BF2S Forums Where are all the whiny peaceful "Enlightened" European now?

Dilbert_X wrote:

People voted for Brexit, and will vote for Le Pen for various reasons.

Not all of them are ignorant idiots as you keep suggesting and they make a balanced decision.

"they make a balanced decision", sorry but this contravenes literally 300 years of classical liberal theory. there's a reason why most of the world's successful democracies have representative democracy and not direct rule by plebiscites. it's because people, on the whole, acting en masse, do not make 'balanced decision'. this isn't a uziq-hates-brexit take: it's there in the foundational theory of liberal democracy, it's there in the writings of de tocqueville, it's there in the documents and letters of the founding fathers of the united states.

several of those founding fathers, incidentally, owned newspapers or had controlling interests in the press/publishing houses/pamphleteering operations. they knew how public opinion could be swayed and led by newsprint and propaganda. it's no accident that most of them were openly fearful of democracy being directed by populism. and what was the vote leave campaign but for a bundle of flashy red-top-paper headline-grabbing lies?

judging by the not trivial amount of regret and u-turns in views expressed by the (supposedly) hardcore no-exit nativist brexiteers, i would say it was a long way from a well-reasoned, well-informed, 'balanced' decision.



why have you yourself been laughing and partaking in so much schadenfreude on these forums, linking so many news articles that report on the continuing fallout of brexit? doesn't make much sense, does it? to laugh at those people who made 'a balanced decision' and yet now are outraged/upset/remorseful of the consequences?

you don't make any fucking sense on this topic, and you well know it. being a 50-something contrarian is not a good look. about time you grew up.

Last edited by uziq (2022-04-19 02:51:32)

lol way to totally misinterpret the graph.

'british people voted for brexit 5 times'.
'no deal brexit was the obvious only option on the table'.

both pretty highly selective, not to say idiosyncratic, ways to read the national mood there. the simple fact is that your 'well-reasoned', 'balanced and informed' peeepuhl have, it seems, changed now to a majority wanting to remain IN the EU and even a slim majority to go through the whole pulaver of RE-JOINING the bloody thing. so how you can sit there and say that 'uziq ignores the overwhelming mandate of the british people's will ...' bla bla bla is slightly funny, to me. it seems to me that the british people were misled, barely knew what they wanted in the first place in any coherent way, and are just as inchoate and mixed in their polling and views now. ah, the wisdom of direct democracy!

indeed, the hodgepodge of opinions and highly variable public weathervane is the whole reason i am CRITICAL of snap referenda such as brexit. just as, indeed, classical theorists of liberalism and democracy have known for centuries. the romans and ancient greeks both had negative connotations for mass behaviour and mass voting. 'turbulence' as a word itself comes from the latin root for 'turba', meaning an unruly multitude. and what else could you call all this contrary political to'ing and fro'ing over a single issue other than 'turbulent'? the more you know, eh!

Its completely failed though eh? Every country is becoming steadily more insular and right wing.

lol over what timeframe? and you're the person talking about 'single datapoints' in omicron. yes, let's take the temperature of post-2008 europe, in which most economies and polities are still working through the fall-out and instabilities, and conclude that a ceturies-old system 'has failed'.

did i mention that you seem to accidentally parrot the viewpoints of the putin/kremlin media, those who have infiltrated many supposedly 'free western' media institutions and organizations, an uncanny amount? "the west has failed, europe is collapsing, liberal democracy is over, ethno-nationalism is the bright new tomorrow ...".

but remember! putin bad! newly awakened imperialist russia bad! we must deplore the arrogance and chauvinism of the backwards russkies!

you are a confused person.

Last edited by uziq (2022-04-19 03:33:59)

yes, keep being obtuse about the fact that the money-trail and overlapping spheres of influence between authoritarian regimes, such as putin's, and the far-right in europe whom you trumpet and cheer on so much, is all too evident. nevermind that there's been several major inquiries in states like the US and UK which have all established that the russians have been meddling in elections, jimmying public opinion, spamming facebook and social media, etc, with propaganda, and so on.

you're like shahter. 'me? pro-putin? i hate putin! i just handily recycle and repost all of his misinformation, scare-stories, and critiques of liberalism on the internet all day long.'

Last edited by uziq (2022-04-19 04:38:38)

yeah, and show me the voting numbers for le pen in the late 1990s (14% in 1988 to 15% in the late-90s, truly a populist wave).

in case you’re too stupid: i’m not saying putin invented the far-right. im saying russia have purposefully amplified and funded them in the last 10 years. the ‘cause’, in my reading, is the 2008 financial crash. but the russians have seized upon it handily.

and, somehow, you seem to repeat all of their lines about the decadent corrupt terrible weak liberal west … verbatim. but i’m sure it’s entirely an accident that you have this valise of received opinions. it’s not at all influenced by the fact that the russkies have been pumping media/social media with these talking points.  as we all know, you’re a highly independent scholar who is always mindful of his sources!

Last edited by uziq (2022-04-19 06:56:31)

A lot of young liberals eventually become conservatives. It has nothing to do with the platforms but people's sensibilities change as they age. I have also heard argued that poor liberal people just die younger too.

I think even as young liberals become older conservatives, they are still more accepting of what the conservatives of their youth foamed about. Eventually people will come to accept trans stuff as they accept other stuff we probably take for granted.

yes, cultural attitudes and social mores have a different dynamic to the more basic angle of economic self-interest.

and people have broadly been becoming more tolerant and less racist over time.

the idea that 'every country' in europe is starting to realize 'multiculturalism has failed' and is becoming a hothouse of racism is just stupid. reading it narrowly as a statement on race/biology is doubly stupid in that it's dangerously scientifically illiterate, too.

right-wing populism as a novel force in recent decades should be taken in its context. that is key to understanding it and to prognosticating the future. not some generalized blague about 'civilization collapsing' because 'we let in too many blacks' and 'now the noble white man won't stand for it anymore'. yawn.

Last edited by uziq (2022-04-24 19:11:54)

certainly never said nobody can be racist. but people's reasons for abandoning the centre are more various than 'racism', and it's a far cry from 'the multicultural project in europe is failing', isn't it? time and again your favourite fascists are confounded at the polls and never reach any elected office. people's reasons for voting for macron are various, too, and a significant one is anti-racism. the anti-racists are winning. so how's your little theory now?

also your use of statistics are disingenuous in the extreme. 42% of the 'french people' did not vote for fascism. 42% of those who voted did so, which excludes 30% of the population who abstained. that's not a trivial number. for a third of the french nation, the options are the table were so odious/left them so indifferent/didn't appeal to their interests, leading to them not casting a vote at all. 'fascism' won 42% of a voting 70%. you can do maths, yes? i a democracy in which a full third of the population don't vote at all for a presidential candidate is not an insignificant fact; it suggests that the political choices on the table don't represent them at all, not that they're complicit in fascism or de facto fans of racism.

the way you talk, rhetorically, suggests that europe is sliding into xenophobia and racism. you said earlier this thread 'half of the french populace are poised to vote for a fascist'. well, a significantly smaller number than 'half the population' voted that way. please be more specific and honest in the way you post and treat with these statistics. you can't say 'you don't understand majority voting old boy' one moment and then make sensational claims like 'half the french people want fascism' the next. apply your own rigour, please.

i've never said populism and the rise of the far-right didn't happen/aren't happening. i've said they must be understood in a proper context. accuracy and details are important. you're trumpeting and triumphing the rise of a nasty piece of work who is deep into the pockets of russian banks and has close ties to putin. why? because you have some pet theory, that everyone is as ignorant and xenophobic as you. well, fine. i'm sure there are quite a few frenchmen whose views align with your own and who are equally tedious to encounter at the bar or tabac. but it's not 'half of the french people', not in your overblown rhetorical sense nor in the actual psephology of the vote.

as i said before, it's significant that the FN are pulling the 'highest numbers ever' (since ww2, any way), but the story is as much about the collapse of the traditional centre in france as about the people's overwhelming desire for fascist/racist politics. the collapse of the republicans/socialists is an equally big component of this story, here; the other half of the equation that your analysis and gloss on the situation misses. people are vacating the centre for both extremes. again, the third runner-up in the election and the third 'winner' here was the extreme left candidate, melenchon. you're handily ignoring that, too, when you want to paint france as overwhelmingly racist.

Last edited by uziq (2022-04-25 01:48:34)

Meanwhile in Australia

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-25/ … /101013704

Being generous to african refugees has delivered street-fights between african machete gangs.

People here are going to get tired of that really fast.

You have literally no idea how the average person thinks.

Doesn't matter how many theoretical books you read, you're completely out of touch.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

uziq wrote:

.and, regardless, france just re-elected a leader in a broad show of support for anti-racism. i'd wager that a large number of the people who got behind macron are not exactly fervent macronistes, i.e. neoliberal centrists. they just didn't want a racist in high office. so how are you going to conclude that france, and europe, are ineluctably showing that multiculturalism has failed?

Paris just isn't Paris anymore. The Christchurch shooter said he saw more Muslims than people in Paris. And who could doubt the perception of an incel mass murderer?

if you're travelling on a budget and live in cheap hostels... guess where those hostels gonna be located. sounds like he had a white man's version of the japanese paris syndrome.

Last edited by Cybargs (2022-04-25 03:37:19)

Dilbert_X wrote:

Have you been to Paris?

no, too many muslims.