As I recall, the Left actually won an election in Greece in 2015, which raised the morale of leftist parties around Southern Europe. However, even after being elected, they discovered that due to the opposition of the European financial elite, they were unable to carry out their program and were forced to accept the very austerity measures that they opposed. It revealed the helplessness of the voters when they defy the financial elites.
So in a neo-liberal world, you can not achieve anything on your own when you try to promote left winged politics. It’s the same deal with climate protection. Everyone knows we need to change something, but when one country tries to, it doesn’t actually change anything, when everyone else doesn’t. So people just get frustrated even more. Which means what’s going to happen is that we probably need to destroy our societies again and built a new one based on past mistakes. Which is going to cost a lot of life’s. But that’s probably the only way to change anything. Doing it the painful way.
No. Greece had many major flaws, like a dysfunctional administration which was unable to collect taxes (especially from the rich trade ship owners), payed out pensions to dead people, handn't even got a land register (a reason for illegal layed fires). The Greek government even consulted Goldman Sachs to hide it's budget deficit to get into the Eurozone and avoid sanctions. Since the banks and investors lost trust and didn't want to buy government bons without high interest rates, the European Central Bank and the other countries of the Eurozone had to step in, in form of transferring taxpayers money, giving out loans with low interest rates and debt cuts. But these helps were massively unpopular in the rich countries which did have to pay them, actually even the far right German AfD party was founded as a protest movement against these programs. So the political leaders on the Eurozone were under pressure to go hard on Greece, not only demanding the necessary reforms the country needed, but also Austerity policy. So the main reason the left government couldn't do their program, was due to the interest of the taxpayers of the wealthy northern European countries. If you want to look at a successful attempt of a left wing policy you'd rather look at Portugal. It was also highly in debt, but there the Socialist government could convince the Eurozone to handle it's problem without applying Austerity, while at the same time delivering reforms to make the state more efficient and effective. They had a convincing plan, the Greece government on the other hand mostly populist rhetoric.
No. Greece wanted the other euro countries, like Germany, to continue to pay their bills. Greek voters have no democratic right to vote that German tax payers should fund their widening deficit. A better description is that the Greece populists simply had to face reality: long-term, you can't spend more than what you make.
I don’t get it. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, so as a way to express frustration, they support the systems that made them poor in the first place.
I think the answer is given toward the very end of the video: the populists (right wing) are promising all kinds of stuff that people believe. But of course they won't be able to deliver and in reality the poorer people will probably be worse off.
@@magepunk2376 not really true. The working class in the West has correctly noticed that they are the losers in globalism. Simplified, the winners are poor people in poor countries because they can sell to richer customers, and rich people in rich countries because they can employ people for less. The main losers are poor people in rich countries who need to compete with poor people in poor countries. The net effect is ofc an overall reduction in global poverty and an increase in global wealth, but the poor/workers in rich countries are not seeing anything of that. Far right parties are saying no to globalism which is quite appealing to a lot of the population in the richer part of the world. Add to this that the only ones in the West that are negatively affected by high migration is the poor of rich countries. Left wing parties are instead mostly talking about higher taxes for the rich, but crucially they are not opposed to migration. This means that even if they offer a solution, it doesn't cover the whole problem spectrum that is afflicting the workers. But the Right are. If their solution is effective or even viable isn't the point, it's that they are offering something, which the Left simply isn't.
@@Superslemmet If you believe reducing immigration will benefit the middle and lower classes, think again. Immigrant workers often fill positions that locals are unwilling to take, including low-income, thankless, and blue-collar jobs. Many are also independent workers. So… I highly doubt that locals would step into these roles, especially since such jobs are in short supply across many developed countries.
It appears that we're living in a globalized second Gilded Age in which there is no shortage of Trump wannabes, but authentic center-left alternatives are scarce. The problem is that the average voter is in pain, but has no idea of what's really going on; they vote for the far-right in desperation, but that only make things worse. We need a new progressive movement and preferably a new Roosevelt as our champion.
They vote for the side that caused all their pain somehow hoping it will stop instead of giving the side trying to help them enough power to be effective.
@5353Jumper The problem for us is that it's hard to sell complex solutions to complex problems, while our opponents have learned that it's much easyy to sell fear (amygdala politics).
I like the way you think! As I watched the video, I thought, “OK, if left wing economic policy is the answer, where are the examples of successful application of those policies?” Of course, I came to the same answer you did. So why did we move away from those policies? My guess is that the very wealthy, who have a disproportionate amount of influence prefer policies that benefit them at the expense of everybody else.
@AndrewUnruh Why? Blame Nixon. He's the one who nominated Lewis F. Powell Jr for the Supreme Court, who in turn penned the majority decisions for Buckley v Valeo in 1976 and First National Bank of Boston v Bellotti in 1978. The result? Money is equal to free speech and corporations are people, thereby legalizing bribery. I suspect that also helped Reagan get elected in 1980 and I'm quite certain that it's what convinced both Clinton and Obama to embrace and continue the neoliberalism introduced by Reagan.
One thing about the left-wing. In many European countries, there has been a concerted effort by the so-called "centrist" parties to drive left-wing ideas out of what is considered "acceptable" politics. Kier Starmers Labour is a perfect example. He has expelled almost anyone with even the slightest hint of a left-wing idea from the party. While Macron is refusing to work with the left and basically showing his utter contempt for the French voters, which will only really benefit the far-right. The centrists and neoliberals see the left as more of a threat then the far-right. This is what brought the n@zis to power in 1933 and it is helping to bring a new generation of far-right into power in the 21st century.
This can be seen in the UK undercover police scandal. Going back to the 60s they were going undercover but only in left wing or activist groups. They often assumed fake identities, sometimes using the names of deceased children, and lived double lives for years. They even had children with people which they abandoned once their operations ended. Many of those they spied on were non-violent activists involved in environmental, anti-racist, and anti-capitalist movements. They weren't undercover in right wing groups. That tells you everything about the priority of every government since.
Here here, Starmer is a right wing pirate who keel hauled Corbyn and set the Corbynites adrift, left wing hasn't had a look in because the system has poisoned the very thought of having a left wing government, the rich have slandered and propagandised the left into oblivion bec6the rich are terrified of paying their fare share.
Culture wars and immigration seem to be playing a bigger role than economic issues. The right's increased popularity correlates to the increase in Syrian refugees in 2015. And the brexit campaign had little traction when delivered as an economic issue, but support surged when it fear mongered immigration issues.
And the Syrian civil war was triggered by interethnic conflicts between farmers that were exacebated by drought. Climate change is multiplying the # of refugees by orders of magnitude because our modern economics are so fragile. Wait 'til you see the politics we'll have when there's a billion climate refugees. It will be the age of everybody pushing each other off the lifeboat. And maybe, the right's increased popularity is people secretly knowing all that and preparing.
Plato warns about the danger of democracy in his book The Republic and how tyranny is very easy to transition into. The rise of the right is the symptom of mass unhappiness in the populace and should be the very thing that makes our politicians take a step backwards and rethink their policies
He warned about STUPID people having a vote... That's Democracy's Achilles heel... An informed and thoughtful populace is required for Democracy to work... So what's the solution? End Democracy? or End stupid people's ability to affect everyone with their arrogance and ignorance...
@MarkoT-xy6ep I know, Plato also stated that a government is a reflection of the people. That is a simplistic view. Nonetheless, people are voting for populists and they don't care about the people, but the people think they do. The recent killing of the CEO in America has seen the elites really worried because the right and left feel that it was payback for so many declined insurance claims that killed thousands of America people. A tipping point will come, and it may have jack boots on, or ordinary voters will finally snap
Yes, thats why you hate us. And you try to make us hate each other on the behest of your globalist elite overlords. "Far right" now encompasses almost everyone, and we are sick of being hated.
The generation that had to risk it all to stop far right extremism in the late thirties and early forties has now houred out and there is no living memory of where extremism leads.
The type of extremism you are talking about is living happily in places like China, Russia, Iran etc. What you are trying to call extremism now is nations with borders/freedom of speech/traditional families
@sewur5034 , yes, this is precisely the rhetoric that led to pre-WWII Germany. Interesting that you don't see it when you're echoing it almost word-for-word. Humankind needs to move forward, not backwards. That has never ended well throughout history.
The generation that got told to kill their Europeans brothers on the continent would all be classed as far right. They don’t want mass migration and lgbt brainwashing
Right??? As a 3rd generation .1%’er I was embarrassed when Trump cut corporate tax almost in half😳 We live through corporations, own virtually nothing in our own name, so the tax break was unreal. Did I hire another personal assistant, domestic, caretaker…or give raises with the extra money? Nope… Same with our public corporations. They simply bought back their own stock, which raised the share price, the wealthy enjoy the increase in net worth and the execs got their bonuses for raising the stock price. When asked, Trump said they weren’t suppose to do that🤣
Because the whole democratic system of the US is already in control of the politicians. How can a two party system be democratic? Why is it a two party system? Because the politicians do everything to keep it that way. They influence their people so they think they don’t actually have any other choices. Then they sabotage each other to create and endless circle of the other getting another chance.
Average people are not getting poorer. That's just not factual true. Incomes for the working class grew at a fast clip under Biden. He was a pro labor president, brought back manufacturing jobs and created massive infrastructure projects. The voters didn't give a shit. They preferred the demagogue that screamed about immigrants eating cats and dogs and tried to win an election with violence.
Maybe,we’ll see. When he was in office last time things were significantly better for the lower classes. For example that tax cut the left constantly calls a tax cut for the rich was also a tax cut for the working and middle class and people appreciated it. Employment for minorities was up too especially for the black community and illegal immigration was down. That in comparison to the last four years was a major reason he was re elected.
Its more that the native people of britain and europe see the invasion by 'refugee' islamics for what it really is....an invasion approved by the neo-marxist leaning governments and their sycophants in the traditional media , by people that openly despise everything about european society and everything that makes it good to live in......and then the left wonders why anyone with half a brain despises their ideas for the future of western society.
People also need to understand that neoliberalism hasn’t failed. It’s working and delivering as intended, for the ruling classes and neoliberals. All this that you’re angry with is intended.
Immigration, feminism, beurocracy. What more could corporations possibly ask for? Unlimited (cheap) workforce while being protected by state from any competition
Exactly this. The only lie has been the one convincing the common people that they're going to benefit from the system, when that has never been part of the plan. For wealthy people to retain an oligarchy, there needs to be a large labour force, with widespread need and poverty to exploit. This is why there is such strong attention on the declining birth rates. If those in power truly wanted to fix the birth rates in a healthy way, they need only introduce policies which help increase income for families, and create focus on family planning. But these would come at reduced profit margins for the oligarch class, so beneficial policies for the majority will never take precedence. The one thing which is painfully clear about the 1% is that there is no such thing as 'having enough money'.
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties. Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights. The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
Indeed, when a wealthy elite charlatan claims to be against 'the system' & on the side of the 'people' & alarm bells don't go off, something is wrong with your snake oil detector.
As a German who speaks out against the AfD on an almost daily basis, I have to admit that it sometimes feels overwhelmingly lonely to remain sensible and do the right thing, namely to vote for the "lesser evil", i.e. the "old" parties. And the optimism is waning. All the time.
I think the worst thing is this weird perception that the left are inherently worse, because of the immense public inexperience with them. The SPD and Grüne were at one point maybe considerable as socialist, but have also just morphed into the centrist neoliberal positions, as the entire system rewards this direction. People for example think that the climate taxing by the current goverment of the people, instead of companies and rich people, is a left philosophy and not a horrifying display of how powerful the capitalistic industry has become in politics. People here in Germany and other western democracies have no real grasp of actual real socialist policies, because of their undermining by centrist parties, especially the CDU over their entire dominance over german politics and in recent years the FDP in our current gov., every time anything mildly considerable as progressive was put on the programm table. The left are still considered worse than literal racism, sexism and populism, because they oppose capitalistic inequality in far more substential ways than a AfD for example. The centrists can form goverments with them in Bundesländern sure, but that undermining and rejecting of "radical ideas", like taxing the rich is still completely in play, with centrists parties mostly holding the majority in parlaments and therefore being already in a power position over left parties. This exactly what one can observe in my region Thüringen right now, with the CDU being forced to govern with 2 left parties and yet besides the few pro people policies that could go through there's way more constant concern that this could break down at any minute, with the CDU having declared leftists as a more dangerous enemy to keep in check than the AfD, who they're slowly starting to overlap with by beginning to use their populism tactics.
The AfD is a far right, anti-constitutional party. What do you expect here? That all the German media ignores this glaring fact? Besides, everybody apart from the AfD-fanboys are sick of this infantile victim-mentality on the right. If nobody likes you, maybe you are the problem and not everybody else.
Maybe it's time to understand that EVERYBODY cares only for themselves and people close to them. Politicians ONLY want to win and get personal gains. Stop living in fantasy
But Eurosceptical parties are anti-EU despite knowing that leaving will hurt their stock options on the short term - because they believe they can save their nation that way. It feels very much like the left wing cares about their Stock options since they're actively helping create a tight housing market as well as a loose labor market.
The term "neoliberal" [applied here to most mainstream parties both within and outside the UK] needs some explaining. I believe neoliberalism describes the economics of Regan and Thatcher, rolled out controversially in the 1980s, which saw mass privatizations and sell-offs of major national assets such as social housing, gas, water and public trapnsport. There was also a deregulation of financial markets which culminated around 2008 in the banking crisis and ensuing economic recession. The resurgence of the Far Right [and the growth of conspiracy theories and anti-immigrant racism] has its roots in disillusionment with consensus [neoliberal] economic policies. Again, many thanks to Richard Murphy for highlighting an urgent problem.
You're 100% right - people like Hayek and Rand popularised it back in the 40s and 50s, Thatcher and Reagan embraced it and made it mainstream in the 80s. I'm not seeing anyone on the Far Right really going against this orthodoxy. They might talk about global elites being the enemy, but economically they tend to be very supportive of them, while decrying leftist socialism, Marxist, communism and 'liberalism', as well as trade unionism.
Thank you. I was obviously confused about the distinction between neo-Liberal and right wing. I never realised there was a big difference between the two positions.
I'm not sure there is a big difference between "neoliberal" and right wing - it's just that the former is an economic term for policies that favour a market driven economy. It is strongly associated with right-wing figures such as Regan and Thatcher, who were both fiercely anti trade unions and strongly individualist.
So explain why people choose far-right parties over socialist ones? The answer lies in their socio-cultural conservatism. Many people are now better off economically compared to 30 years ago and prioritize cultural issues over economic ones. This shift explains their focus on border control and anti-immigration issues rather than raising minimum wages. While blaming neoliberalism might be a more comfortable explanation, as a social democrat, I have to admit it’s not accurate. Far-right voters are primarily driven by cultural concerns, not economic struggles.
Is "driven by cultural concerns" a polite way of saying "driven by hate for people they see as different"? If so, I question the value of politeness in this instance. Better to be blunt.
@@joanmoriarity8738 People are different, cultures can be vastly opposing, it’s not a matter of perception, it’s an empirical fact. You can’t force me to accept a community of individuals who adhere to values I fundamentally disagree with. I loathe islam. Thus, I don’t want to live among adherents of this cult.
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties. Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights. The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
You're very off. It's not an increase in minimum wage that young people want, because what they're often desperate for is a job at all. There's growing unemployment, but politicians and corporations everywhere keep insisting that we need more immigration, that we're lazy and that nobody wants to work. That's why there's been so much controversy over the H1B program lately. Why hire an American when you can bring someone whose ability to stay in the US is tied to working for you? Lower class economic stress is objectively a factor.
Because the wealthy have convinced them that foreigners are the reason why they are getting poorer. It is quite easy to do as foreigners look different and can be singled out, whereas the white slave master exploiters look just as white as the poor.
There's a Russian-American historian, Peter Turchin, who's investigated what happens with many societies over the centuries. He says the pattern is for the rich to gradually get richer, have more political power which they use to largely benefit themselves. This increases inequality until it is intolerable for those who aren't part of the rich. The masses might start voting far right. The system then resets itself, usually very painfully. I suspect we are getting to that point with neo-liberalism. I've wondered if the popularity of far right parties is a symptom of the problem, but doesn't often provide the solutions.
I don't much about the far right economic policies in Europe, but in the USA the Republicans are further up the ass of the rich and corporations than the Democrats are so voting for Republicans is only doubling down on neoliberalism.
You’ve misread Turchin quite significantly. It’s true he says inequality tends to increase due to the wealth getting pumped upwards from poor to rich. But people don’t automatically vote far-right in response. What tends to happen is that the abundance of wealth results in more elites, and these elites increasingly compete fiercely for the same number of positions of power as before. The counter-elites that arise may be liberal, nationalist, communist, or fascist, but the point is that they arise because of intense competition among elites resulting from the wealth pump.
@@scallamander4899 Sorry, I didn't communicate myself clearly. Voting far right seems to be what people are doing at the present time. I'm perfectly aware that other options have been more popular at other times.
@@TheoBrookes-p2h It's true in a sense that the elite would obviously prefer a far right government out of all the options. But yeah it's important to avoid fatalism.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who’s needs aren’t being met. It sounds like you’re doing just fine probably at the expense of those supporting the right.
@@ggjr61 The stupidity comes in from the people supporting the right believing that the right-wing politicians will do anything to help them. They never have in the past, so why would they think they're going to do something in the future?
You nailed it: people in Europe voted for social democrats (e.g. in the UK and Germany) in the late 90s, but instead got more neoliberal governments than ever before, which made many people loose faith in democracy altogether. That of course doesn't mean, that facism would be a better alternative. But somehow the parties still don't get, that moving even further towards the right will win them back the votes they lost. We currently only have the choice between right and far-right.
When people perceive they are struggling some become easily convinced that it is the fault of minorities and foreigners, it appears to be part of human nature. Rising popularity of the far right is a red flag that the authorities (of whatever persuasion) are not (or cannot) deal with the core issues causing people to struggle. I expect it will continue until policies reduce inequality.
If foreigners are coming here by the boat load and putting pressure on our country, causing societal breakdown, then yes, the foreigners may well get the blame. We all know it''s the fault of the politicians, but they're doing their best 'not to be racist', and so the situation gets worse.
It really is. Only someone totally deluded and hateful of the native Europeans will think colonising their countries with millions and millions of third-world migrants and not making any effort to integrate them doesn't effect anything. Want to reduce inequality? Stop importing cheap labour and suppressing wages.
Nonsense. The demographic change has started to strain the societal fabric as certain cultures are simply incompatible. The europeans feel they loose control over their turf
Where on Earth did you have meaningful amounts of minorities and foreigners in any country eg. 50 years ago? Even now it is only the West. People blame ALWAYS elites and authorities. It will continue as long as governments will prioritize interests of corporations instead of their citizens.
if you stop and think about it, the only time things were vaguely going in the right direction for working people was in the 50's and 60's...maybe. That's 20 years of things being 'ok' in the entire history of organised labour
@@danielpye7738But the same thing is becoming less accessible for that guy. We are getting poorer every year. In 50's and 60's we vwere getting richer and richer. Now we are stagnating (as you said, we are right now fine more or less) but we won't be in near future. 35 years after WW2 the bottom 50 got 129 % richer while the top 1 got 58 % richer. From 1980 to 2014 the bottom 50 got 21 % richer and top 1 got 94 % richer and thats only percentage. If this trend continues, we will eventually stop getting any growth for low-income people as inflation will be always be bigger that the growth of bottom 50.
@@mikehunt.1609 - the unions were just trying to keep wages in line with inflation back then. It was the ruling classes that decided to put their foot down and put the commoners back in their place. Of course, since the papers were all owned by rich people, the story was told quite differently...
I want everyone back in good well-paying jobs that create real value so that I can tax the bejasus out of them to pay for the drains and the streetlighting and roads and GPs and dentists and hospitals and schools and soldiers and sailors and airmen with proper kit. I've nothing against businessmen turning a profit as long as shareholders don't come before citizens.
@@davidharris3264 With a vested interest to oppose the best interests of all the other citizens, who aren't shareholders. Some citizens are more equal than others.
In the anglo world shareholders come first - there are no other stakeholders recognised. A CEO who doesnt maximise profit can be sued and / or removed.
Neoliberalism isn't liberal ideology. It's an economic ideology that is free market at its core and is championed primarily by centrists and conservatives, although many liberals (particularly business owners) are also on board with neoliberalism.
Its not rocket science, there is a common theme in all country's, an underlying cause which is the debt based financial system and it hollows out the fabric of society, which causes the dissatisfaction, which can then be used to fuel far right politics, wars scapegoating and so on. What does it matter what policy are put forth by a government when this feudal system is in place? It is baffling that people cant see this even now, that they are dominated by a financial elite and instead they want to talk politics.
You can only make big changes in your life and others when you got the money to do so. Money is so important that it completely nullifies any general morals people should have. So the ones that get the money to make any changes are general people that don’t care about others. If you try to get money the legal and morally correct way, it always requires a lot of work, in addition of just having luck. So you’re basically playing the lottery while others can just play with peoples life’s to become rich and powerful. Bad people apologize and promise changes, but they don’t actually mean it. They just try to benefit from others as long as possible. If big companies can influence a government to make people do what they want instead of the other way around, it’s going to get worse for society. Because the company only cares about money and not the well being of people.
Why don‘t we just found a bank in combination with a political party? That is, an actually well-intentioned political party, and a bank governed democratically and transparently by the electorate. Then the party would have all the deposits to use to gain power, of course still respecting a sizeable reserve ratio. And once it has achieved the absolute majority in the country (because voting for any other party would go against common sense), it would slowly revolutionize the effectivity of the country‘s bureaucracy through excellent technology and subsequently redistributing the *cost savings* instead of redistributing any wealth itself.
Romania just experienced this at a high level. Most of population voted for far right extremist president which threatens the democracy. Romania suffered greatly from communism just 30 years ago and people seem to have forgotten.
That is a tough ask. Jeremy Corbin was politically annihilated in 2019 and he was the only MP to offer genuine change, a genuine alternative to the status quo since I was a young boy. If we are going to come up with an alternative we've got to do it soon
It is quite simple. The majority parties are committed to mass immigration, net zero and alienating the bulk of the population through aggressive social liberalism .the voters dont want this or more than 50%
I think you nailed it here: the "left" wants change to deal with problems caused by old status quo policies, the "right" promises that the status quo will work for you if we just keep to it.
Corbyn wasn't emotional enough/gut emotions. The right wing add in the visceral emotions. Left wingers are too busy padding their CV and looking 'proper' (most come for middle class+ families), so therefore, people vote for the right wing nut jobs. 'Liberals' are highly educated and ladder climbers; your local plumber isn't
Are you feeling better to pressure other people? You like punish people because of their race? You think your country is exceptional? You are part of the problem.
It offers a sense of identify to those with low self esteem and a proclivity for fear. ANYONE can be disenfranchised, just as soon as they lose an election.
@@bostongirlsandy - You don't want to see a United States unleashed on the world, our meddling is bad enough as it is, a truly Conquest oriented US would be devastating.
@@bostongirlsandy - And you may get them. The problem with Fascism (and make no mistake, Trump and the people around him ARE Fascist) is that Fascism is colonialism turned inward, meaning all the things a colonizing state usually does to the people they're colonizing (repression, apartheid, genocide) is turned inward to a people living within the Fascist state, and once the state accomplishes those things, it needs to turn outward to find a new source to blame for the problems that will still exist within the state. The US already has the repression part down pat, we'll see if Trump (and/or Vance) will be able to do the apartheid and genocide part or if he'll get thwarted and lose interest like last time.
@@bostongirlsandy why would you hope for that, for history to repeat !!! WW2 happened around that exact same time !! from 1939 to 1945. , and today we have nukes
The fundamental problem is the Political Party system itself. That inevitably leads to division, conflict and gross mismanagement. That system has been abused by the wealthy, who also own and run much of the media. Having some radical ideas myself, I know just how difficult it can be to get my voice heard.
In the case of Brazil, there are a number of factors, such as religion; many still have a colonial/neocolonial mentality and lack class consciousness and so on. And we are on the periphery of capitalism, we are generally vulnerable to external actions by major powers such as the United States and countries from Western Europe. The great powers manipulate and destabilize our region to maintain the status quo.
Até a nossa direita foi bem de esquerda na economia por décadas. Só veja Vargas, a ditadura etc. A facção "neoliberal" é um fenômeno mais recente. Para de cair em narrativas de neocolonialismo. Isso é choro. Só assuma que seu país é ruim em vez de culpar os EUA.
Somos vulneráveis porque somos um país agrário exportador com uma infraestrutura de merda, não porque o mundo está contra nós. Suma com a galera do agro e faça algumas ferrovias e indústrias para mercado interno, e mova o polo industrial pra algum lugar razoável, e veja como o país dispara...
@@umcaraqualquer3640 Neocolonialism and poor infrastructure aren't two separate things. Neocolonialism is when a first world country lobbies or pressures a third world country to stop developing infrastructure and industry.
I thought the Australian Labor party would be a breath of fresh air after the Morrison years but it is walking a similar path. Albo should have been the left’s poster boy considering his upbringing but it’s not turning out that way.
@@danielpye7738swung centrist - Keir Starmer and the Australian Labor Party have difficulties enacting leftist policies. As I understand it, Starmer in the UK is not about to lead the Labour Party in any political risk taking. In Australia, the Greens seem to be colluding with the Coalition to wedge Labor whenever they can
It depends how you define far right. There are those of us who treasure individuality and personal responsibility. We want capitalism and freedom to live as we see fit. Many left us consider us far right. However, we have no interest in controlling others and forcing them to live as we wish. That is the mode of operation of the left.
Well said. I'm a lifelong Labour voter and am in absolute despair at what the Labour party is doing. I too voted for Starmer in the hope that maybe some Socialist principals would happen. I feel quite homeless at the moment although I still continue as a party member having respect for our local MP. Like you I think this rise of the far right and nationalistic populism terrifying
There is no "far-right" in any meaningful sense in politics. What does exist, is a bunch of normal people who have become alienated by how far left the Overton Window has been pushed. Take Donald Trump, he is a 1980's Democrat, but in 2016 he somehow became cheeto-Hitler.
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties. Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights. The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
That's the world we are living in: neoliberale (or, in Europe, even liberal) has nothing to do with liberal, social democratic parties are not social democratic anymore, gas and nuclear power are called 'sustainable', the Republicans are about to turn the country into a oligarchy...
Well it is, it's freedom for the rich and powerfull. But many voters don't understand that that directly leads to less freedom for the poor and powerless, which 99% of us are.
The rise of populist parties and the shift of centre politics to the right, is entirely due to the failings of the established parties. Fix them and start governing for the people and not the WEF and the electorate may return.
Without reform of the UK's first-past-the-post voting system and some significant change in the media landscape to de-power the influence of the Sun-Daily-Torygraph, the Labour Party will need to continue to tread on eggshells on so many issues. Without those reforms, a more left leaning Labour Party would soon be out of office and all your hopes would be as dust. Voting reform has to come first.
I agree the media have way too much influence along with other sectors of society. I would argue that Corbyn has been the most successful politician in recent years and with the most left wing policies, why? because it gave people hope and the Labour Party became the largest political party in Europe but this was not acceptable to many of the establishment and so he had to be brought down. Then, Cameron had to go into coalition with the Lib Dems to form a government and May had to coerce the DUP to support her so that she could form a government, hardly overwhelming victories, so I think, if the media can be effectively dealt with, the Left would be popular in this country and give people what they are hoping to get from the far right.
As an Australian, I've noticed that countries that have a Murdoch dominated press have fallen for this neo-liberalism and now far-right agenda. Both our Liberal/National party and Labor party are seemingly working for the big corporates and the super wealthy. Many of these politicians after leaving parliament get employed by the very corporations that they were lobbied by whilst ministers and often the people that they previously opposed.
@@edbennett2 yes, I agree. The EU stopped Murdoch from taking over more media outside UK, he then started his campaign to weaken the EU. Brexit was his biggest success. Look up the role media mogul Hugenberg played in the rise of the Nazi party and bringing Hitler into office in Germany 1933.
No, like in the UK people want their country back. Under Hitler the means of production was controlled by the state. They had a socialist command economy - that is, a far left system. Adolf Hitler was a selective (national socialist) - Jews not included etc.
@PerPress Nazi Germany had a mixed economy. The Soviet Union was the far left system. The Nazis were all about taking their old empire back and crushing communism. They kept the women at home, were supported by the Church, and they hated immigrants. How that isn't considered far right, I'll never understand. Lol. I'm not saying that the left is any better.
@@shiptj01 _"Nazi Germany had a mixed economy. "_ *Wrong. Nazis had a socialist Command economy. 99% of the modern day countries today, have a mixed economy system.*
@@shiptj01 _"The Soviet Union was the far left system. "_ *and the Nazis were a competing system, also on the Far-Left. In practice they were almost identical.*
@@shiptj01 _"How that isn't considered far right, I'll never understand."_ *Because that has nothing to do with Far-Right. You were referring to Traditionalism, which the Nazis were more or less.*
I can’t believe this guy made an 8 min video on the topic without talking about how people dislike open-border immigration. People want to understand and share culture with their neighbours. The “left” doesn’t understand that open-borders is a key part of neoliberalism and most people, except rad-lib-arts graduates, want to conserve their cultures. Even minorities want limits on immigration but that doesn’t stop the radlibs from calling everyone who opposes the neolib-border idea a racist.
lmao bro mass immigration is a core tenant of leftist ideology. They are never going to back down or compromise on it. Mostly in part because immigration increases their electorate pool.
"The People" have had one historic objective: creating a left utopia based on the teachings of Karl Marx, Frederic Engels and Lenin. That was common sense for the Left and scientific proven by scientist after WW II. Instead the people toppeld down the real existing socialist goverments in eastern Europe that were an example for many left politicians and voted for Thatcher and Reagan in UK and USA. So why should the Left care about the people? Immigrants are a blank state, they may in the end help to create the socialist utopia the left aim for.
Yeah he addressed that in the video by talking about the populists and their absurd solutions to society's problems, which unfortunately, people lap up as they're desperate for solutions even if it's a lie.
@@sayno2lolzisback how utterly condescending. it's not a lie. leftist ideology is a delusion. we don't want open borders. immigration has not improved society.
When the riches 1% absorb 99% of the wealth you get misery as people struggle to survive so they cling to anything that will deal with the wealth hoarders, governments and the greedy rich are solely to blame.
Hmmm Here the RW complains, spreading misinformation and hate. They never provide any solution! Btw Our German AfD is massively supported by Ruzzia. Trollfarms, money, campaigns, knowledge ...
@@Hiltok Indeed. Answers that are not solutions is the go-to of most politicians in my experience. It just depends on what form of unpleasantness one wishes to vote for, or against.
Now the question is if the Neoliberals in power around the world KNOW their system is broken and continue to uphold it for their own benefit, or if Neoliberalism is so ingrained in their minds that they still believe, truly believe, that it's the best system to run a country, I really hope it's not the former. Also, GJ YT in waiting till now after it would have helped in America to recommend this to me.
@@ParacolidingDanni a "lie" backed up by empirical data, handed out by official institutions... In fact most progressivists have long moved on towards the "that is what always happened throughout history, so dont be mad" stance - youre a bit late to the party...
@@johnmulligan912So, no far-right women or POC? Would you consider Islam as a far-right ideology? I’m not fishing to attack Muslims, just trying get to a more useful definition of “far-right”.
Why is it so hard to secure the means of production under the control of the regular person? We are returning to the dark ages in which wealth was handed down from eldest son to eldest son and then eldest sons fought each other and captured their wealth. It wasn’t a good idea then and it’s not a good idea now.
Discontent often results in the switch from left to right, or right to left, nothing really get done, if left or right, money is wasted, and poor gets poorer. Politics only benefits the elites.
The far right massively applies manipulation over social networks. It's quite extreme. And the Kremlin helps those populistic opinions in order to sow chaos in the world, especially in Europe.
The answer is to be found in the term "far right" itself. A phrase that once meant actual Nazis, skin heads etc, is now routinely thrown around to mean anything vaguely right wing. There is no right wing anymore only 'far right extremists'. Opinions about immigration, family values patriotism etc that were once common among the majority of the population, debated in parliament, Newsnight and Question time, have been reclassified as extremist, on the fringes of the norm and morally repugnant. Decades of political correctness has silenced many from voicing their opinions publicly to the point that many feel they have to walk around on eggshells. The fear is very real considering people are having the police at their doors for 'mean tweets' on social media. Special hate crime laws are being drafted or enacted across the western world in which your political opinions could get you arrested, fired or doxed. The left have become the establishment, once cherished liberal values like the freedom of speech, that the left used to champion and benefited from greatly, have been discarded in favour of an authoritarian intolerance towards those who disagree. They have blatantly recatogorised the narrative by constantly referring to the other side as "extremist", and are now using the legal system to punish those with opposing views. Its for this reason that I no longer consider myself a 'leftist'. Disingenuous tactics and authoritarian laws besides, this is extremely dangerous. When a large chunk of the population is deamonised and marginalised by the mainstream politics and the legal system, then they are going to respond by supporting parties like the AFD. When people are fed up that their daughter and her family cant get a house whilst migrants are receiving preferential treatment and your mum cant afford to heat her house this winter because her payment has been cut, meanwhile there's been another terror attack and you dare not complain because you don't want to be seen as racist. Your grievances are allways characterised as coming from a place of 'hatred' your views are moraly irreprehencable, narrow minded and biggoted, your patriotism associated with low class football hooligans, and likely dangerous and the party that once claimed to represent you, despise you and everything you stand for. The left only have themselves to blame for the backlash they have created. Whether this reaction proves to be "far right" in the traditional sense or "far right" in the leftist propaganda sense, remains to be seen, it all depends on what happens next. If the authoritarian, draconian, policies continue and parties like the AFD are banned as is being proposed and even more laws are draughted to curtail free speach, then it will provoke the very thing its trying to counter. If you keep backing people into a corner then they will have no choice but to retaliate. If the left can put to one side its Utopian, Idealistic fantasy, stop persecuting its opponents and return to the political consensus that we had for generations, then there might be hope! Or is your vision for the perfect world too important to be derailed for anything and the inevitable suffering and hardship, a small price to pay for 'Utopia'? As the old saying goes: "I never left the Left, the Left, left me"! th-cam.com/video/d5PR5S4xhXQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=9gWQYmb0DS1f0w3N
Just came to say that the analysis is also correct outside Europe, in Brazil. There, someone as terrible as bolsonaro was only possible by the fact that the main force to the left (Lula and his party PT) has embraced neoliberalism
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties. Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights. The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
@johnmulligan912 OK, drop the 40% threshold to £20K. No one would work, no tax, less productivity. Flat rate taxation at 20% starting at £20K. Everyone pays the same. A more equal society. Whether you're a millionaire or a labourer.
Mile End Road? Why does everything have to be so London centric? That’s already alienated the rest of the country. Have you seen the plight of Northern towns like Easington Colliery? How do you solve that? You should use that because it represents the unachievable, so if you can come up with a system that solves that you will be a miracle maker. We need to develop a system with collectivism at its heart. We need people to pull together and experience the pleasure of joint efforts. We need tough love for those left behind. We need to lift people up so that they can contribute. We also need to look after ourselves and look after our security and prevent ghettoisation and secularism that is causing so much damage.
@cogsnbanjo Let me give a more considered response over and above the more general comment I made to Richard's video earlier. Collectivism is what every government wants in that every government despises individualism. Perhaps what you need to look at more carefully is the way in which governments seek to undermine people more surreptitiously. For example; governments do NOT provide good education at a state level because it is counterproductive to the government in that a 'smarter' population asks smarter questions and the idea that the education system in this country, and other western nations, is actually dumbing us down is rigorously argued in John Gatto's ironically titled book, called 'Dumbing Us Down'. The illusion of the 2 parties being in opposing political positions is in plain sight...in that there is little or no difference between the 2, and neither of them are doing what YOU want them to do or anything close to what you suggest needs to be done in the North. The government, (of any flavour), literally has very little influence as to what actually happens on the ground, since the government per se, is controlled by a) the corporatocracy b) the military industrial complex c) the central banks d) big pharma e) big ag f) the mainstream media and the wealthy elite. As a plebeian, you believe democracy exists to help you, but this is NOT what the real term democracy means. Look up the definition and etymology of 'demos' and 'kratos'; you will see that what you are taught to believe democracy to be, is in fact not quite accurate. We are all at the bottom of the pile because they keep you stupid, feed you sh*t that makes you ill, then when you finally get GP appointment, they then poison you with something that is costing the country more than it can afford. Gabor Mate talks about this in his book 'The Myth of the Normal'. Read more, my friend; start with 'The Creature from Jekyll Island' G Edward Griffin and then try 'The Racket' by Matt Kennard and then 'The Psychology of Totalitarianism' by Matias Desmet. Lastly, please please please stop watching the main stream TV news and buying main stream media newspapers and watch the UK Column News, which is good solid journalism and their website is very good too! Hope this is considered enough for you! Oh, one final book...'On the Importance of Civil Disobedience' by Thoreau, you'll need that in the coming months and years, I rather suspect! Happy reading!
The far right isn’t really winning. These far right parties are actually center right. It’s just your conservative parties in Europe are center-left. Being anti-immigration is a normal center-right position. Far right is characterized by wanting a dictatorship or monarchy and aristocracy and theocracy and traditionalism and patriarchy and wanting to return to feudalism or empire or fascism or slavery.
The reason AfD is far-right is due to their policies they want to enact that not only reduces the living standard for the general people, but also the segregation of the population into races for them to mass deport into countries they deem "safe" to deport to regardless of how established they are in the civilization. Singling out immigrants as the cause for the populations misfortune is what far-right politicians usually do. Besides that we've seen in Thuringia how, once in power, the so-called "center-right" party actually acts.
@@Historia.Magistra.Vitae. It does in context with how politicians act and what they stand for. People arguing that anti-immegration is center-right so the far-right AfD is also center-right are knee deep in their bubble that they don't even understand what "remigration" is and entails. If in your eyes the AfD is more center-right compared to our CxU, then maybe you're so far out that all you can perceive is leftist/socialist activism.
Spending without control also put on this. You cannot outrun the demographic reality of pension systems collapsing and productivity going down to hell with just good vibes and 'leaving no one behind'.
@@Redf322please define it so clearly then. In the last 6-7 years the Left has accelerated their policies to more and more extreme positions on many things like gender - and middle of the road people now fit the 'far right' checklist in their estimation by for example believing in binary genders and not supporting biological males competing in women's sports and having legal rights to access women's safe spaces which the previous Left had fought so hard to create. The Left is accelerating away from the middle justas fast as some truly far right groups are but has more institutional support in Europe. So they are consistently casting everything to the right of their increasingly extreme and ridiculous positions as far right or neo fascist. It's a term that is being used incredibly loosely now as a smear against anyone who wants proper controlled immigration, scaling back on the gender theory experimentation on children and proper national defence. Ironically these are all policies which Left wing parties are also now adopting because of the evidence that things have gotten out of control.
All the people here who continue to vote Labour despite everything we’ve seen since Blair jumped into bed with Bush have been fantasising with no basis. Here in the UK, the Green Party has offered genuinely radical alternatives for decades but a) The main parties have never offered us PR to allow any real alternative to take hold b) The billionaire owned media keep the majority either in ignorance and/or distracted with irrelevant trash. Presenting any alternatives in such an environment is a seriously uphill struggle.
Because they offer solutions. Now the solutions are shite but it has more appeal than the " We can't do anything" which is offered by our mainstream parties.
No. Both offer solutions. The extrem right offer easy solutions that will not work and the more leftists offer solutions that will work but their solutions are complicated. So the people decide to go with the easy solutions.
The long and short of it is that economic hardships and disparities have hit a breaking point, but also the median voter is also so woefully uniformed they can be easily duped into blaming minorities for their problems instead of the wealthy and the powerful
what's far-left? Free healthcare, workers rights and LGBTQ rights? Last I checked, that's just basic human decency and at most left-wing or center-left, but go off.
@@pascalsolal : *Wrong. Fascism was statism first, nationalism second. Also it wasn't racist. Fascism was a totalitarian far-left, socialist 3rd position ideology based on National Syndicalism which they adapted from a French Marxist, known as Georges Sorel. It rejected individualism, capitalism, liberalism, democracy, and marxist interpretation of socialism ("class warfare"). Instead, it advocated for class collaboration where the means of production was organized by national worker syndicals (i.e. trade unions / Fascist Corporatism), and the guiding philosophy of the state was Actual Idealism (Neo-Hegelianism).* *Being an outgrowth of Sorelian Syndicalism, (which itself was an outgrowth from Marxist socialism), its idea was that society would be consolidated (i.e., incorporated) into syndicates (in the Italian context, fascio/fasci) which would be regulated by and serve as organs for the State, or "embody" the State (corpus = body). The purpose was the centralization and synchronization of society under the State, as an end unto itself. To quote Mussolini's infamous aphorism: "All within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State."* *As finalized by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile ("the Doctrine of Fascism"), Fascism came from the belief that the "Stateless and Classless society" Communism calls for after its "dictatorship of the proletariat" cannot be achieved, and that only the State can properly organize a socialist society. Therefore, Fascism cared about unity in a strong central government with society being brought together by syndicalist organizations obedient to the State.* [01] "La Dottrina Del Fascismo / the Doctrine of Fascism", by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile [02] "Che cosa è il Fascismo: Discorsi e polemiche / Origins and Doctrine of Fascism", by Giovanni Gentile [03] "the Philosophy of Fascism", by Mario Palmieri [04] "Fascism: An Informal Introduction to Its Theory and Practice", by Renzo De Felice [05] "Mussolini's Intellectuals", by A. James Gregor [06] "La Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni", by Rabaglietti Giuseppe & Sergio Panunzio [07] "Teoria generale dello Stato Fascista", by Sergio Panunzio [08] "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" by Zeev Sternhell [09] Any work from Emilio Gentile
@Historia.Magistra.Vitae. I don't agree at all. Fascism was based on nationalism and racism. Fascism is based on the idea of race, on a biological basis. It's not because it had common points with socialism that it was far left. Therefore, when they were in power, the fascists fought the socialists and communists. They put them in jail, they killed them. The fascists rejected capitalism in their propaganda, but in reality they got along with capitalists very well. Fascism is built upon the idea that inequalities are natural, whereas socialists, on the contrary, considers that all men are born equal. Similarities doesn't mean identity.
I listened to your video after it appeared on my feed. I agreed and instantly subscribed. Good luck in all your endeavors. Kind regards from Iceland 💜💛💜💜
if working people are fed up with stagnant wages why are they electing billionaires and millionaires to govern them.
Because they are dumb
@@zuni1966There you have it 😂
Little Tarquin cant help himself 😂
RIGHT! It doesn't make sense to think that billionaires care about working class people...
Because people see them as "outside of the establishment of politics" instead of "the puppeteers of politics"
They literally believe these people have so much money, they can't possibly want more or be corrupted by bribes. 🫤
As I recall, the Left actually won an election in Greece in 2015, which raised the morale of leftist parties around Southern Europe. However, even after being elected, they discovered that due to the opposition of the European financial elite, they were unable to carry out their program and were forced to accept the very austerity measures that they opposed.
It revealed the helplessness of the voters when they defy the financial elites.
So in a neo-liberal world, you can not achieve anything on your own when you try to promote left winged politics.
It’s the same deal with climate protection.
Everyone knows we need to change something, but when one country tries to, it doesn’t actually change anything, when everyone else doesn’t. So people just get frustrated even more.
Which means what’s going to happen is that we probably need to destroy our societies again and built a new one based on past mistakes.
Which is going to cost a lot of life’s. But that’s probably the only way to change anything. Doing it the painful way.
Cool my comment has been shadow banned again 🫤
Edit: Now just this comment is visible.
TH-cam is such a joke 😑
No. Greece had many major flaws, like a dysfunctional administration which was unable to collect taxes (especially from the rich trade ship owners), payed out pensions to dead people, handn't even got a land register (a reason for illegal layed fires). The Greek government even consulted Goldman Sachs to hide it's budget deficit to get into the Eurozone and avoid sanctions.
Since the banks and investors lost trust and didn't want to buy government bons without high interest rates, the European Central Bank and the other countries of the Eurozone had to step in, in form of transferring taxpayers money, giving out loans with low interest rates and debt cuts.
But these helps were massively unpopular in the rich countries which did have to pay them, actually even the far right German AfD party was founded as a protest movement against these programs.
So the political leaders on the Eurozone were under pressure to go hard on Greece, not only demanding the necessary reforms the country needed, but also Austerity policy.
So the main reason the left government couldn't do their program, was due to the interest of the taxpayers of the wealthy northern European countries.
If you want to look at a successful attempt of a left wing policy you'd rather look at Portugal. It was also highly in debt, but there the Socialist government could convince the Eurozone to handle it's problem without applying Austerity, while at the same time delivering reforms to make the state more efficient and effective. They had a convincing plan, the Greece government on the other hand mostly populist rhetoric.
No. Greece wanted the other euro countries, like Germany, to continue to pay their bills. Greek voters have no democratic right to vote that German tax payers should fund their widening deficit. A better description is that the Greece populists simply had to face reality: long-term, you can't spend more than what you make.
So, the European financial elite refused to finance the the Greek living far above their means.
I don’t get it. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, so as a way to express frustration, they support the systems that made them poor in the first place.
Self hatred I guess
Yes, but they don't see that because all the propaganda tells them that Fascism is the answer.
I think the answer is given toward the very end of the video: the populists (right wing) are promising all kinds of stuff that people believe. But of course they won't be able to deliver and in reality the poorer people will probably be worse off.
@@magepunk2376 not really true. The working class in the West has correctly noticed that they are the losers in globalism.
Simplified, the winners are poor people in poor countries because they can sell to richer customers, and rich people in rich countries because they can employ people for less. The main losers are poor people in rich countries who need to compete with poor people in poor countries. The net effect is ofc an overall reduction in global poverty and an increase in global wealth, but the poor/workers in rich countries are not seeing anything of that.
Far right parties are saying no to globalism which is quite appealing to a lot of the population in the richer part of the world. Add to this that the only ones in the West that are negatively affected by high migration is the poor of rich countries.
Left wing parties are instead mostly talking about higher taxes for the rich, but crucially they are not opposed to migration. This means that even if they offer a solution, it doesn't cover the whole problem spectrum that is afflicting the workers. But the Right are. If their solution is effective or even viable isn't the point, it's that they are offering something, which the Left simply isn't.
@@Superslemmet If you believe reducing immigration will benefit the middle and lower classes, think again. Immigrant workers often fill positions that locals are unwilling to take, including low-income, thankless, and blue-collar jobs. Many are also independent workers. So… I highly doubt that locals would step into these roles, especially since such jobs are in short supply across many developed countries.
It appears that we're living in a globalized second Gilded Age in which there is no shortage of Trump wannabes, but authentic center-left alternatives are scarce. The problem is that the average voter is in pain, but has no idea of what's really going on; they vote for the far-right in desperation, but that only make things worse. We need a new progressive movement and preferably a new Roosevelt as our champion.
They vote for the side that caused all their pain somehow hoping it will stop instead of giving the side trying to help them enough power to be effective.
@5353Jumper The problem for us is that it's hard to sell complex solutions to complex problems, while our opponents have learned that it's much easyy to sell fear (amygdala politics).
Americans know they're voting for war and endless austerity, they're very aware.
I like the way you think! As I watched the video, I thought, “OK, if left wing economic policy is the answer, where are the examples of successful application of those policies?” Of course, I came to the same answer you did.
So why did we move away from those policies? My guess is that the very wealthy, who have a disproportionate amount of influence prefer policies that benefit them at the expense of everybody else.
@AndrewUnruh Why? Blame Nixon. He's the one who nominated Lewis F. Powell Jr for the Supreme Court, who in turn penned the majority decisions for Buckley v Valeo in 1976 and First National Bank of Boston v Bellotti in 1978. The result? Money is equal to free speech and corporations are people, thereby legalizing bribery. I suspect that also helped Reagan get elected in 1980 and I'm quite certain that it's what convinced both Clinton and Obama to embrace and continue the neoliberalism introduced by Reagan.
One thing about the left-wing. In many European countries, there has been a concerted effort by the so-called "centrist" parties to drive left-wing ideas out of what is considered "acceptable" politics. Kier Starmers Labour is a perfect example. He has expelled almost anyone with even the slightest hint of a left-wing idea from the party. While Macron is refusing to work with the left and basically showing his utter contempt for the French voters, which will only really benefit the far-right.
The centrists and neoliberals see the left as more of a threat then the far-right. This is what brought the n@zis to power in 1933 and it is helping to bring a new generation of far-right into power in the 21st century.
do you have anything between your ears at all. mass immigration is the reason for this simple and straightforward. how stupid can one be
This can be seen in the UK undercover police scandal. Going back to the 60s they were going undercover but only in left wing or activist groups. They often assumed fake identities, sometimes using the names of deceased children, and lived double lives for years. They even had children with people which they abandoned once their operations ended.
Many of those they spied on were non-violent activists involved in environmental, anti-racist, and anti-capitalist movements.
They weren't undercover in right wing groups. That tells you everything about the priority of every government since.
Here here, Starmer is a right wing pirate who keel hauled Corbyn and set the Corbynites adrift, left wing hasn't had a look in because the system has poisoned the very thought of having a left wing government, the rich have slandered and propagandised the left into oblivion bec6the rich are terrified of paying their fare share.
@@clementattlee6984its called being sensible
Another mixing far and wing
Culture wars and immigration seem to be playing a bigger role than economic issues. The right's increased popularity correlates to the increase in Syrian refugees in 2015. And the brexit campaign had little traction when delivered as an economic issue, but support surged when it fear mongered immigration issues.
And the Syrian civil war was triggered by interethnic conflicts between farmers that were exacebated by drought. Climate change is multiplying the # of refugees by orders of magnitude because our modern economics are so fragile.
Wait 'til you see the politics we'll have when there's a billion climate refugees. It will be the age of everybody pushing each other off the lifeboat.
And maybe, the right's increased popularity is people secretly knowing all that and preparing.
Plato warns about the danger of democracy in his book The Republic and how tyranny is very easy to transition into. The rise of the right is the symptom of mass unhappiness in the populace and should be the very thing that makes our politicians take a step backwards and rethink their policies
He warned about STUPID people having a vote... That's Democracy's Achilles heel... An informed and thoughtful populace is required for Democracy to work... So what's the solution? End Democracy? or End stupid people's ability to affect everyone with their arrogance and ignorance...
These politicians were elected by the people. For decades.
@MarkoT-xy6ep I know, Plato also stated that a government is a reflection of the people. That is a simplistic view. Nonetheless, people are voting for populists and they don't care about the people, but the people think they do. The recent killing of the CEO in America has seen the elites really worried because the right and left feel that it was payback for so many declined insurance claims that killed thousands of America people. A tipping point will come, and it may have jack boots on, or ordinary voters will finally snap
Its not "The Republic," it's just "Republic"
...instead of blaming the "indicated" voter.
many reasons, but at its core its because hate is easier to invoke than empathy.
Very true.
Both sides are selling them out to corporations, but the side that does it a little more also makes hate OK.
Exactly@@thec9424
Empathy for what exactly?
It seems you have no empathy towards the “far right” to me….
Because to hate You only need ignorance, to have empathy You need to understand
Yes, thats why you hate us. And you try to make us hate each other on the behest of your globalist elite overlords. "Far right" now encompasses almost everyone, and we are sick of being hated.
The generation that had to risk it all to stop far right extremism in the late thirties and early forties has now houred out and there is no living memory of where extremism leads.
The type of extremism you are talking about is living happily in places like China, Russia, Iran etc. What you are trying to call extremism now is nations with borders/freedom of speech/traditional families
@sewur5034 , yes, this is precisely the rhetoric that led to pre-WWII Germany. Interesting that you don't see it when you're echoing it almost word-for-word.
Humankind needs to move forward, not backwards. That has never ended well throughout history.
BellaBarossa
Well said. Regards from Germany.
@@sewur5034happily? Russia? Lmfao
The generation that got told to kill their Europeans brothers on the continent would all be classed as far right. They don’t want mass migration and lgbt brainwashing
What just happened in the US. Average people are getting poorer and they vote for somebody who will give everything to the richest.
Right??? As a 3rd generation .1%’er I was embarrassed when Trump cut corporate tax almost in half😳 We live through corporations, own virtually nothing in our own name, so the tax break was unreal. Did I hire another personal assistant, domestic, caretaker…or give raises with the extra money? Nope… Same with our public corporations. They simply bought back their own stock, which raised the share price, the wealthy enjoy the increase in net worth and the execs got their bonuses for raising the stock price. When asked, Trump said they weren’t suppose to do that🤣
Because the whole democratic system of the US is already in control of the politicians.
How can a two party system be democratic?
Why is it a two party system?
Because the politicians do everything to keep it that way.
They influence their people so they think they don’t actually have any other choices.
Then they sabotage each other to create and endless circle of the other getting another chance.
So, nothing new there then.
Average people are not getting poorer. That's just not factual true. Incomes for the working class grew at a fast clip under Biden. He was a pro labor president, brought back manufacturing jobs and created massive infrastructure projects. The voters didn't give a shit. They preferred the demagogue that screamed about immigrants eating cats and dogs and tried to win an election with violence.
Maybe,we’ll see. When he was in office last time things were significantly better for the lower classes. For example that tax cut the left constantly calls a tax cut for the rich was also a tax cut for the working and middle class and people appreciated it. Employment for minorities was up too especially for the black community and illegal immigration was down. That in comparison to the last four years was a major reason he was re elected.
Neoliberal economics has failed to deliver benefits for the greater good. If the existing system failed, people turn to something else.
Yes, very good point.
Its more that the native people of britain and europe see the invasion by 'refugee' islamics for what it really is....an invasion approved by the neo-marxist leaning governments and their sycophants in the traditional media , by people that openly despise everything about european society and everything that makes it good to live in......and then the left wonders why anyone with half a brain despises their ideas for the future of western society.
Why is the far right so popular in Europe? I ask the question for very good reason.
The Corporate capture of power forces Governments to put those with wealth and the power to economically affect our societies before the rest of us
Neo liberal policies are right wing politics.
The answer to neo-liberalism is not fascism, but people will have to find out the hard way (again).
People also need to understand that neoliberalism hasn’t failed. It’s working and delivering as intended, for the ruling classes and neoliberals. All this that you’re angry with is intended.
Corporate oligarchy is going well for the oligarchs
Immigration, feminism, beurocracy. What more could corporations possibly ask for? Unlimited (cheap) workforce while being protected by state from any competition
Exactly this. The only lie has been the one convincing the common people that they're going to benefit from the system, when that has never been part of the plan.
For wealthy people to retain an oligarchy, there needs to be a large labour force, with widespread need and poverty to exploit. This is why there is such strong attention on the declining birth rates.
If those in power truly wanted to fix the birth rates in a healthy way, they need only introduce policies which help increase income for families, and create focus on family planning. But these would come at reduced profit margins for the oligarch class, so beneficial policies for the majority will never take precedence. The one thing which is painfully clear about the 1% is that there is no such thing as 'having enough money'.
This, combined with the statement that there is often barely any alternative party, besides the far right, is the point of the video, right?
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties.
Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights.
The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
Yes, well put. People think Farage has the answers but he'll be worse than what people are rebelling against.
Indeed, when a wealthy elite charlatan claims to be against 'the system' & on the side of the 'people' & alarm bells don't go off, something is wrong with your snake oil detector.
Doubt it
Do you mean, worse then locking people in jail for SEEING a political meme on the internet?
@@Carlosmltr Please give me an example of this.
He doesn't have the answers. He has the gift of the gab (also Murdochs amplification and blessing)
As a German who speaks out against the AfD on an almost daily basis, I have to admit that it sometimes feels overwhelmingly lonely to remain sensible and do the right thing, namely to vote for the "lesser evil", i.e. the "old" parties. And the optimism is waning. All the time.
I think the worst thing is this weird perception that the left are inherently worse, because of the immense public inexperience with them.
The SPD and Grüne were at one point maybe considerable as socialist, but have also just morphed into the centrist neoliberal positions, as the entire system rewards this direction.
People for example think that the climate taxing by the current goverment of the people, instead of companies and rich people, is a left philosophy and not a horrifying display of how powerful the capitalistic industry has become in politics.
People here in Germany and other western democracies have no real grasp of actual real socialist policies, because of their undermining by centrist parties, especially the CDU over their entire dominance over german politics and in recent years the FDP in our current gov., every time anything mildly considerable as progressive was put on the programm table.
The left are still considered worse than literal racism, sexism and populism, because they oppose capitalistic inequality in far more substential ways than a AfD for example.
The centrists can form goverments with them in Bundesländern sure, but that undermining and rejecting of "radical ideas", like taxing the rich is still completely in play, with centrists parties mostly holding the majority in parlaments and therefore being already in a power position over left parties.
This exactly what one can observe in my region Thüringen right now, with the CDU being forced to govern with 2 left parties and yet besides the few pro people policies that could go through there's way more constant concern that this could break down at any minute, with the CDU having declared leftists as a more dangerous enemy to keep in check than the AfD, who they're slowly starting to overlap with by beginning to use their populism tactics.
It must be so lonely being supported by every mainstream media and corporation huh?
@@sewur5034 Snark is not attractive, nor informational. In other words, it's a waste of space.
Rufus
You are not alone. The majority is against the AfD. We had that once, it is enough. Stay upright and remember, the majorit, is with you.
The AfD is a far right, anti-constitutional party. What do you expect here? That all the German media ignores this glaring fact? Besides, everybody apart from the AfD-fanboys are sick of this infantile victim-mentality on the right. If nobody likes you, maybe you are the problem and not everybody else.
Biggest problem is both sides care more about their stock options than their nation.
Maybe it's time to understand that EVERYBODY cares only for themselves and people close to them. Politicians ONLY want to win and get personal gains. Stop living in fantasy
But Eurosceptical parties are anti-EU despite knowing that leaving will hurt their stock options on the short term - because they believe they can save their nation that way.
It feels very much like the left wing cares about their Stock options since they're actively helping create a tight housing market as well as a loose labor market.
The term "neoliberal" [applied here to most mainstream parties both within and outside the UK] needs some explaining. I believe neoliberalism describes the economics of Regan and Thatcher, rolled out controversially in the 1980s, which saw mass privatizations and sell-offs of major national assets such as social housing, gas, water and public trapnsport. There was also a deregulation of financial markets which culminated around 2008 in the banking crisis and ensuing economic recession. The resurgence of the Far Right [and the growth of conspiracy theories and anti-immigrant racism] has its roots in disillusionment with consensus [neoliberal] economic policies. Again, many thanks to Richard Murphy for highlighting an urgent problem.
The irony is that much of the far right seems to be neo-liberalism but turbo charged.
You're 100% right - people like Hayek and Rand popularised it back in the 40s and 50s, Thatcher and Reagan embraced it and made it mainstream in the 80s. I'm not seeing anyone on the Far Right really going against this orthodoxy. They might talk about global elites being the enemy, but economically they tend to be very supportive of them, while decrying leftist socialism, Marxist, communism and 'liberalism', as well as trade unionism.
Yes.
Thank you. I was obviously confused about the distinction between neo-Liberal and right wing. I never realised there was a big difference between the two positions.
I'm not sure there is a big difference between "neoliberal" and right wing - it's just that the former is an economic term for policies that favour a market driven economy. It is strongly associated with right-wing figures such as Regan and Thatcher, who were both fiercely anti trade unions and strongly individualist.
So explain why people choose far-right parties over socialist ones? The answer lies in their socio-cultural conservatism. Many people are now better off economically compared to 30 years ago and prioritize cultural issues over economic ones. This shift explains their focus on border control and anti-immigration issues rather than raising minimum wages. While blaming neoliberalism might be a more comfortable explanation, as a social democrat, I have to admit it’s not accurate. Far-right voters are primarily driven by cultural concerns, not economic struggles.
Is "driven by cultural concerns" a polite way of saying "driven by hate for people they see as different"?
If so, I question the value of politeness in this instance. Better to be blunt.
@@joanmoriarity8738 People are different, cultures can be vastly opposing, it’s not a matter of perception, it’s an empirical fact. You can’t force me to accept a community of individuals who adhere to values I fundamentally disagree with. I loathe islam. Thus, I don’t want to live among adherents of this cult.
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties.
Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights.
The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
You're very off. It's not an increase in minimum wage that young people want, because what they're often desperate for is a job at all. There's growing unemployment, but politicians and corporations everywhere keep insisting that we need more immigration, that we're lazy and that nobody wants to work. That's why there's been so much controversy over the H1B program lately. Why hire an American when you can bring someone whose ability to stay in the US is tied to working for you? Lower class economic stress is objectively a factor.
Indeed. They're actually genetically predisposed to authoritarianism.
So, the average person see the wealthy get wealthier, and decide to vote more wealthy people into power? Odd.
If the alternative sticks up for criminals and rapists what choice we have?
Yes exactly
brainwashed by the billionaire tax avoider owned media
The far left wealthy, like Gates, Soros, Starmer and Blair?
Because the wealthy have convinced them that foreigners are the reason why they are getting poorer. It is quite easy to do as foreigners look different and can be singled out, whereas the white slave master exploiters look just as white as the poor.
There's a Russian-American historian, Peter Turchin, who's investigated what happens with many societies over the centuries. He says the pattern is for the rich to gradually get richer, have more political power which they use to largely benefit themselves. This increases inequality until it is intolerable for those who aren't part of the rich. The masses might start voting far right. The system then resets itself, usually very painfully. I suspect we are getting to that point with neo-liberalism. I've wondered if the popularity of far right parties is a symptom of the problem, but doesn't often provide the solutions.
I don't much about the far right economic policies in Europe, but in the USA the Republicans are further up the ass of the rich and corporations than the Democrats are so voting for Republicans is only doubling down on neoliberalism.
You’ve misread Turchin quite significantly. It’s true he says inequality tends to increase due to the wealth getting pumped upwards from poor to rich. But people don’t automatically vote far-right in response. What tends to happen is that the abundance of wealth results in more elites, and these elites increasingly compete fiercely for the same number of positions of power as before. The counter-elites that arise may be liberal, nationalist, communist, or fascist, but the point is that they arise because of intense competition among elites resulting from the wealth pump.
There was a solution in Germany
@@scallamander4899 Sorry, I didn't communicate myself clearly. Voting far right seems to be what people are doing at the present time. I'm perfectly aware that other options have been more popular at other times.
@@TheoBrookes-p2h It's true in a sense that the elite would obviously prefer a far right government out of all the options. But yeah it's important to avoid fatalism.
Simple answer: greed, ignorance, self-interest and stupidity have always been popular.
It’s easy to say that when you’re not the one who’s needs aren’t being met. It sounds like you’re doing just fine probably at the expense of those supporting the right.
@@ggjr61 The stupidity comes in from the people supporting the right believing that the right-wing politicians will do anything to help them. They never have in the past, so why would they think they're going to do something in the future?
Simple answer: immigration.
*Capitalism
@@ggjr61And how exactly is the far right helping the ones who are less fortunate?
You nailed it: people in Europe voted for social democrats (e.g. in the UK and Germany) in the late 90s, but instead got more neoliberal governments than ever before, which made many people loose faith in democracy altogether.
That of course doesn't mean, that facism would be a better alternative. But somehow the parties still don't get, that moving even further towards the right will win them back the votes they lost. We currently only have the choice between right and far-right.
When people perceive they are struggling some become easily convinced that it is the fault of minorities and foreigners, it appears to be part of human nature. Rising popularity of the far right is a red flag that the authorities (of whatever persuasion) are not (or cannot) deal with the core issues causing people to struggle. I expect it will continue until policies reduce inequality.
If foreigners are coming here by the boat load and putting pressure on our country, causing societal breakdown, then yes, the foreigners may well get the blame. We all know it''s the fault of the politicians, but they're doing their best 'not to be racist', and so the situation gets worse.
It really is. Only someone totally deluded and hateful of the native Europeans will think colonising their countries with millions and millions of third-world migrants and not making any effort to integrate them doesn't effect anything. Want to reduce inequality? Stop importing cheap labour and suppressing wages.
Nonsense. The demographic change has started to strain the societal fabric as certain cultures are simply incompatible. The europeans feel they loose control over their turf
Where on Earth did you have meaningful amounts of minorities and foreigners in any country eg. 50 years ago? Even now it is only the West.
People blame ALWAYS elites and authorities. It will continue as long as governments will prioritize interests of corporations instead of their citizens.
The left vs right dichotomy has been a disaster for the human race.
if you stop and think about it, the only time things were vaguely going in the right direction for working people was in the 50's and 60's...maybe. That's 20 years of things being 'ok' in the entire history of organised labour
Erm ok says the guy typing his comment on some device provided by a company operating in a market that can bring him goods at affordable prices
@@danielpye7738But the same thing is becoming less accessible for that guy. We are getting poorer every year. In 50's and 60's we vwere getting richer and richer. Now we are stagnating (as you said, we are right now fine more or less) but we won't be in near future. 35 years after WW2 the bottom 50 got 129 % richer while the top 1 got 58 % richer. From 1980 to 2014 the bottom 50 got 21 % richer and top 1 got 94 % richer and thats only percentage. If this trend continues, we will eventually stop getting any growth for low-income people as inflation will be always be bigger that the growth of bottom 50.
Because they had to reward the working class for the sacrifices to defeat Hitler and counter the Red menace. Those imperatives no longer exist.
Maybe, but the Unions then totally cocked it all up in the 1970s, which is why there was the backlash of Margret Thatcher.
@@mikehunt.1609 - the unions were just trying to keep wages in line with inflation back then. It was the ruling classes that decided to put their foot down and put the commoners back in their place. Of course, since the papers were all owned by rich people, the story was told quite differently...
I want everyone back in good well-paying jobs that create real value so that I can tax the bejasus out of them to pay for the drains and the streetlighting and roads and GPs and dentists and hospitals and schools and soldiers and sailors and airmen with proper kit. I've nothing against businessmen turning a profit as long as shareholders don't come before citizens.
but shareholders are citizens
@@davidharris3264 citizens matter more
@@davidharris3264 With a vested interest to oppose the best interests of all the other citizens, who aren't shareholders. Some citizens are more equal than others.
In the anglo world shareholders come first - there are no other stakeholders recognised. A CEO who doesnt maximise profit can be sued and / or removed.
Richard doesn't think taxes pay for anything though
Neoliberalism isn't liberal ideology. It's an economic ideology that is free market at its core and is championed primarily by centrists and conservatives, although many liberals (particularly business owners) are also on board with neoliberalism.
Its not rocket science, there is a common theme in all country's, an underlying cause which is the debt based financial system and it hollows out the fabric of society, which causes the dissatisfaction, which can then be used to fuel far right politics, wars scapegoating and so on. What does it matter what policy are put forth by a government when this feudal system is in place? It is baffling that people cant see this even now, that they are dominated by a financial elite and instead they want to talk politics.
Very interesting take. Politics used as a smoke screen.
You can only make big changes in your life and others when you got the money to do so.
Money is so important that it completely nullifies any general morals people should have.
So the ones that get the money to make any changes are general people that don’t care about others.
If you try to get money the legal and morally correct way, it always requires a lot of work, in addition of just having luck. So you’re basically playing the lottery while others can just play with peoples life’s to become rich and powerful.
Bad people apologize and promise changes, but they don’t actually mean it. They just try to benefit from others as long as possible.
If big companies can influence a government to make people do what they want instead of the other way around, it’s going to get worse for society. Because the company only cares about money and not the well being of people.
It's just Divine Comedy....
LAUGH AT IT! 😅😅😅
Exactly, petty arguments rather than a class revolt
Why don‘t we just found a bank in combination with a political party? That is, an actually well-intentioned political party, and a bank governed democratically and transparently by the electorate. Then the party would have all the deposits to use to gain power, of course still respecting a sizeable reserve ratio. And once it has achieved the absolute majority in the country (because voting for any other party would go against common sense), it would slowly revolutionize the effectivity of the country‘s bureaucracy through excellent technology and subsequently redistributing the *cost savings* instead of redistributing any wealth itself.
Expertly put. So frustrating how obvious this is but how blind everyone is.
Romania just experienced this at a high level. Most of population voted for far right extremist president which threatens the democracy. Romania suffered greatly from communism just 30 years ago and people seem to have forgotten.
That is a tough ask. Jeremy Corbin was politically annihilated in 2019 and he was the only MP to offer genuine change, a genuine alternative to the status quo since I was a young boy. If we are going to come up with an alternative we've got to do it soon
It is quite simple. The majority parties are committed to mass immigration, net zero and alienating the bulk of the population through aggressive social liberalism
.the voters dont want this or more than 50%
I think you nailed it here: the "left" wants change to deal with problems caused by old status quo policies, the "right" promises that the status quo will work for you if we just keep to it.
Corbyn wasn't emotional enough/gut emotions. The right wing add in the visceral emotions. Left wingers are too busy padding their CV and looking 'proper' (most come for middle class+ families), so therefore, people vote for the right wing nut jobs. 'Liberals' are highly educated and ladder climbers; your local plumber isn't
It was specifically the Zionists who annihilated him....and democracy
"anti-Semitism"
Keir Starmer drinks Israeli Chai
The right offers a sense of identity to disenfranchised people.
Are you feeling better to pressure other people? You like punish people because of their race? You think your country is exceptional? You are part of the problem.
It offers a sense of identify to those with low self esteem and a proclivity for fear.
ANYONE can be disenfranchised, just as soon as they lose an election.
Yes, those poor poor white racists, so disenfranchised.
It's history repeating itself just like in the 30s
Let's hope so.
@@bostongirlsandy - You don't want to see a United States unleashed on the world, our meddling is bad enough as it is, a truly Conquest oriented US would be devastating.
@TSZatoichi I was hoping for profound changes in our society here in USA.
@@bostongirlsandy - And you may get them.
The problem with Fascism (and make no mistake, Trump and the people around him ARE Fascist) is that Fascism is colonialism turned inward, meaning all the things a colonizing state usually does to the people they're colonizing (repression, apartheid, genocide) is turned inward to a people living within the Fascist state, and once the state accomplishes those things, it needs to turn outward to find a new source to blame for the problems that will still exist within the state. The US already has the repression part down pat, we'll see if Trump (and/or Vance) will be able to do the apartheid and genocide part or if he'll get thwarted and lose interest like last time.
@@bostongirlsandy why would you hope for that, for history to repeat !!! WW2 happened around that exact same time !! from 1939 to 1945. , and today we have nukes
The fundamental problem is the Political Party system itself. That inevitably leads to division, conflict and gross mismanagement. That system has been abused by the wealthy, who also own and run much of the media.
Having some radical ideas myself, I know just how difficult it can be to get my voice heard.
In the case of Brazil, there are a number of factors, such as religion; many still have a colonial/neocolonial mentality and lack class consciousness and so on.
And we are on the periphery of capitalism, we are generally vulnerable to external actions by major powers such as the United States and countries from Western Europe. The great powers manipulate and destabilize our region to maintain the status quo.
Até a nossa direita foi bem de esquerda na economia por décadas. Só veja Vargas, a ditadura etc. A facção "neoliberal" é um fenômeno mais recente.
Para de cair em narrativas de neocolonialismo. Isso é choro. Só assuma que seu país é ruim em vez de culpar os EUA.
Somos vulneráveis porque somos um país agrário exportador com uma infraestrutura de merda, não porque o mundo está contra nós.
Suma com a galera do agro e faça algumas ferrovias e indústrias para mercado interno, e mova o polo industrial pra algum lugar razoável, e veja como o país dispara...
@@umcaraqualquer3640
Neocolonialism and poor infrastructure aren't two separate things. Neocolonialism is when a first world country lobbies or pressures a third world country to stop developing infrastructure and industry.
People tend to have national and religious conscioness naturally. But class consciusness is artificial, uncommon and educated.
That is a very good question! I cant understand how people see far right as an option...
It’s the same stupidity here in Australia.
US, as well.
I thought the Australian Labor party would be a breath of fresh air after the Morrison years but it is walking a similar path. Albo should have been the left’s poster boy considering his upbringing but it’s not turning out that way.
@ sadly true
Hold on, the UK and Australia have swing left….
@@danielpye7738swung centrist - Keir Starmer and the Australian Labor Party have difficulties enacting leftist policies. As I understand it, Starmer in the UK is not about to lead the Labour Party in any political risk taking. In Australia, the Greens seem to be colluding with the Coalition to wedge Labor whenever they can
It depends how you define far right. There are those of us who treasure individuality and personal responsibility. We want capitalism and freedom to live as we see fit. Many left us consider us far right. However, we have no interest in controlling others and forcing them to live as we wish. That is the mode of operation of the left.
In the US - the religious right most definitely is interested in controlling others and forcing them to live as they wish
Well said. I'm a lifelong Labour voter and am in absolute despair at what the Labour party is doing. I too voted for Starmer in the hope that maybe some Socialist principals would happen. I feel quite homeless at the moment although I still continue as a party member having respect for our local MP. Like you I think this rise of the far right and nationalistic populism terrifying
There is no "far-right" in any meaningful sense in politics. What does exist, is a bunch of normal people who have become alienated by how far left the Overton Window has been pushed. Take Donald Trump, he is a 1980's Democrat, but in 2016 he somehow became cheeto-Hitler.
Labour DESPERATELY needs to left actually - Without caring why right wing politicians call them "communist!!1!"
The left has abandoned the working class. You made your bed and now you have to lay in it.
You caused the rise of the so calked farrrrr.right
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties.
Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights.
The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
I hate the term "neoliberal" because it is anything but liberal.
That's the world we are living in:
neoliberale (or, in Europe, even liberal) has nothing to do with liberal, social democratic parties are not social democratic anymore, gas and nuclear power are called 'sustainable', the Republicans are about to turn the country into a oligarchy...
Yeah, a more appropriate term for that political position would be "turbo-capitalistic".
Corporate oligarchy
Right, the term should be autocratic or oligarchic.
Well it is, it's freedom for the rich and powerfull. But many voters don't understand that that directly leads to less freedom for the poor and powerless, which 99% of us are.
*¡thoroughly examine ongoing verifiable and proven humanity's contradictions that is how and why life is too complex and too complicated!*
The rise of populist parties and the shift of centre politics to the right, is entirely due to the failings of the established parties.
Fix them and start governing for the people and not the WEF and the electorate may return.
Without reform of the UK's first-past-the-post voting system and some significant change in the media landscape to de-power the influence of the Sun-Daily-Torygraph, the Labour Party will need to continue to tread on eggshells on so many issues. Without those reforms, a more left leaning Labour Party would soon be out of office and all your hopes would be as dust. Voting reform has to come first.
I agree the media have way too much influence along with other sectors of society. I would argue that Corbyn has been the most successful politician in recent years and with the most left wing policies, why? because it gave people hope and the Labour Party became the largest political party in Europe but this was not acceptable to many of the establishment and so he had to be brought down. Then, Cameron had to go into coalition with the Lib Dems to form a government and May had to coerce the DUP to support her so that she could form a government, hardly overwhelming victories, so I think, if the media can be effectively dealt with, the Left would be popular in this country and give people what they are hoping to get from the far right.
As an Australian, I've noticed that countries that have a Murdoch dominated press have fallen for this neo-liberalism and now far-right agenda. Both our Liberal/National party and Labor party are seemingly working for the big corporates and the super wealthy. Many of these politicians after leaving parliament get employed by the very corporations that they were lobbied by whilst ministers and often the people that they previously opposed.
@@edbennett2Probably just a coincidence 🙄
@@edbennett2Coincidence, of course 🙄
@@edbennett2 yes, I agree. The EU stopped Murdoch from taking over more media outside UK, he then started his campaign to weaken the EU. Brexit was his biggest success.
Look up the role media mogul Hugenberg played in the rise of the Nazi party and bringing Hitler into office in Germany 1933.
Because people forgot about the Nazis.
No, like in the UK people want their country back.
Under Hitler the means of production was controlled by the state.
They had a socialist command economy - that is, a far left system.
Adolf Hitler was a selective (national socialist) - Jews not included etc.
@PerPress Nazi Germany had a mixed economy. The Soviet Union was the far left system. The Nazis were all about taking their old empire back and crushing communism. They kept the women at home, were supported by the Church, and they hated immigrants. How that isn't considered far right, I'll never understand. Lol. I'm not saying that the left is any better.
@@shiptj01 _"Nazi Germany had a mixed economy. "_
*Wrong. Nazis had a socialist Command economy. 99% of the modern day countries today, have a mixed economy system.*
@@shiptj01 _"The Soviet Union was the far left system. "_
*and the Nazis were a competing system, also on the Far-Left. In practice they were almost identical.*
@@shiptj01 _"How that isn't considered far right, I'll never understand."_
*Because that has nothing to do with Far-Right. You were referring to Traditionalism, which the Nazis were more or less.*
Completely agree.
The short answer is that people are just awful.
What i see is that people constantly call what they don't like fascism and far right.
World is in verge of destruction
I can’t believe this guy made an 8 min video on the topic without talking about how people dislike open-border immigration. People want to understand and share culture with their neighbours. The “left” doesn’t understand that open-borders is a key part of neoliberalism and most people, except rad-lib-arts graduates, want to conserve their cultures. Even minorities want limits on immigration but that doesn’t stop the radlibs from calling everyone who opposes the neolib-border idea a racist.
lmao bro mass immigration is a core tenant of leftist ideology. They are never going to back down or compromise on it.
Mostly in part because immigration increases their electorate pool.
Youre a racis t 😂Just kidding
Hes pushing his agenda ,listen to his smug middle class voice .The real enemy
"The People" have had one historic objective: creating a left utopia based on the teachings of Karl Marx, Frederic Engels and Lenin. That was common sense for the Left and scientific proven by scientist after WW II. Instead the people toppeld down the real existing socialist goverments in eastern Europe that were an example for many left politicians and voted for Thatcher and Reagan in UK and USA. So why should the Left care about the people?
Immigrants are a blank state, they may in the end help to create the socialist utopia the left aim for.
Yeah he addressed that in the video by talking about the populists and their absurd solutions to society's problems, which unfortunately, people lap up as they're desperate for solutions even if it's a lie.
@@sayno2lolzisback how utterly condescending.
it's not a lie. leftist ideology is a delusion. we don't want open borders. immigration has not improved society.
I can't reconcile this reasoning with the fact that most far-right parties are wildly neoliberal.
When the riches 1% absorb 99% of the wealth you get misery as people struggle to survive so they cling to anything that will deal with the wealth hoarders, governments and the greedy rich are solely to blame.
So... is that why they elect / support people like Trump or Musk ? I'd rather think they're delusional...
Same problem in New Zealand. Gap between rich and poor is disgusting and growing.
I'm a NZer too and this growing inequality has been happening for quite some time
Even after 6 years of Labour?
Austerity forever 😢
Why RW Popular? Cos they Always Always provide supposedly easy solutions.
I thought they just stirred up issues and provided no solutions.
@@Redf322 Well....whatever it is I just know I don't like them. Hitler & such.
I'd rearrange that: not supposedly easy solutions, but rather easy supposed solutions.
Hmmm
Here the RW complains, spreading misinformation and hate.
They never provide any solution!
Btw Our German AfD is massively supported by Ruzzia. Trollfarms, money, campaigns, knowledge ...
@@Hiltok Indeed. Answers that are not solutions is the go-to of most politicians in my experience. It just depends on what form of unpleasantness one wishes to vote for, or against.
This year being the 80th Anniversary of the end of WW2. It's crazy.😮
Is not all economics
Rich dont like to be criticize at all 😮
Now the question is if the Neoliberals in power around the world KNOW their system is broken and continue to uphold it for their own benefit, or if Neoliberalism is so ingrained in their minds that they still believe, truly believe, that it's the best system to run a country, I really hope it's not the former.
Also, GJ YT in waiting till now after it would have helped in America to recommend this to me.
Its all about demographic change - europeans feel that as an ethnic group, they're going the way of the red squirrel
A right wing lie
@@ParacolidingDanni Statistically observable truth.
@@ParacolidingDanni a "lie" backed up by empirical data, handed out by official institutions...
In fact most progressivists have long moved on towards the "that is what always happened throughout history, so dont be mad" stance - youre a bit late to the party...
@@ParacolidingDanni its backed up by goverment official data though
@bruceyawen6160 don't think so
How about a definition of “far” right?
Disagree with my political beliefs.
That's who the "far right" are.
Google it
He gave you a definition 6:26 .
@@Redf322 absurd
@@johnmulligan912So, no far-right women or POC? Would you consider Islam as a far-right ideology?
I’m not fishing to attack Muslims, just trying get to a more useful definition of “far-right”.
Why is it so hard to secure the means of production under the control of the regular person? We are returning to the dark ages in which wealth was handed down from eldest son to eldest son and then eldest sons fought each other and captured their wealth. It wasn’t a good idea then and it’s not a good idea now.
some very shocking views in this comments section! Fascism seems to be picking up a pace....
Copy and paste one of the many fascist comments please.
Fascism is not a thing anymore, and it was a socialist Far-Left ideology anyways.
Go and find a safe space.
This is truly troubling
Where?…
Great video! Congratulations!
One word dual meaning. Gaslighting.
From the title of this video, I thought that it was referring to America.
It's a worldwide issue, America is just the most prominent about it
And they actually think the right will help them 😂?
They do... and when they realize it doesn't, they'll find a way to blame the left for it
Discontent often results in the switch from left to right, or right to left, nothing really get done, if left or right, money is wasted, and poor gets poorer. Politics only benefits the elites.
The far right massively applies manipulation over social networks. It's quite extreme. And the Kremlin helps those populistic opinions in order to sow chaos in the world, especially in Europe.
Spot on.
In a word, austerity.
I agree with majority of your assessments. However I was under no illusion that Labour would offer any hope or change.✌
They've only been in place 5 months, give 'em a chance before condemning them.
@@LowPlainsDrifter60 Fair enough. Labour does seem fairly good at condemning themselves. I doubt my original feelings will shift.
Housing being unaffordable and Politicians personally profiting from the housing cris is the main reason.
The answer is to be found in the term "far right" itself. A phrase that once meant actual Nazis, skin heads etc, is now routinely thrown around to mean anything vaguely right wing. There is no right wing anymore only 'far right extremists'. Opinions about immigration, family values patriotism etc that were once common among the majority of the population, debated in parliament, Newsnight and Question time, have been reclassified as extremist, on the fringes of the norm and morally repugnant. Decades of political correctness has silenced many from voicing their opinions publicly to the point that many feel they have to walk around on eggshells. The fear is very real considering people are having the police at their doors for 'mean tweets' on social media. Special hate crime laws are being drafted or enacted across the western world in which your political opinions could get you arrested, fired or doxed.
The left have become the establishment, once cherished liberal values like the freedom of speech, that the left used to champion and benefited from greatly, have been discarded in favour of an authoritarian intolerance towards those who disagree. They have blatantly recatogorised the narrative by constantly referring to the other side as "extremist", and are now using the legal system to punish those with opposing views. Its for this reason that I no longer consider myself a 'leftist'. Disingenuous tactics and authoritarian laws besides, this is extremely dangerous. When a large chunk of the population is deamonised and marginalised by the mainstream politics and the legal system, then they are going to respond by supporting parties like the AFD.
When people are fed up that their daughter and her family cant get a house whilst migrants are receiving preferential treatment and your mum cant afford to heat her house this winter because her payment has been cut, meanwhile there's been another terror attack and you dare not complain because you don't want to be seen as racist. Your grievances are allways characterised as coming from a place of 'hatred' your views are moraly irreprehencable, narrow minded and biggoted, your patriotism associated with low class football hooligans, and likely dangerous and the party that once claimed to represent you, despise you and everything you stand for.
The left only have themselves to blame for the backlash they have created. Whether this reaction proves to be "far right" in the traditional sense or "far right" in the leftist propaganda sense, remains to be seen, it all depends on what happens next. If the authoritarian, draconian, policies continue and parties like the AFD are banned as is being proposed and even more laws are draughted to curtail free speach, then it will provoke the very thing its trying to counter. If you keep backing people into a corner then they will have no choice but to retaliate. If the left can put to one side its Utopian, Idealistic fantasy, stop persecuting its opponents and return to the political consensus that we had for generations, then there might be hope! Or is your vision for the perfect world too important to be derailed for anything and the inevitable suffering and hardship, a small price to pay for 'Utopia'?
As the old saying goes: "I never left the Left, the Left, left me"!
th-cam.com/video/d5PR5S4xhXQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=9gWQYmb0DS1f0w3N
Perfect analysis!
We need a strong, unapologetic movement. We need to harness the anger that we are all feeling. The time for pleasantries and manners is over.
Just came to say that the analysis is also correct outside Europe, in Brazil. There, someone as terrible as bolsonaro was only possible by the fact that the main force to the left (Lula and his party PT) has embraced neoliberalism
In reality nowdays the left parties are more far left, much more radical, then the right parties.
Just the main stream media spreads that illusion, that the left ideas are in the middle, and from that point of view, just the normal right partias are far rights.
The real far right parties and ideas are very rare and very less popular.
Raise the basic rate tax threshold.
Raise the 40% tax threshold to at least £60k and watch the early retirees get off the sofa and go back to work. Me included.
@@stephennelmes4557 and let’s lose more services. Also that wouldn’t make any of my friends return to the workforce
@johnmulligan912 OK, drop the 40% threshold to £20K. No one would work, no tax, less productivity.
Flat rate taxation at 20% starting at £20K. Everyone pays the same. A more equal society. Whether you're a millionaire or a labourer.
The truth is, when we elect another to control us, we have already given all of our power away. Rule oneself.
Mile End Road? Why does everything have to be so London centric? That’s already alienated the rest of the country.
Have you seen the plight of Northern towns like Easington Colliery? How do you solve that? You should use that because it represents the unachievable, so if you can come up with a system that solves that you will be a miracle maker.
We need to develop a system with collectivism at its heart. We need people to pull together and experience the pleasure of joint efforts.
We need tough love for those left behind. We need to lift people up so that they can contribute.
We also need to look after ourselves and look after our security and prevent ghettoisation and secularism that is causing so much damage.
What tosh!
@@TheConsideredMan Not a very considered response.
Yeah, I did think that about this “Mile End Road” thing.
The “Clacton Omnibus” might be a better analogy in the case of populist nationalism.
@cogsnbanjo Let me give a more considered response over and above the more general comment I made to Richard's video earlier.
Collectivism is what every government wants in that every government despises individualism.
Perhaps what you need to look at more carefully is the way in which governments seek to undermine people more surreptitiously.
For example; governments do NOT provide good education at a state level because it is counterproductive to the government in that a 'smarter' population asks smarter questions and the idea that the education system in this country, and other western nations, is actually dumbing us down is rigorously argued in John Gatto's ironically titled book, called 'Dumbing Us Down'.
The illusion of the 2 parties being in opposing political positions is in plain sight...in that there is little or no difference between the 2, and neither of them are doing what YOU want them to do or anything close to what you suggest needs to be done in the North.
The government, (of any flavour), literally has very little influence as to what actually happens on the ground, since the government per se, is controlled by a) the corporatocracy b) the military industrial complex c) the central banks d) big pharma e) big ag f) the mainstream media and the wealthy elite.
As a plebeian, you believe democracy exists to help you, but this is NOT what the real term democracy means. Look up the definition and etymology of 'demos' and 'kratos'; you will see that what you are taught to believe democracy to be, is in fact not quite accurate.
We are all at the bottom of the pile because they keep you stupid, feed you sh*t that makes you ill, then when you finally get GP appointment, they then poison you with something that is costing the country more than it can afford. Gabor Mate talks about this in his book 'The Myth of the Normal'.
Read more, my friend; start with 'The Creature from Jekyll Island' G Edward Griffin and then try 'The Racket' by Matt Kennard and then 'The Psychology of Totalitarianism' by Matias Desmet.
Lastly, please please please stop watching the main stream TV news and buying main stream media newspapers and watch the UK Column News, which is good solid journalism and their website is very good too!
Hope this is considered enough for you!
Oh, one final book...'On the Importance of Civil Disobedience' by Thoreau, you'll need that in the coming months and years, I rather suspect!
Happy reading!
@@TheConsideredManso the government wants workers collectives? Er ok
The far right isn’t really winning. These far right parties are actually center right. It’s just your conservative parties in Europe are center-left. Being anti-immigration is a normal center-right position. Far right is characterized by wanting a dictatorship or monarchy and aristocracy and theocracy and traditionalism and patriarchy and wanting to return to feudalism or empire or fascism or slavery.
Exactly what far right politicians like Trump, Farage and Wilders want and Orban has done.
The reason AfD is far-right is due to their policies they want to enact that not only reduces the living standard for the general people, but also the segregation of the population into races for them to mass deport into countries they deem "safe" to deport to regardless of how established they are in the civilization.
Singling out immigrants as the cause for the populations misfortune is what far-right politicians usually do. Besides that we've seen in Thuringia how, once in power, the so-called "center-right" party actually acts.
@@DarkKerialstraz : *Nothing to do with Far-Right.*
@@Historia.Magistra.Vitae. It does in context with how politicians act and what they stand for. People arguing that anti-immegration is center-right so the far-right AfD is also center-right are knee deep in their bubble that they don't even understand what "remigration" is and entails.
If in your eyes the AfD is more center-right compared to our CxU, then maybe you're so far out that all you can perceive is leftist/socialist activism.
Spending without control also put on this. You cannot outrun the demographic reality of pension systems collapsing and productivity going down to hell with just good vibes and 'leaving no one behind'.
It is not the far right. It is just the right. Now the left. That is now the far left.
Exactly
Most of the time, the term 'far right' is used to describe centre parties with common sense
No the term has a clear definition.
In other words, most of the centrists carry far right ideas.
@Redf322 Not so.
Like countless others, my politics hasn't changed in fifty years. The use of words has. Can l suggest you read Orwell's '1984'
@idsavo No.
Those of us in the centre (who are non-left) have centre ideas, but it suits the agenda of the left to call us far right
@@Redf322please define it so clearly then. In the last 6-7 years the Left has accelerated their policies to more and more extreme positions on many things like gender - and middle of the road people now fit the 'far right' checklist in their estimation by for example believing in binary genders and not supporting biological males competing in women's sports and having legal rights to access women's safe spaces which the previous Left had fought so hard to create. The Left is accelerating away from the middle justas fast as some truly far right groups are but has more institutional support in Europe. So they are consistently casting everything to the right of their increasingly extreme and ridiculous positions as far right or neo fascist. It's a term that is being used incredibly loosely now as a smear against anyone who wants proper controlled immigration, scaling back on the gender theory experimentation on children and proper national defence. Ironically these are all policies which Left wing parties are also now adopting because of the evidence that things have gotten out of control.
All the people here who continue to vote Labour despite everything we’ve seen since Blair jumped into bed with Bush have been fantasising with no basis. Here in the UK, the Green Party has offered genuinely radical alternatives for decades but a) The main parties have never offered us PR to allow any real alternative to take hold b) The billionaire owned media keep the majority either in ignorance and/or distracted with irrelevant trash. Presenting any alternatives in such an environment is a seriously uphill struggle.
Because the overton window has shifted so far left, moderates are now considered far right. In reality, the true far right is very small
The economic window is to the right and the cultural one to the left, where neoliberalism has found its balancing act.
Because they offer solutions. Now the solutions are shite but it has more appeal than the " We can't do anything" which is offered by our mainstream parties.
No. Both offer solutions. The extrem right offer easy solutions that will not work and the more leftists offer solutions that will work but their solutions are complicated. So the people decide to go with the easy solutions.
The long and short of it is that economic hardships and disparities have hit a breaking point, but also the median voter is also so woefully uniformed they can be easily duped into blaming minorities for their problems instead of the wealthy and the powerful
Islamization? People feel foreigners in their own countries
lefties approve islamization. every european super leftist country = filled to the brim with muslim immigrants
Because it's not the far Right. It's just right
The danger with criticising Labour is that you will be helping the far right attract further members/supporters.
It's not actually the Far right. It's more a matter of the right versus the wrong. Happily, common sense is once again prevalent.
Common sense is hating whoever that is deemed hateable at the moment?
because the left has become far left
What led them there
Far left???
what's far-left? Free healthcare, workers rights and LGBTQ rights? Last I checked, that's just basic human decency and at most left-wing or center-left, but go off.
@prodsxmmit that is just center left where i live at least
@@anyoneatall3488 not just where you live. That literally is center-left.
Corporate greed is the problem and not raising salaries
The bourgeoisie prefers fascism than socialism, as in the thirties. Nothing new.
*Fascism was socialism.*
@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.
No. Fascism is nationalist and racist, which socialism isn't.
@@pascalsolal : *Wrong. Fascism was statism first, nationalism second. Also it wasn't racist. Fascism was a totalitarian far-left, socialist 3rd position ideology based on National Syndicalism which they adapted from a French Marxist, known as Georges Sorel. It rejected individualism, capitalism, liberalism, democracy, and marxist interpretation of socialism ("class warfare"). Instead, it advocated for class collaboration where the means of production was organized by national worker syndicals (i.e. trade unions / Fascist Corporatism), and the guiding philosophy of the state was Actual Idealism (Neo-Hegelianism).*
*Being an outgrowth of Sorelian Syndicalism, (which itself was an outgrowth from Marxist socialism), its idea was that society would be consolidated (i.e., incorporated) into syndicates (in the Italian context, fascio/fasci) which would be regulated by and serve as organs for the State, or "embody" the State (corpus = body). The purpose was the centralization and synchronization of society under the State, as an end unto itself. To quote Mussolini's infamous aphorism: "All within the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State."*
*As finalized by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile ("the Doctrine of Fascism"), Fascism came from the belief that the "Stateless and Classless society" Communism calls for after its "dictatorship of the proletariat" cannot be achieved, and that only the State can properly organize a socialist society. Therefore, Fascism cared about unity in a strong central government with society being brought together by syndicalist organizations obedient to the State.*
[01] "La Dottrina Del Fascismo / the Doctrine of Fascism", by Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile
[02] "Che cosa è il Fascismo: Discorsi e polemiche / Origins and Doctrine of Fascism", by Giovanni Gentile
[03] "the Philosophy of Fascism", by Mario Palmieri
[04] "Fascism: An Informal Introduction to Its Theory and Practice", by Renzo De Felice
[05] "Mussolini's Intellectuals", by A. James Gregor
[06] "La Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni", by Rabaglietti Giuseppe & Sergio Panunzio
[07] "Teoria generale dello Stato Fascista", by Sergio Panunzio
[08] "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" by Zeev Sternhell
[09] Any work from Emilio Gentile
@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.
I don't agree at all. Fascism was based on nationalism and racism. Fascism is based on the idea of race, on a biological basis. It's not because it had common points with socialism that it was far left. Therefore, when they were in power, the fascists fought the socialists and communists. They put them in jail, they killed them. The fascists rejected capitalism in their propaganda, but in reality they got along with capitalists very well.
Fascism is built upon the idea that inequalities are natural, whereas socialists, on the contrary, considers that all men are born equal.
Similarities doesn't mean identity.
@@Historia.Magistra.Vitae.
My answer has been censured with no reason. I don't agree with you.
It's not!! But we're sick of the left and there's nothing else to vote for!!
Is the left in power in your country?
So... you vote for fascism
I listened to your video after it appeared on my feed.
I agreed and instantly subscribed.
Good luck in all your endeavors.
Kind regards from Iceland
💜💛💜💜
Because people have forgotten the horrors far right did, and and there is hardly anyone left who can remember 2nd world war!
Hitler was a socialist... What makes him a conservative/capitalist to you?
The labour party is nothing like the labour party when I was young! That was the 60's!!!
Because our countries are going to shit
Exactly. In almost all Europe the leaders have lost credibility.
That's what Putin wants you to believe. But it's not true!
@PerPress That's not true. Just some guys on social media wants you to believe that.
@joeferreti9442 It is not true in Poland, but in Germany and the UK etc.
Which are the viable socialist parties in the UK?