850
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
850 points (91.3% liked)
Showerthoughts
29522 readers
253 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- Avoid politics
- 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
- 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
- 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
People turn fascist when they're desperate and angry, same as always. So when people experience economic hardship they look for somone to blame, often immigrants. So we call them racists, and I guess that's true, but it comes from something else; economic inequality.
In Europe we do the same thing, in the French elections the rural population voted overwhelmingly for the fascists - here in brown.
In the German elections, the poorer former East-German provinces also supported the fascist AfD, here shown in the darker colours.
Even in Denmark, where I live, the more right-wing and extremist parties are popular in the southern, western, and northern parst of the country - the poorer rural areas, who's seen their jobs disappear, their shops close, and their income stall even as the country as a whole gets richer.
So the challenge of liberal democracy is clear; show the population outside the cities that they, too, can get their piece of the pie. If we cannot solve that, then we'll see more countries turn fascist in the next decade.
Jesus, been scrolling for hours and finally someone has said it. It's why someone like Bernie trended so well and actually had a chance if the DNC would've ran him in 2016. He wanted to raise EVERYONE up, regardless of any identity or ideology. He came with receipts and actual plans that he non-stopped harped on every second he had a mic in front of him. This election cycle I didn't hear a single actual legislative plan fleshed out like they did with the healthcare for all in 2016 debates. You're not gonna win a mud-slinging contest of "he said, she said" when people just don't care.
A lot of people (white and/or rich mostly) also know that they have benefited from racial discrimination and opportunities stolen from other people. They saw their parents buying homes, getting loans and jobs. They vaguely heard how difficult it was for POC or displaced individuals, they don't want the system turning on them. In their bleak futurism that the right-wing paints, we will all be treated equally so everyone is a target. Instead of targeting voters concerns in an economical way, they went with a polisci approach like Harris's horrible housing innovative.
You're parents had a shack? sorry. Get no economical support from parents but they effect your government support? sorry. Congress didn't pass it? sorry. We've decided to change the definition of a "starter-home". Sorry.
The piece of the pie was a perfect way to put it, I've seen so many shit takes from everyone on here I'm flabbergasted. From people "getting popcorn to watch everyone get their just desserts" to "maybe we shouldn't of ran a woman-POC this election cycle".
Back in 2016 I was living in the middle of Trump country, but when I told them I was supporting Bernie and not Clinton they'd say something like "I don't agree with him on a lot of stuff but I respect him and like that he hates billionaires."
I really think he could have won.
Yes, thank you for putting it in plain language. People are not in a good place all over the world and telling people the economy (markets and stats people no longer have faith in) is great has the opposite effect then what the Dems intended.
This mess stems from a combo of a two party system (you know that thing the US founders warned you about) and a fundamental failure (real or perceived) of society's ability to reward people fairly. Now you don't have a middle class to pander to, you just have levels of poor and a few ultra wealthy (both demographics that tend to vote more right then left).
The real telling stat here is women voters. At what point would a woman vote contrary to her own body autonomy, safety and general rights? Like anyone else, when she is poor, hungry and angry.