detracts from the truth that euro-enthusiasts decry populism because it works against their pet enthusiasm; ever-deeper-union.

Quote:

---

Populism is a political discourse that juxtaposes "the people" with "the elites." Populism may comprise an ideology urging social and political system changes and/or a rhetorical style deployed by members of political or social movements. It is defined by the Cambridge dictionary as "political ideas and activities that are intended to represent ordinary people's needs and wishes"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

nothing you say above diminishes the concept of "populism", and nothing detracts from the truth that euro-enthusiasts decry populism because it works against their pet enthusiasm; ever-deeper-union.

---

So.....

"Elites" are 80% of the population, and "the common people" only represent 20% of the populace?

By the most basic definition - not those of the political flunkies decrying it - populism is precisely as Furunculus defines it. In essence, therefore, populism is the cornerstone of our democracy. Every party does it to an extent, which accounts for HoreTore's post, though some parties more than others. These parties are the ones deemed "no-good uneducated misguided populists" and are thrown aside by the "political class." Ironically, this effectively proves the "populist" argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

So.....

"Elites" are 80% of the population, and "the common people" only represent 20% of the populace?

---

que?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

By the most basic definition - not those of the political flunkies decrying it - populism is precisely as Furunculus defines it. In essence, therefore, populism is the cornerstone of our democracy. Every party does it to an extent, which accounts for HoreTore's post, though some parties more than others. These parties are the ones deemed "no-good uneducated misguided populists" and are thrown aside by the "political class." Ironically, this effectively proves the "populist" argument.

---

Please, do explain why populist parties are at best fringe parties.

If they supposedly hold the views of the majority of the population, the common man, then surely they would have the majority of the votes, right?

Or....Perhaps "the common man" actually favours something else...? Election results says he does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Please, do explain why populist parties are at best fringe parties.

If they supposedly hold the views of the majority of the population, the common man, then surely they would have the majority of the votes, right?

Or....Perhaps "the common man" actually favours something else...? Election results says he does.

---

Because mainstream parties try to portray them as dangerous fringe parties, because the people don't think that the populist parties will get elected, and because when the populist parties latch on to a big issue that threatens to displace the top few ruling parties those parties immediately take hold of that issue and begin to half-heartedly use it in their campaigns to prevent the populist parties from taking their votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Because mainstream parties try to portray them as dangerous fringe parties, because the people don't think that the populist parties will get elected, and because when the populist parties latch on to a big issue that threatens to displace the top few ruling parties those parties immediately take hold of that issue and begin to half-heartedly use it in their campaigns to prevent the populist parties from taking their votes.

---

So..... It's all an elaborate elitist conspiracy to confuse and betray the common man...?

I'd say that the theory "the populist parties actually don't represent the views of the common man" is a lot easier and makes much more sense.

Time to face the facts; Europe's populist parties only reflect the views of a small portion of the population. Thankfully.

EDIT: Funnily enough, that's the very same conspiracy theory the communist who calls for a dictatorship of the proletariat uses.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

So..... It's all an elaborate elitist conspiracy to confuse and betray the common man...?

---

:inquisitive:

It isn't a conspiracy theory. It's politics. Political parties adopt and push policies they think people want. That's just how the system works, which is why I see populist parties as an important pressure bloc to force major parties to adopt policies that they need to adopt, but not as parties that will realistically gain power, for better or for worse.

EDIT: You contradict yourself. If a party was populist then it wouldn't represent the views of only a small portion of the voters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

EDIT: You contradict yourself. If a party was populist then it wouldn't represent the views of only a small portion of the voters.

---

It's like how in the usa the green party is the only one with environmentalist goals :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

It's like how in the usa the green party is the only one with environmentalist goals :laugh4:

---

I didn't say anything like that. :inquisitive:

'Populist' in common parlance does not mean a party which represents the populace at large, or represents the will of the people.

Populist is a pejorative term, for demagoguery, for 'easy' quick-fix solutions, for form over content.

This is why a populist party never refers to itself as such, no more than an environmental party refers to itself as 'tree-huggin' hippies'. Populism is not by definiton rightwing.

A populist party will always claim to represent the true will of the people, usually contrasted to an out-of-touch elite, or an even more sinister conspiracy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

'Populist' in common parlance does not mean a party which represents the populace at large, or represents the will of the people.

---

Yes, in common parlance perhaps, but not in the definition provided. In effect, a democracy can and should run on "populism." Populism is intended to represent the will of the people, even if it does not always precisely do so. If they promote unpopular policies they aren't really populist in the true sense. The danger in representing populism as you do is that when the claim of an out of touch and autocratic elite is legitimate, they are easily demonized and ignored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

:inquisitive:

It isn't a conspiracy theory. It's politics. Political parties adopt and push policies they think people want. That's just how the system works, which is why I see populist parties as an important pressure bloc to force major parties to adopt policies that they need to adopt, but not as parties that will realistically gain power, for better or for worse.

EDIT: You contradict yourself. If a party was populist then it wouldn't represent the views of only a small portion of the voters.

---

Populists claims they represent the "common man". In reality, they only represent a small portion, as every single election result has shown. The majority in this country, for example, vastly favour social democracy. Lower taxes, less government and no immigration simply isn't what the majority of this country wants, only some 20% of us want that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

Muslims are not a race, it is a religion; anti-semitic is taken to be anti-Jew, but again the race / religion line is blurred as not all Semites are Jews... but then I'm pretty sure you know this.

Looking down on Africa does not make one a Racist. Some might look down equally on any group of countries that manage to have such high levels of corruption, starvation and ethnic violence whilst having such abundant mineral wealth. Many Carribbeans look down on Africa often for these very reasons.

~:smoking:

---

and where does the abundance of mineral wealth and any other type of wealth or abundance for that matter (richest fishgrounds, hardwoods, coffee etc) go to? oh yeah... it feeds the rest of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

The Devil's Advocate in me wishes to make the point that Africa has peoples from all over the globe - whites, blacks, Indians and Arabs. If he'd specified "Black" then you'd be on firmer ground.



Since a lot of DNA is scaffolding and basic cell function, you need to go quite a long way from Primates before it drops below 70%



Never defended methods here. I think that many parents either fail to have any responsibility or try to be their children's friend. In this African, Caribbean and Indian methods often have a lot in common - stricter, boundries, some corporal punishment and aspirations. When I have my own kids I either need to find a nice ghetto to live in or else emigrate.

~:smoking:

---

you can go devils advocate all you want, you can say that if you read what it says he might have said nothing that is that bad or blablabla... but we all know what he meant... and he knows it too otherwise he wouldnt have (semi)apologised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

I don't think he was a racist, as he might have actually been talking about monkeys. It's a well-known fact that monkeys in asia are more liberal and open-minded and prone to race mixing and therefore more diverse, whereas the monkeys in Africa don't believe in "mixing the monkeys" and tend to be more hard-line, secluded and inbred.

---

so then one would suspect that the half-monkeys would be found in asia instead of africa... :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ironside

As long as they don't mix together, then some of those asian monkeys start to complain. Chinese example. Only to note that the western world is not the only place with rascists running around if anyone thought that (and because I've just red about it).

---

oh not, racism/discrimination is to be found everywhere in the world... (I know that asia is pretty bad also, the adore westerners, hate pretty much anything else... wont ever show or admit it freely/openly though.) but you find racism in africa too.. or south-america...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave

I need some math help. My childrens' grandmother is Thai. So my wife is half Thai, making my children 1/4 Thai. So, are my kids only 1/8 monkey? :laugh4:

---

depends from which point of view u look at... :P

are the thai the monkeys here or are you? or none of you? or maybe both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Stranger

and where does the abundance of mineral wealth and any other type of wealth or abundance for that matter (richest fishgrounds, hardwoods, coffee etc) go to? oh yeah... it feeds the rest of the world.

---

Cobblers.

First off, minerals rarely feed anyone. Diamonds are valuable, not edible.
Richest fishgrounds? Hardly.
Zimbabwe was a major exporter locally of food - not any more now of course. Better to starve under a black president than be fed under a white one I guess... :dizzy2:

Coffee may have its origins in Ethiopia, but is grown from South America to Indonesia.
Hardwoods - yeah, the world would collapse without African hardwoods...

Africa's corrupt leaders help provide resources to the rest of the world, but there is nothing that Africa has that can not be found elsewhere.

~:smoking: