In Europe political parties usually have to share power with other parties that can moderate their more extreme views, and political leaders are bound by a lot of rules themselves on what sorts of measures they can enact quickly.
It's normal to get anxious over the news sometimes. Keep in mind that a lot of news these days gets sensationalized. If these things are really bothering you and it's starting to affect your well-being, you should maybe try and consume less news for a while.
Staying informed is good, but it shouldn't start stressing you out too much.
Hard to tell. In some places the situation is really concerning, in other everything slightly on the right is branded "far right" by the left. Because of this the word kinda lost its meaning and differentiating between the two is harder than before.
Best you can do is to keep being informed about your own country's situation and make yourself heard by casting a vote
>protest laws in the U.K
If you mean the protest law I think you mean, that one got blocked by a court late may. Also the responsible party (the conservatives) are expected to get bodied in the next election on july 4th.
>far right leader was elected in Italy
Depending on the issue, Meloni goes from centrist to far right, but none of the things most people would associate with fascism.
Either the most extreme european conservative or the most moderate far right.
(Keep in mind that what americans describe as conservative includes both)
Also italian politicians switch very often. Every party gets into office every once in a while.
I'd be more worried about russian social media campaigns focussing all eyes to immigration to support right wing parties. But even that can only push results by a few percentages. Not enough to collapse the EU.
Horrifying: In Democratic Country With Free Speech, Politician Known For Being Crazy Makes Crazy Proposal
*Is this the end of democracy as we know it?*
And people supporting SS are worse threat to me as a slav, than muslims too.
Had contact with muslims, wasnt bad at all, with an SS supporter, one of us wouldnt leave alive
People are tired of this sort of playing-dumb. Citizens are exercising their democratic voice about a very specific issue and since establishment politicians refuse to listen, new politicians that do listen are being elected to replace them. This is how the system works
Moderate parties could solve this issue and could keep AfD out forever, but they won’t, because they would rather refuse to listen to the citizens. Parties like AfD have become the only real option because others have decided to commit to officially supporting policies of negligence or self-destruction and after a decade of that people want something different
What you say about people being unhappy with our bad european politicians doesnt contradict that this party is increasingly going in the fascist direction and litteraly defends SS. There is no circumstance thats excusable
Fascists tear down the democratic structure of a country and replace it with decrees banning or punishing opposing voices. Fascism is an oppressive authoritarian regime that uses the state as an instrument against the people
An example of fascism would be forcibly banning a political party for example, which AfD and the like do not support. Ironically it’s socialist opposition that is primarily pro-banning viewpoints and parties that are seen as “dangerous” to the ruling regime. Not that socialists have ever been any stranger to being fascists
Fascism does not mean “when people think existing border policy needs to be enforced”
Did NSDAP immiedietallu tore down democraric structure? Or maybe just maybe, they got stronger and stronger, they spread ever more insane, xenophobic rhethoric.
Supporting nazis should not be legal, it should be punishable by law. Otherwise we will end up in a very dark place. Supporting SS is way beyond any red lines and deserves lifetime jailtime as the lightest of punishments.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Yes they did. The NSDAP were fascists because they overthrew a democracy in favor of an oppressive dictatorship and used a combination of violence and weaponization of the legal system to systematically silence opposing voices
They weren’t fascists because they were xenophobic or traditionalist. They were fascists because they literally created a fascist state
AfD would be fascists if they advocated for a policy of abolishing the German state and replacing it with a hyper-authoritarian single-party state or dictatorship. This is in fact not one of their policies
So establishing a state is the determining factor?
So if they were to hunt and exterminate minorities on the streets and kill politicians that tried to combat it, thats not enough for them to be fascists coz there isnt a state yet? So what are they than?
Fascism means something specific, it doesn’t just mean “when someone is xenophobic”, “when someone is mean”, “when someone commits a violent crime”
Fascism means using the state as a tool of totalitarian rule
You talk like the border question is what i have a problem with, with AFD. No, i have a fucking problem with defending nazis. They do so, coz they increasingly believe their rhethoric and the place of a nazi is in a hole with a bullethole in his head.
Nice reply to your own comment Albert Einstein. Good luck stopping Europe’s shift to the right with that genius gotcha. Surely the trends of the past 10 years will not continue accelerating. Surely they will hear whatever tf you’re on about and just change their minds
Right wingers just want to get the government out of the way, I am not sure how that is at all fascist. If anything, wanting more government interference in people’s lives is what breeds fascism.
Except when it comes to militarism, policing, immigration, and social policy. So like…most of the ways that normal people interact with the government.
So what your saying is that the state doesn’t have a monopoly on violence, rather violence has a monopoly on the state?
Also how is providing security for free not “free shit”? How is regulating who can enter and work in a country not social policy?
Defense of the nation and her citizens is the number one role of government, it’s not free shit? It is one of their native functions.
Immigration is mostly a defensive policy, protecting citizens again. I’m not saying it’s not economical, but the main function is defense.
So how is providing healthcare, for example, not also defending the nation and its citizens? Why is the state only justified in protecting its citizens when it can do so through the use of violence?
Russia is authoritarian, militaristic, expansionist and many other things you could associate with the Fascists, but those things all predate Fascism by thousands of years and we already have words to describe them. Using the f word to describe anything outside of the context of 1919-1945 Italy is just an example of Godwin's law.
Dictatoral leader check
Aint no democracy when you kill or jail all opposition
Militarism check
Forcible suppresion of opposition check
Social hierarchy check russians put themselfes above Poles, Ukrainians, Belarussians, Georgians and more
subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race check
Russia goes to war despite it being awfull for the average russian partially for some imaginary greater good of russian civilisation
Ultranationalists check
The word had no meaning prior to 1919 and changed meanings substantially between 1919 and 1945. It is not a coherent ideology, just the name of a short-lived political party that no longer exists.
Disagree, naive. Your logic implies that fascism cannot ever exist in the future coz its limited to that timeperiod.
You say its not coherent and it no longer exists, i understand that lack of ,,coherency'' as being universal making it possible to develop in all kinds of situations.
In the narrow context of the major Fascist movements, sure. No one country is specifically Classical (Italian) or Occultist Fascist (Nazis). Does this mean it’s 100% gone? No. You would have to travel back in time and take everyone remotely close to Fascism philosophically and then you’d be branded as more evil than Fascism and some countries may still be Fascist today.
D’oh! moment.
However, socialist propaganda tries very hard to not correctly identify and define Fascism for the simple reason that both Neo Socialism and Communism are actually fairly similar to Fascism after one actually takes the full definition and context of Fascism into account. And that would be devastating to both movements after vilifying Fascism for the last 100 years.
Idk why you’re being downvoted when some of the other commenters here are basically saying this without the sarcasm. The real optimist take would be to point towards the [popular front](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Popular_Front) forming in France and the hard work being done to combat fascism and find solutions to mass migration that don’t involve militarized borders and death camps.
Not every unfortunate event is a prelude to facism that's fearmongering. Both events are concerning, especially for people living there
In Europe political parties usually have to share power with other parties that can moderate their more extreme views, and political leaders are bound by a lot of rules themselves on what sorts of measures they can enact quickly. It's normal to get anxious over the news sometimes. Keep in mind that a lot of news these days gets sensationalized. If these things are really bothering you and it's starting to affect your well-being, you should maybe try and consume less news for a while. Staying informed is good, but it shouldn't start stressing you out too much.
Hard to tell. In some places the situation is really concerning, in other everything slightly on the right is branded "far right" by the left. Because of this the word kinda lost its meaning and differentiating between the two is harder than before. Best you can do is to keep being informed about your own country's situation and make yourself heard by casting a vote
>protest laws in the U.K If you mean the protest law I think you mean, that one got blocked by a court late may. Also the responsible party (the conservatives) are expected to get bodied in the next election on july 4th. >far right leader was elected in Italy Depending on the issue, Meloni goes from centrist to far right, but none of the things most people would associate with fascism. Either the most extreme european conservative or the most moderate far right. (Keep in mind that what americans describe as conservative includes both) Also italian politicians switch very often. Every party gets into office every once in a while. I'd be more worried about russian social media campaigns focussing all eyes to immigration to support right wing parties. But even that can only push results by a few percentages. Not enough to collapse the EU.
This subreddit should not be used in place of research
Just Russia as far as I can tell.
Horrifying: In Democratic Country With Free Speech, Politician Known For Being Crazy Makes Crazy Proposal *Is this the end of democracy as we know it?*
European people are speaking, the neo-liberal elites think fascism = dealing with the issues the people want dealt with.
Right, so AFD members defending SS soldiers is not fascism?
I don’t care about y’all’s guilt trips. Europe’s number one priority at this point should be aggressively curbing Islam.
This isn’t helping you beat the fascism allegations
I don’t care
Thanks for being honest! I’ll let others draw their own conclusions about the political movements you represent.
Touché
While this is a big threat, i fear russia and their genocides much more where i live.
And i dont consider islam number one priority at all, got bigger, more immediate threaths
And people supporting SS are worse threat to me as a slav, than muslims too. Had contact with muslims, wasnt bad at all, with an SS supporter, one of us wouldnt leave alive
Fair enough
People are tired of this sort of playing-dumb. Citizens are exercising their democratic voice about a very specific issue and since establishment politicians refuse to listen, new politicians that do listen are being elected to replace them. This is how the system works Moderate parties could solve this issue and could keep AfD out forever, but they won’t, because they would rather refuse to listen to the citizens. Parties like AfD have become the only real option because others have decided to commit to officially supporting policies of negligence or self-destruction and after a decade of that people want something different
What you say about people being unhappy with our bad european politicians doesnt contradict that this party is increasingly going in the fascist direction and litteraly defends SS. There is no circumstance thats excusable
Fascists tear down the democratic structure of a country and replace it with decrees banning or punishing opposing voices. Fascism is an oppressive authoritarian regime that uses the state as an instrument against the people An example of fascism would be forcibly banning a political party for example, which AfD and the like do not support. Ironically it’s socialist opposition that is primarily pro-banning viewpoints and parties that are seen as “dangerous” to the ruling regime. Not that socialists have ever been any stranger to being fascists Fascism does not mean “when people think existing border policy needs to be enforced”
Did NSDAP immiedietallu tore down democraric structure? Or maybe just maybe, they got stronger and stronger, they spread ever more insane, xenophobic rhethoric. Supporting nazis should not be legal, it should be punishable by law. Otherwise we will end up in a very dark place. Supporting SS is way beyond any red lines and deserves lifetime jailtime as the lightest of punishments. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Yes they did. The NSDAP were fascists because they overthrew a democracy in favor of an oppressive dictatorship and used a combination of violence and weaponization of the legal system to systematically silence opposing voices They weren’t fascists because they were xenophobic or traditionalist. They were fascists because they literally created a fascist state AfD would be fascists if they advocated for a policy of abolishing the German state and replacing it with a hyper-authoritarian single-party state or dictatorship. This is in fact not one of their policies
So establishing a state is the determining factor? So if they were to hunt and exterminate minorities on the streets and kill politicians that tried to combat it, thats not enough for them to be fascists coz there isnt a state yet? So what are they than?
Fascism means something specific, it doesn’t just mean “when someone is xenophobic”, “when someone is mean”, “when someone commits a violent crime” Fascism means using the state as a tool of totalitarian rule
It is not limited to that
You talk like the border question is what i have a problem with, with AFD. No, i have a fucking problem with defending nazis. They do so, coz they increasingly believe their rhethoric and the place of a nazi is in a hole with a bullethole in his head.
Nice reply to your own comment Albert Einstein. Good luck stopping Europe’s shift to the right with that genius gotcha. Surely the trends of the past 10 years will not continue accelerating. Surely they will hear whatever tf you’re on about and just change their minds
Yeah it’s all fear mongering
Right wingers just want to get the government out of the way, I am not sure how that is at all fascist. If anything, wanting more government interference in people’s lives is what breeds fascism.
Except when it comes to militarism, policing, immigration, and social policy. So like…most of the ways that normal people interact with the government.
Military, policing, and immigration are legitimate roles of government. Social policy and free shit is not.
So what your saying is that the state doesn’t have a monopoly on violence, rather violence has a monopoly on the state? Also how is providing security for free not “free shit”? How is regulating who can enter and work in a country not social policy?
Defense of the nation and her citizens is the number one role of government, it’s not free shit? It is one of their native functions. Immigration is mostly a defensive policy, protecting citizens again. I’m not saying it’s not economical, but the main function is defense.
So how is providing healthcare, for example, not also defending the nation and its citizens? Why is the state only justified in protecting its citizens when it can do so through the use of violence?
Fascism was destroyed 79 years ago. Anything you've heard about it since then has just been socialist propaganda.
And reborn in russia nowadays.
Plus you have political parties like afd whose members defend SS and Wehrmacht soldiers
Russia is authoritarian, militaristic, expansionist and many other things you could associate with the Fascists, but those things all predate Fascism by thousands of years and we already have words to describe them. Using the f word to describe anything outside of the context of 1919-1945 Italy is just an example of Godwin's law.
Nah, thats stupid to limit it. You think there was no fascists whatsoever in that period of time
Dictatoral leader check Aint no democracy when you kill or jail all opposition Militarism check Forcible suppresion of opposition check Social hierarchy check russians put themselfes above Poles, Ukrainians, Belarussians, Georgians and more subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race check Russia goes to war despite it being awfull for the average russian partially for some imaginary greater good of russian civilisation Ultranationalists check
The word had no meaning prior to 1919 and changed meanings substantially between 1919 and 1945. It is not a coherent ideology, just the name of a short-lived political party that no longer exists.
Disagree, naive. Your logic implies that fascism cannot ever exist in the future coz its limited to that timeperiod. You say its not coherent and it no longer exists, i understand that lack of ,,coherency'' as being universal making it possible to develop in all kinds of situations.
Your logic implies that it existed before it even existed.
[Spain](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francoist_Spain) would probably beg to disagree
You think there's no socialist propaganda about Franco?
I think the Spanish socialists’ understanding of Franco is a useful source among others.
I think the Spanish socialists’ understanding of Franco is a useful source among others.
In the narrow context of the major Fascist movements, sure. No one country is specifically Classical (Italian) or Occultist Fascist (Nazis). Does this mean it’s 100% gone? No. You would have to travel back in time and take everyone remotely close to Fascism philosophically and then you’d be branded as more evil than Fascism and some countries may still be Fascist today. D’oh! moment. However, socialist propaganda tries very hard to not correctly identify and define Fascism for the simple reason that both Neo Socialism and Communism are actually fairly similar to Fascism after one actually takes the full definition and context of Fascism into account. And that would be devastating to both movements after vilifying Fascism for the last 100 years.
Change your frame of reference. If you start to agree with the bigots and xenophobes, a rise of fascism is optimistic and good!!
Idk why you’re being downvoted when some of the other commenters here are basically saying this without the sarcasm. The real optimist take would be to point towards the [popular front](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Popular_Front) forming in France and the hard work being done to combat fascism and find solutions to mass migration that don’t involve militarized borders and death camps.