Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,307
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 29, 2018 13:25:29 GMT
is Le Pen more extreme than Bolsonaro? Genuine question If we're talking about the daughter she explicitly refused to endorse him on the basis that he is too extreme for her liking.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 13:50:17 GMT
The parties in Austria and Poland are far right (albeit not majority-fascist), and one of the governing ones in Italy is too. Bolsonaro's just an alpha wolf on a completely unprotected farm in this context. Austria's PM, Sebastian Kurz, is from the ÖVP which sits in the EPP group at Strasburg which is itself a more moderate politcal group than that the British Prime Minister sits in. Perhaps you're thinking the government is run by the minority coalition partner, in the same way that we ran the UK govt 2010-2015? The point is, I'm seeing the following, repeated in dozens of threads in my social media streams today:Leftist: This is a disaster! Many people will die! Bolsonario is an actual fascist! Unaligned: You said that about Trump. Leftist: No this is different - Bolsonario is an *actual* fascist. Unaligned: Yeh, that's literally what you said about Trump. Leftist: Uhh... Well, okay, admittedly I was being a bit alarmist about that, but this is for real. Unaligned: So why should I take you seriously this time? I'm gonna wait and see what he does first.I hope there's a lesson for political commentators here somewhere. Finally, this is a country where there are over 50,000 murders a year - many of them innocent by-standers to gang-warfare. Parties of the Left were evidently unwilling or unable to deal with that. In that context, the voters in Brazil have concluded that electing a Robocop who will inevitably cause collateral damage in the fight-back is worthwhile, and will save lives in the long-run. I don't like it but I understand why they've done it. It might even work. Western liberals need to understand that the thought of machine-gun toting cops shooting up the neighbourhood once a month isn't that scary to people living in places where gangs do it every fucking night. While hyperbole is a problem, this is what happens when people elect increasingly extreme politicians. Bolsonaro can be condemned not on leftwing arguments against him but on the merits of his own statements: a promise to kill 30,000 people and start a civil war should be endearing to absolutely no-one. If his supporters aren't willing to believe him on that, and they aren't willing to believe the opposition either, they're wilfully deluding themselves and will get the government they deserve. Re: Austria's PM, I was referring to the presidential election candidate (I assumed you were doing the same) who narrowly lost, in the end. Btw, the tactic won't work - it hasn't in Mexico which has descended into total war with a yearly casualty count ranking up alongside Yemen's, Syria's, Iraq's and Afghanistan's, and it hasn't in the Philippines where IS managed to take over an entire city and hold it for months. I also understand why they've done it, but those are reasons, not excuses. The above examples indicate why they're fairly stupid reasons, too. In the context of domestic, electoral politics, of course it's Brazilian liberals' duty to see how they can deal with this. On an international level, there's no reason for outsiders not to be disgusted, and we ought to expect better of our own people than to vote for Bolsonaro's ilk (for that matter I don't think he'd fly here). When we discuss security laws surrounding foreign extremists, we should consider Brazil too: clearly it has a rather high proportion of potentially dangerous fascists.
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Oct 29, 2018 14:43:37 GMT
In the context of domestic, electoral politics, of course it's Brazilian liberals' duty to see how they can deal with this. On an international level, there's no reason for outsiders not to be disgusted, and we ought to expect better of our own people than to vote for Bolsonaro's ilk (for that matter I don't think he'd fly here). When we discuss security laws surrounding foreign extremists, we should consider Brazil too: clearly it has a rather high proportion of potentially dangerous fascists. Oh I wouldn't be so smug. God knows what kind of politicians the British would elect if there were 15,000 murders every year and our political class was as corrupt as their Brazilian counterparts. I suppose you'd be surprised by the proportion of 'potentially dangerous fascists' in the UK.
|
|
Izzyeviel
Lib Dem
I stayed up for Hartlepools
Posts: 3,279
|
Post by Izzyeviel on Oct 29, 2018 14:53:41 GMT
Another example of how the right no longer care about due process, unless its one of their own.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 14:55:32 GMT
In the context of domestic, electoral politics, of course it's Brazilian liberals' duty to see how they can deal with this. On an international level, there's no reason for outsiders not to be disgusted, and we ought to expect better of our own people than to vote for Bolsonaro's ilk (for that matter I don't think he'd fly here). When we discuss security laws surrounding foreign extremists, we should consider Brazil too: clearly it has a rather high proportion of potentially dangerous fascists. Oh I wouldn't be so smug. God knows what kind of politicians the British would elect if there were 15,000 murders every year and our political class was as corrupt as their Brazilian counterparts. I suppose you'd be surprised by the proportion of 'potentially dangerous fascists' in the UK. "If Britain was Brazil, then it wouldn't be Britain!" I also believe voters here wouldn't have tolerated parties as corrupt as some of the ones which formed several previous Brazilians governments. We'd never have reached this hypothetical point to begin with. However, I would be surprised if a murder rate, even one that high, caused people to vote for fascist. There are plenty of democratic countries with high murder rates but a distinct absence of fascist governments - take, for example, El Salvador. Humans can do better than this.
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,555
|
Post by European Lefty on Oct 29, 2018 14:59:54 GMT
I've heard that students are being asked to report teachers whose politics are contrary to those of the new president. Now, where have I heard that one before......
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 29, 2018 15:09:47 GMT
Oh I wouldn't be so smug. God knows what kind of politicians the British would elect if there were 15,000 murders every year and our political class was as corrupt as their Brazilian counterparts. I suppose you'd be surprised by the proportion of 'potentially dangerous fascists' in the UK. "If Britain was Brazil, then it wouldn't be Britain!" I also believe voters here wouldn't have tolerated parties as corrupt as some of the ones which formed several previous Brazilians governments. We'd never have reached this hypothetical point to begin with. However, I would be surprised if a murder rate, even one that high, caused people to vote for fascist. There are plenty of democratic countries with high murder rates but a distinct absence of fascist governments - take, for example, El Salvador. Humans can do better than this. It is arguable that until the Great Reform Act and then the Corrupt Practises act our political system was pretty damn corrupt.
And our electoral system is at least in part responsible for parties of the extreme right and left failing to get any traction over the years. While I also have great faith in the British character circumstances and systems have a large part to play in outcomes.
If the murder rate was that high I think it would concentrate people's minds greatly. How could it be otherwise? El Salvador isn't a great example given that up until the early 90s it had chronic political instability and often authoritarian rule. It's great that the country now has a multi party democracy, but it can't be taken for granted and continuing poverty combined with continuing violence could well de-rail progress again at some point.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 29, 2018 15:11:14 GMT
Another example of how the right no longer care about due process, unless its one of their own. It's why independence of the judicary is so important and should be important to the left.
|
|
|
Post by Forfarshire Conservative on Oct 29, 2018 15:24:45 GMT
Austria's PM, Sebastian Kurz, is from the ÖVP which sits in the EPP group at Strasburg which is itself a more moderate politcal group than that the British Prime Minister sits in. Perhaps you're thinking the government is run by the minority coalition partner, in the same way that we ran the UK govt 2010-2015? The point is, I'm seeing the following, repeated in dozens of threads in my social media streams today:Leftist: This is a disaster! Many people will die! Bolsonario is an actual fascist! Unaligned: You said that about Trump. Leftist: No this is different - Bolsonario is an *actual* fascist. Unaligned: Yeh, that's literally what you said about Trump. Leftist: Uhh... Well, okay, admittedly I was being a bit alarmist about that, but this is for real. Unaligned: So why should I take you seriously this time? I'm gonna wait and see what he does first.I hope there's a lesson for political commentators here somewhere. Finally, this is a country where there are over 50,000 murders a year - many of them innocent by-standers to gang-warfare. Parties of the Left were evidently unwilling or unable to deal with that. In that context, the voters in Brazil have concluded that electing a Robocop who will inevitably cause collateral damage in the fight-back is worthwhile, and will save lives in the long-run. I don't like it but I understand why they've done it. It might even work. Western liberals need to understand that the thought of machine-gun toting cops shooting up the neighbourhood once a month isn't that scary to people living in places where gangs do it every fucking night. While hyperbole is a problem, this is what happens when people elect increasingly extreme politicians. Bolsonaro can be condemned not on leftwing arguments against him but on the merits of his own statements: a promise to kill 30,000 people and start a civil war should be endearing to absolutely no-one. If his supporters aren't willing to believe him on that, and they aren't willing to believe the opposition either, they're wilfully deluding themselves and will get the government they deserve. Re: Austria's PM, I was referring to the presidential election candidate (I assumed you were doing the same) who narrowly lost, in the end. Btw, the tactic won't work - it hasn't in Mexico which has descended into total war with a yearly casualty count ranking up alongside Yemen's, Syria's, Iraq's and Afghanistan's, and it hasn't in the Philippines where IS managed to take over an entire city and hold it for months. I also understand why they've done it, but those are reasons, not excuses. The above examples indicate why they're fairly stupid reasons, too. In the context of domestic, electoral politics, of course it's Brazilian liberals' duty to see how they can deal with this. On an international level, there's no reason for outsiders not to be disgusted, and we ought to expect better of our own people than to vote for Bolsonaro's ilk (for that matter I don't think he'd fly here). When we discuss security laws surrounding foreign extremists, we should consider Brazil too: clearly it has a rather high proportion of potentially dangerous fascists.That’s unfair. People face daily violence unimaginable to people in this country, their children are endangered and pretty much, in places like Rio, every family has been touched by the violence. Yesterday they faced a choice between a party made up of corrupt former, and some current, communists and socialists, with the glaring example of Venezuela as a neighbour, or they could could choose an, I accept appalling, authoritarian who promises to destroy corruption and kill the criminals. If you were in their position who’d you choose?
|
|
Izzyeviel
Lib Dem
I stayed up for Hartlepools
Posts: 3,279
|
Post by Izzyeviel on Oct 29, 2018 15:28:26 GMT
I've heard that students are being asked to report teachers whose politics are contrary to those of the new president. Now, where have I heard that one before...... In the UK its the other way round.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 15:34:14 GMT
While hyperbole is a problem, this is what happens when people elect increasingly extreme politicians. Bolsonaro can be condemned not on leftwing arguments against him but on the merits of his own statements: a promise to kill 30,000 people and start a civil war should be endearing to absolutely no-one. If his supporters aren't willing to believe him on that, and they aren't willing to believe the opposition either, they're wilfully deluding themselves and will get the government they deserve. Re: Austria's PM, I was referring to the presidential election candidate (I assumed you were doing the same) who narrowly lost, in the end. Btw, the tactic won't work - it hasn't in Mexico which has descended into total war with a yearly casualty count ranking up alongside Yemen's, Syria's, Iraq's and Afghanistan's, and it hasn't in the Philippines where IS managed to take over an entire city and hold it for months. I also understand why they've done it, but those are reasons, not excuses. The above examples indicate why they're fairly stupid reasons, too. In the context of domestic, electoral politics, of course it's Brazilian liberals' duty to see how they can deal with this. On an international level, there's no reason for outsiders not to be disgusted, and we ought to expect better of our own people than to vote for Bolsonaro's ilk (for that matter I don't think he'd fly here). When we discuss security laws surrounding foreign extremists, we should consider Brazil too: clearly it has a rather high proportion of potentially dangerous fascists.That’s unfair. People face daily violence unimaginable to people in this country, their children are endangered and pretty much, in places like Rio, every family has been touched by the violence. Yesterday they faced a choice between a party made up of corrupt former, and some current, communists and socialists, with the glaring example of Venezuela as a neighbour, or they could could choose an, I accept appalling, authoritarian who promises to destroy corruption and kill the criminals. If you were in their position who’d you choose? Not unfair at all. We currently consider people from war-torn Islamic countries, don't we? What makes Brazilians any different in this case? Btw, Haddad isn't a socialist; he's a centre-left technocrat. What you and the other apologists in this thread are avoiding is that there was a whole spectrum of other candidates beforehand for Brazilians to pick from, and yet they chose Bolsonaro anyway. The tired old hot takes about the left just aren't even close to applicable here. For the first time in my life, I suppose I'm finding myself in the 'out-of-touch' camp usually ridiculed as SJWs. I just can't ever fathom voting for a man who promises 30,000 deaths (and I'm a victim of several violent crimes with permanent damage as a result). This goes beyond bigotry, disastrous policies, bad press or criminal history - the man has promised to start a civil war. Over here politicians pledge social security, or tax cuts, or £350m for the NHS or what have you, but he pledges unspecified deaths of thousands of innocents. How am I supposed to relate to people who want to do that? How is anyone supposed to?
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 15:40:13 GMT
"If Britain was Brazil, then it wouldn't be Britain!" I also believe voters here wouldn't have tolerated parties as corrupt as some of the ones which formed several previous Brazilians governments. We'd never have reached this hypothetical point to begin with. However, I would be surprised if a murder rate, even one that high, caused people to vote for fascist. There are plenty of democratic countries with high murder rates but a distinct absence of fascist governments - take, for example, El Salvador. Humans can do better than this. It is arguable that until the Great Reform Act and then the Corrupt Practises act our political system was pretty damn corrupt.
And our electoral system is at least in part responsible for parties of the extreme right and left failing to get any traction over the years. While I also have great faith in the British character circumstances and systems have a large part to play in outcomes.
If the murder rate was that high I think it would concentrate people's minds greatly. How could it be otherwise? El Salvador isn't a great example given that up until the early 90s it had chronic political instability and often authoritarian rule. It's great that the country now has a multi party democracy, but it can't be taken for granted and continuing poverty combined with continuing violence could well de-rail progress again at some point.
Hundreds of years ago. So you are saying we're, culturally at least, centuries ahead. Of course it would, but that was 20 years ago, too - and plenty of other countries have similar levels of violence without the accompanying collective insanity. You can be concerned about violence without wanting to, frankly moronically, support someone who's pledged to bring more violence. Jamaica, Lesotho, Honduras, Belize - all of these have higher murder rates than Brazil, but stable governance. Brazil's election is an appalling exception, not the rule.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,481
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 29, 2018 15:40:56 GMT
If I lived in a county where 50K people were murdered by criminals and gangs each year and a former army officer politician promised to stop that level of death, if need be by killing some 30K gang members and organized criminals to make it possible, i too would warmly enbrace him and vote for him and hope that he actually did it. Why wouldn't I?
|
|
Izzyeviel
Lib Dem
I stayed up for Hartlepools
Posts: 3,279
|
Post by Izzyeviel on Oct 29, 2018 15:44:50 GMT
If I lived in a county where 50K people were murdered by criminals and gangs each year and a former army officer politician promised to stop that level of death, if need be by killing some 30K gang members and organized criminals to make it possible, i too would warmly embrace him and vote for him and hope that he actually did it. Why wouldn't I? Because you care about things such as law and order and due process? Or are those just buzzwords used to defend rich white males on your side who have been accused of sexual assault?
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 15:45:36 GMT
If I lived in a county where 50K people were murdered by criminals and gangs each year and a former army officer politician promised to stop that level of death, if need be by killing some 30K gang members and organized criminals to make it possible, i too would warmly enbrace him and vote for him and hope that he actually did it. Why wouldn't I? Because he didn't promise that. He promised to kill 30,000 people (unspecified as to who), start a civil war, and also said that the deaths of innocents (his words, not mine!) would be necessary and ok. He said the killings would need to be extrajudicial - that is, there wouldn't even be a checked system in place for working out who to kill - and that torture would need to be used. He said the dictatorship, the very same one you would have lived, suffered, and potentially died under, essentially wasn't violent enough. These are just a few samples of a litany of violent promises. What the fuck, Carlton?
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,481
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 29, 2018 16:00:35 GMT
If I lived in a county where 50K people were murdered by criminals and gangs each year and a former army officer politician promised to stop that level of death, if need be by killing some 30K gang members and organized criminals to make it possible, i too would warmly embrace him and vote for him and hope that he actually did it. Why wouldn't I? Because you care about things such as law and order and due process? Or are those just buzzwords used to defend rich white males on your side who have been accused of sexual assault? But how easy to say that from the comfort of a long-term stable law-abiding environment rather than in a fearful community in thrall to overlapping gangs and criminal groupings that enter the fabric of everything. if you were there I contend you would not be able to support such tender liberal thoughts. You would vote for instant action care and protection and crave to see the photos in the local press of a satisfying level of weekly body bags as the new man is seen to clean up the worst of it and to intimidate those who have been bleeding and intimidating you and your family and friends. There is no time or place for nice ordered collection of evidence, arrests, trials and due process. At 50K deaths a year it cries out for blunt summary action with a rooting out and termination of a lot of people very quickly in a form of civil war against a known and evident enemy. When the position has been cleared up and law and order begins to be reimposed one may gradually switch to what we here in our comfort would regard as more acceptable. Short term it needs to be blunt force summary action to make a public point and to redress the death toll onto the criminals and away from the public. The death rate may stay the same for a while but it will be deserved deaths of the dregs preying on society.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 16:07:38 GMT
'Deserved deaths of the dregs praying on society'. Jesus Christ, that's deluded on so many levels; I don't think it warrants an explanation. I've lived in a relatively horrid area in the UK, and know people who lived and suffered in violent places in third world countries. None of them would be so moronic and cruel as to vote for more war of this kind. If the enemy was that well known, police action (including a state of martial law in places such as Rio, which has so far done nothing to reduce levels of violence) would have solved the problem long ago.
This is usually the point in the thread where someone makes an appeal to your veneer of common decency and you backtrack, but I don't feel inclined to pretend anymore. Congratulations, you've failed at basic human decency.
|
|
Izzyeviel
Lib Dem
I stayed up for Hartlepools
Posts: 3,279
|
Post by Izzyeviel on Oct 29, 2018 16:17:04 GMT
Because you care about things such as law and order and due process? Or are those just buzzwords used to defend rich white males on your side who have been accused of sexual assault? But how easy to say that from the comfort of a long-term stable law-abiding environment rather than in a fearful community in thrall to overlapping gangs and criminal groupings that enter the fabric of everything. if you were there I contend you would not be able to support such tender liberal thoughts. You would vote for instant action care and protection and crave to see the photos in the local press of a satisfying level of weekly body bags as the new man is seen to clean up the worst of it and to intimidate those who have been bleeding and intimidating you and your family and friends. There is no time or place for nice ordered collection of evidence, arrests, trials and due process. At 50K deaths a year it cries out for blunt summary action with a rooting out and termination of a lot of people very quickly in a form of civil war against a known and evident enemy. When the position has been cleared up and law and order begins to be reimposed one may gradually switch to what we here in our comfort would regard as more acceptable. Short term it needs to be blunt force summary action to make a public point and to redress the death toll onto the criminals and away from the public. The death rate may stay the same for a while but it will be deserved deaths of the dregs preying on society. Well, at least your honest about wanting one rule for rich white men, and a different one for everyone else.
|
|
|
Post by curiousliberal on Oct 29, 2018 16:20:18 GMT
But how easy to say that from the comfort of a long-term stable law-abiding environment rather than in a fearful community in thrall to overlapping gangs and criminal groupings that enter the fabric of everything. if you were there I contend you would not be able to support such tender liberal thoughts. You would vote for instant action care and protection and crave to see the photos in the local press of a satisfying level of weekly body bags as the new man is seen to clean up the worst of it and to intimidate those who have been bleeding and intimidating you and your family and friends. There is no time or place for nice ordered collection of evidence, arrests, trials and due process. At 50K deaths a year it cries out for blunt summary action with a rooting out and termination of a lot of people very quickly in a form of civil war against a known and evident enemy. When the position has been cleared up and law and order begins to be reimposed one may gradually switch to what we here in our comfort would regard as more acceptable. Short term it needs to be blunt force summary action to make a public point and to redress the death toll onto the criminals and away from the public. The death rate may stay the same for a while but it will be deserved deaths of the dregs preying on society. Well, at least your honest about wanting one rule for rich white men, and a different one for everyone else. Stop framing it like this. You're right fro a Western perspective, but this should scare 'white' men in Brazil on a personal level too. It's not only morally repugnant to support it, but criminally idiotic. Utter madness, and thankfully the majority of humans aren't conditioned to be this way anymore.
|
|
carlton43
Non-Aligned
Posts: 48,481
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 29, 2018 16:22:19 GMT
But your 'Common Decency' is bought at far too high a price by 50K others and not by you of course. There is no common ground between us and it is fruitless to continue the debate. You do not have to stoop to personal abuse as to my character. I am very probably more ethical and concerned than you are but less hidebound by impractical rules that blind you to the obvious and the necessary. Note it has not blinded the majority of electors in Brazil!
|
|