- Apr 12, 2011
- 17,007
- 6,087
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
I also came across this as well that breaks down and explains what's wrong with how everyone talks about political views and ideas. To those on the left, it's a good summary of why there has been a resurgence of more conservative views, and to those on the right, why you are being falsely accused of being racist nazis.
This is how the media and common knowledge views and talks about politics. The left and the right of a scale, with hippies and communists to the left and businessmen and religious folks to the right. However, this is a gross oversimplification.
This is much more close to what the political spectrum actually looks like. The marker "You" is an average U.S. voter with the makers for the four largest US political parties, and Donald Trump. Naturally, it is very close to populism and more centralized. You have the "loony lefty libtards" in the 3 categories down-left (social liberalism, social democracy and democratic socialism) and "right wing Fascist Nazis" in the 3 up-right (conservatism, neo-conservatism and national conservatism). It's incredibly rare you'll ever meet anyone outside of those more centralized ideas, but perception is often accentuated by the media.
This is the Overton Window, which is the range of ideas the public will accept, and the further you get on either side, the less likely it is going to be popular. In most of the West and other modern cultures, the media is the one that determines this, but naturally they do have their own biases based upon their owners and viewership. For instance, as most newspaper owners in the UK are wealthy conservatives, that's where they centre the frame, just like Fox in the US (no coincidence thanks to the same owner of both Fox and the Sun/Times). So, why is this such a problem right now?
Because of people like these three, they're not the only ones. They want to move the Overton window off it's populist center to that "Nationalist Conservatism" because that's the center of their ideals. They do this by normalizing the political debate on the simple lines of lower immigration for our security (jobs and terrorism), focusing on the needs of their nation, and a turn away from increasing globalization. They do that by making every issues about someone else.
These methods aren't new or original. On the left, we have a campaign poster Farage unveiled in the closing weeks of the Brexit debate showing queues of immigrants flowing through Europe (they were Syrians fleeing the war, but that detail was oddly missing) and on the right a still from Nazi propaganda footage showing the same (again, Jews fleeing the war, but beyond the point). Now, this isn't "so they're Nazis?" - because we can see on the proper spectrum that no, they're not - but more that this is history repeating: authoritarian right wing parties using the movement of people as reason to move the state to a more authoritarian position. Why do they want that?
To get rid of rights like these. Ultimately, the tie that binds all of these politicians is business and their love of making money, and they make money if you are working. All of these rules mentioned (as well as others not), except number four, stop this. 4 is arguably even more important, because they make hiring more difficult. And who else would like these relaxed rules? The rich media owners, naturally, whose business interests would also improve.
This is why most countries, like the U.S., have a split political system so that when people like these get into power, they cannot just take control and do whatever they want. That is why we have seen a common framing tool from these leaders is that the judiciary is an "enemy of the people", and if that sounds familiar...
...it's because again history is repeating itself. Again, a reminder, this does not mean "These people are Nazis". What it means is that this is a well-worn and overused playbook, that we are again seeing attempts to move what's moderate, acceptable, and popular outside of it's usual framing somewhere else, this time somewhere more economically right and socially authoritarian. How do you normalize this view?
They're re-framing the political rhetoric that their authoritarian, economically right views are the views of the people, and they do this by simply saying that they are political outsiders and represent the true voice of the people and their interests.
I didn't agree with the poster of this to use this poem, but I do agree that fascism isn't applicable to the current situation, it's a more extreme version of what we are seeing right now. The rest of this poem, however, resonates with what a lot of these nationalist and populist movements are doing, and certainly with what Trump, Farage, and Le Pen are saying. By saying "all we want is your safety, security, and your way to a better job", they can re-frame their political ideas as the norm, and with that the Overton window moves away. Honestly, who doesn't want job security? national security? The end of terrorism? The problem is what it will cost, and whether you can stand for that.
This isn't saying that these leaders are going to be come tyrants, it's just showing what they are doing and why we should be concerned about it since it's been done successfully in the past. Like it says, this is an overused playbook, and if you look at current events through the eyes of history, it's no surprise that Trump is villainizing the media. Now, these aren't simple issues with simple solutions. The causes of this are deep and complex, rooted in history, current events, the media, and in the oversimplification of viewpoints. What I want people to get away from this is that this is happened before, and it's likely to happen again. If we use the tools available to us, it's going to be okay.
This is how the media and common knowledge views and talks about politics. The left and the right of a scale, with hippies and communists to the left and businessmen and religious folks to the right. However, this is a gross oversimplification.
This is much more close to what the political spectrum actually looks like. The marker "You" is an average U.S. voter with the makers for the four largest US political parties, and Donald Trump. Naturally, it is very close to populism and more centralized. You have the "loony lefty libtards" in the 3 categories down-left (social liberalism, social democracy and democratic socialism) and "right wing Fascist Nazis" in the 3 up-right (conservatism, neo-conservatism and national conservatism). It's incredibly rare you'll ever meet anyone outside of those more centralized ideas, but perception is often accentuated by the media.
This is the Overton Window, which is the range of ideas the public will accept, and the further you get on either side, the less likely it is going to be popular. In most of the West and other modern cultures, the media is the one that determines this, but naturally they do have their own biases based upon their owners and viewership. For instance, as most newspaper owners in the UK are wealthy conservatives, that's where they centre the frame, just like Fox in the US (no coincidence thanks to the same owner of both Fox and the Sun/Times). So, why is this such a problem right now?
Because of people like these three, they're not the only ones. They want to move the Overton window off it's populist center to that "Nationalist Conservatism" because that's the center of their ideals. They do this by normalizing the political debate on the simple lines of lower immigration for our security (jobs and terrorism), focusing on the needs of their nation, and a turn away from increasing globalization. They do that by making every issues about someone else.
These methods aren't new or original. On the left, we have a campaign poster Farage unveiled in the closing weeks of the Brexit debate showing queues of immigrants flowing through Europe (they were Syrians fleeing the war, but that detail was oddly missing) and on the right a still from Nazi propaganda footage showing the same (again, Jews fleeing the war, but beyond the point). Now, this isn't "so they're Nazis?" - because we can see on the proper spectrum that no, they're not - but more that this is history repeating: authoritarian right wing parties using the movement of people as reason to move the state to a more authoritarian position. Why do they want that?
To get rid of rights like these. Ultimately, the tie that binds all of these politicians is business and their love of making money, and they make money if you are working. All of these rules mentioned (as well as others not), except number four, stop this. 4 is arguably even more important, because they make hiring more difficult. And who else would like these relaxed rules? The rich media owners, naturally, whose business interests would also improve.
This is why most countries, like the U.S., have a split political system so that when people like these get into power, they cannot just take control and do whatever they want. That is why we have seen a common framing tool from these leaders is that the judiciary is an "enemy of the people", and if that sounds familiar...
...it's because again history is repeating itself. Again, a reminder, this does not mean "These people are Nazis". What it means is that this is a well-worn and overused playbook, that we are again seeing attempts to move what's moderate, acceptable, and popular outside of it's usual framing somewhere else, this time somewhere more economically right and socially authoritarian. How do you normalize this view?
They're re-framing the political rhetoric that their authoritarian, economically right views are the views of the people, and they do this by simply saying that they are political outsiders and represent the true voice of the people and their interests.
I didn't agree with the poster of this to use this poem, but I do agree that fascism isn't applicable to the current situation, it's a more extreme version of what we are seeing right now. The rest of this poem, however, resonates with what a lot of these nationalist and populist movements are doing, and certainly with what Trump, Farage, and Le Pen are saying. By saying "all we want is your safety, security, and your way to a better job", they can re-frame their political ideas as the norm, and with that the Overton window moves away. Honestly, who doesn't want job security? national security? The end of terrorism? The problem is what it will cost, and whether you can stand for that.
This isn't saying that these leaders are going to be come tyrants, it's just showing what they are doing and why we should be concerned about it since it's been done successfully in the past. Like it says, this is an overused playbook, and if you look at current events through the eyes of history, it's no surprise that Trump is villainizing the media. Now, these aren't simple issues with simple solutions. The causes of this are deep and complex, rooted in history, current events, the media, and in the oversimplification of viewpoints. What I want people to get away from this is that this is happened before, and it's likely to happen again. If we use the tools available to us, it's going to be okay.
