@antireactionary
Interested in nationalism, state ethics, right-wing ideology, and the politics of conspiracy theories. A follow or repost is not an endorsement. Definition of nationalism: https://www.academia.edu/45663252/A_definition_of_nationalism
Younger Britons are more likely to believe it can sometimes be acceptable to shoplift in certain circumstances
For instance, while 69% of 18-24 year olds believe it can be okay for a starving person to shoplift food, just 31% of over 65s feel this can ever be acceptable
yougov.com/en-gb/articl...
Voters don't in fact know, if they themselves face future costs. They are not making the judgements you suggest, but rather acting on the fear or suspicion of future harm.
Governments are clearly to blame here, since they all try to conceal the figures.
I don't see how Jews can be "anti-war", given that there is an ethnic conflict between the Jewish people and the Palestinian people.
If Britain is good at integrating people, why is British politics all about Muslims, and blacks, and Asians, and white British people, and Jews, and Poles, and migrants,and so on?
No, the prime argument is that Labour should be more like Reform, or more Reform than Reform - so that *current* Reform voters will switch to Labour.
That assessment is correct: the white working class will vote for Labour, if it becomes a right-wing ethno-nationalist party.
The ecological fallacy argument does not apply over the 50-70 years which it took for the shift. Reform is indeed occupying the niche occupied by Labour in 1955 - even if most 1955 voters are dead.
No amount of hostility against a minority makes war crimes "necessary".
Does this - in tone at least - indicate that Ford, and similar political scientists, might now be prepared to accept, that the white working class shifted from Labour to Reform?
Immigration is by definition negative for some or all non-immigrants, because it constitutes a transfer of resources. Immigration of non-Christians, into a Christian state with a Christian identity, is by definition negative for its Christian inhabitants.
Research should allow for this reality.
When the majority of the electorate is fascist, the winning strategy for all parties is to be a fascist party. There is no mathematical route to an anti-fascist government, in a state where the population is overwhelmingly fascist.
Hmm ... is that not Karl Marx?
" nur verschieden interpretiert; es kommt aber darauf an, sie zu verändern."
The right-wing voters are not 50% as you suggest, but the majority, and therefore cannot be 'deprived of power' without suppressing the democratic process itself.
No, the point is precisely that Labour does not win by 'trimming right', but by wholesale adoption of right-wing preferences such as the death penalty, whites-only immigration, and mass deportations.
That does not alter the fact, that Labour will win over most Reform voters, by adopting policies to the right of Reform.
Nor does it alter the historical fact, that traditional white working-class voters, who mostly voted Labour two generations ago, now vote Reform.
The 'policy stance which most favours the left' is becoming right-wing, since right-wing voters are the majority in most democracies.
Effective.
You missed that: effective.
The point here, which many comments miss, is that the people who post these images are not doing it for their own pleasure, but to appeal to public sentiment, and that works. The psychological appeal of fascism is central to Griffin's work.
Roger Griffin would not agree. This issue needs to be taken seriously, since it is older than AI slop, and clearly central to fascist propaganda.
They are not out of touch. Many political scientists genuinely don't understand the mechanism here - the stereotypical white working class Reform voter is seen by *most other voters* as an authentic exemplar of 'the people'. True support for Reform, and similar parties in Europe, is thus far higher.
Die Debatte zu Jugendlichen und sozialen Medien passiert fast ausschließlich unter der Annahme, dass junge Menschen zuhause sicher, unterstützt und akzeptiert sind. Die Realität ist natürlich eine andere. Soziale Medien sind eben auch eine Möglichkeit mit dieser Realität umzugehen.
2 in 3 Brits think the number of people coming to the UK to apply for refugee status or asylum is too high - and at least half do not trust any political parties to have the right immigration policies 👉 bit.ly/40m9s5f
How does he reconcile this with support for certain forms of 'economic zones'?
@gilduran.com
I don't live in the US, but we need to realise that the loss of traditional culture and identity is real, not an illusion. Technology, markets, geopolitics, social shifts - all inevitably undermine the culture inherited from previous generations, and the right correctly senses that.
@it_is_fareed on twitter: "My entire net worth is in third order Rapture derivatives. If the chance of “the chance of “the chance of the Rapture exceeds 5%” exceeds 5%” exceeds 5%, i lose my house"
It has been obvious for decades that a very large section of the population rejects all migration, and hates all migrants. The media consistently downplay this, so as a journalist you must take some blame.
Millions of people in Britain want migrants shot at sea, just as millions of Germans want migrants shot at a border wall. The political elite consistently underestimates the anger of the right-wing voter.
The 'complicity of the state' in this case is its complicity in democracy as such. The 'politicking' that you deplore, is simply the normal democratic process.
The political class was democratically elected, and democracy is to blame for its existence.
An ethnically-defined nation is, by definition, exclusive of non-members. Sunak can only be English, if and when the English redefine themselves to include him. There is no evidence of that.
