Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
12-06-2019, 18:13   #1
mariaalice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,478
Democracy

I know I have been reading too much into watching years and years https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000539g its genuinely dark if a bit fanciful, so could democracy be by pased in a country like the Uk or even Ireland.
mariaalice is offline  
Advertisement
12-06-2019, 22:14   #2
ancapailldorcha
Order! Order!
 
ancapailldorcha's Avatar
Mod: This is a little vague and short for an OP here so I am moving this.
ancapailldorcha is online now  
13-06-2019, 09:59   #3
mariaalice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,478
In a post-Trump world ( I know he is a god to some) could Democracy be undermined by a mixture of new speak, popularism, unrestrained capitalism ect.
That is more or less the premise of the series.

The homeless and drug addicts and others floating around round them up and send them to an abandoned army camp they are being housed after all its not a camp call it something else or its not privatisation in the NHS if you have to pay its NHS fast track.

The serices is a bit overblown but is interesting on the power of populism.
mariaalice is offline  
14-06-2019, 10:31   #4
Fuaranach
Registered User
 
Fuaranach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariaalice View Post
In a post-Trump world ( I know he is a god to some) could Democracy be undermined by a mixture of new speak, popularism, unrestrained capitalism ect.
Obviously it could, but the initial problem you have here is how to define democracy. Is, for instance, the cabal of journalists whose members spin stories on behalf of vested interests, agendas and ideologies "undermining democracy" or merely "part of the democratic system"?

If the former, populism and its anti-democratic tendencies is an intensification of what we now have rather than something new. I really think learning German history from, say, early 1929 until 1934 is very relevant to today. In particular, while most would see Hitler's passing of the Enabling Act (March 1933) as overthrowing democracy, 'rule by decree', where the President overthrew the wishes of the Reichstag, had been exercised no fewer than 60 times in 1932 alone. That's perspective. In short, every single democratic system has strong anti-democratic features as in running a human society stability and security are, most of us will agree, more fundamental needs. The voting system used, for instance and without irony, is always chosen with those needs in mind as well as the more obvious "How will changing the voting system undermine our power?" needs. We, for instance, have PR-STV not because it's more representative than the Westminster model (it is) but rather because Britain chose it for us in 1919 to undermine the largest party (SF) and support smaller parties (which included Unionists).

To directly answer your question, having visited Auschwitz and many hugely informative Berlin museums in the past year I have no doubt that the conditions that led to the rise of populists in Germany from 1930 could happen again. That populism was not an aberration; rather, modern technology allowed it to take populism to new heights/a bigger audience. Now the technology is far superior, people with memories of the consequences of 1930s populism are fewer, and the losers from globalisation are more defined in western countries. It is no coincidence that Britain and the US are becoming more populist at a time when inequality is growing at an unprecedented pace in those countries most of all - something decisively supported via the low taxation on the superrich policies of the legislatures of many of our Western democratic states. As in Germany in 1932/33 it is our democracies which are aiding and abetting the rise of these populist, rightwing forces which seek to undermine them. Truth be told, democracies have been actively engaging (primarily through tax subsidies/ incentives/cuts) in the not-so-free market to help the superrich get richer since at least the 1970s and the rise of Reaganism/ Thatcherism. Plenty of blame to go around here.

Not one of these snakeoil salesmen will save jobs or increase the number of poor people who have jobs because immigrants leave. Capitalism doesn't work like that. Working conditions will decrease as people need to work for less to make their bosses "competitive". Those of us who read history widely have seen the pattern before, time and time again. Those of us who remember 2008-2010 will also remember the statistics about the rich getting richer at the time, using the supposed need for cutbacks to consolidate their wealth. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Fuaranach is offline  
Thanks from:
14-06-2019, 10:42   #5
joe40
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,403
I dislike the term "populism" because it feeds into the narrative that there is an elite who feel they are more knowledgeable than the general population.

For me the word popular just means enjoyed by a lot of people why should this have a negative connation.

Why could policies that promote equality be called populism since I'm sure they would be popular.

Instead the people promoting hate about immigrants, and denying environmental realities are called populists as if they have popular support, where in fact they are still in the minority.
joe40 is offline  
Advertisement
14-06-2019, 12:14   #6
mariaalice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe40 View Post
I dislike the term "populism" because it feeds into the narrative that there is an elite who feel they are more knowledgeable than the general population.

For me the word popular just means enjoyed by a lot of people why should this have a negative connation.

Why could policies that promote equality be called populism since I'm sure they would be popular.

Instead the people promoting hate about immigrants, and denying environmental realities are called populists as if they have popular support, where in fact they are still in the minority.
Populism means to pander to the idea that there are easy answers to complex questions.
mariaalice is offline  
14-06-2019, 17:21   #7
DEFTLEFTHAND
Registered User
 
DEFTLEFTHAND's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 16,128
You see the seeds of it in Britain and America.

Angry people refusing to accept Brexit and the election of Trump.

It's very worrying indeed.
DEFTLEFTHAND is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet