The rise of fascism in the 21st Century

Dunno what term people understand less around here - "fascism" or "Liberal".

None of the leaders or people mentioned in the OP are fascist. There are no fascist leaders in the Western civilsation. And fascism doesn't mean "not liberal" in the same way "liberal" doesn't mean socialist, or Marxist or Communist.

At least moustaches will be in fashion again

Stephen15 wrote:

Marriages tend to be between similar types of people in similar situations. Professionals will typically marry fellow professionals and low income earners will tend to marry other low income earners. It's fairly basic demographics. Fact of the matter is the HSE can't retain indigenous Irish staff due to poor pay and conditions and other factors such our high rents etc. When did I mention our generous welfare system is anything to do with forgeiners. I don't blame forgeiners I blame our government for not doing enough for our own. It also wouldn't surprise me if the qualifications held by persons coming from third world countries are of a lower standard than Irish/Western qualifications.

I don't dispute that marriages tend to be between people from similar socio economic groups, what happens in practice though is one person I the marriage gets a critical skills permit, and the other doesn't, they find it hard to get interviews because of their stamp 3 status or their qualifications are non transferable and they have to take lower income work because they need to make ends meet

Stephen15 wrote:

The problem we can't be fully sure of these people's backgrounds particularly from migrants coming from countries whom our government dosen't have ties with but also ideologies and cultures coming into our country which aren't compatible particularly coming from the religion of Islam.

People coming from middle Eastern countries go through a longer visa screening process than those coming from the likes of South America, most South Americans don't need a visa at all to enter the country.
Do you think the government just throws open the gates for people from countries we don't have treaties with? Typically people from non treaty countries will have to wait 4-5 months and have secured a job offer paying more than the average wage to be allowed to come here.

Stephen15 wrote:

I didn't say these people could work in jobs that require qualifications they could however work in petrol stations, in shops and as taxi drivers. Fact most coming in with qualifications would be from first world countries which are easier to assimilate into our culture than those from those from the third world. Fact of the matter is it is easier for Pierre an IT developer from France to integrate than Ahmed with no qualifications from Bangladesh.

Pierre is an EU citizen he can come here regardless of his job or qualification he could be homeless and if he arrives at the border we will let him in. Ahmed has to apply for a visa, in that he has to prove he has the means to support himself on arrival to Ireland. He also needs a work permit he needs to supply documentary evidence of his skills and qualifications, proof that he has secured a job offer and it pays more than x amount, if he arrives at the border without these he won't make it to the arrivals hall.

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

Certainly is worrying with the rise of populist. As said previously populist can be left and right. Think chaves and orban.

The worry is populists are anti pluralists. The rhetoric of being the only way forward and any dissenting opinion should be considered illegitimate should concern any democracy.

and casey has just proved that little old ireland is susceptible to this nonsense to, prepare for weird **** to occur

The reality is that the internet has turned out to be a bit of a double-edged sword, a great resource for communication and information - but critically on the other hand a source of mass disinformation and toxic communication

This manipulation of information empowers and validates fringes (like fascism)

Highly emotive non-issues are now regularly turned into significant issues that can pivot elections. It's all pretty grim.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

and casey has just proved that little old ireland is susceptible to this nonsense to, prepare for weird **** to occur

While it is a concern, I'm not so sure that this susceptibility will carry through to the general political environment or to the next general election.


Casey has proved his inability to work with anyone else in the days since the election. He would seem to be congenitally incapable of building a movement that depends on volunteer members, not paid employees. The chances of him building a movement, either a new party or a revitalised Renua or whatever, to achieve critical mass in the highly competitive environment of the next election are slim.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Maybe your reply was meant for someone saying we are all being manipulated by media.. particularly online.. to be scared of imaginary foes, while individuals with no real significant power are dressed up as bogey men for us to focus our attention on, like George Soros, in order that the far-right can sweep into power and destabilize the world.

Because that is more what a a conspiracy theory sounds like. I'd even say that, like a lot of conspiracy theories, that it isn't entirely without merit.

There are a lot of conspiracy theories about Soros, but its clear he's a multi-billionaire, who has donated 80% of his wealth to his own charity, Open Society. Open Society extensively lobbies institutions, media, politicians and NGOs to achieve Soros's own goals. Its arguable that Soros billions of dollars had more influence on western elections over the last 20 years than any Russian facebook accounts. Yet people are collectively losing their minds over the latter, whilst ignoring the former.

Soros for the record considers himself to be a god.

"I fancied myself as some kind of god ..." he once wrote. "If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble."

When asked by Britain's Independent newspaper to elaborate on that passage, Soros said, "It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out."

The things said by brazils new president are not comparable to anything said by trump or farage, as much as some people wish, european and american people would go crazy for the drama created by a leader like jair bolsanaro

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Of course they would exist. Pay more and mechanise.

Playing devils advocate here a bit but if "they're taking our jobs" is really the source of anyone's pain then mechanising isn't going to make them any happier.

But someone is getting rich on the back of this setup. Evidently it's not the migrants. Probably it's not the farmer who needs this just to scrape by. And it certainly isn't the "libtard snowfalkes", the "fascists", or the "LGBTXYZs".

So the **** are we fighting each other for?

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

There will be less competition for jobs so they won’t be automated out of jobs.

There'll be less competition for no jobs at all. Meanwhile, profit will go up.

Add to those that only those with the existing available capital or credit will be able to mechanise in the first place. The rest will be forced to sell to those who have.

Probably is the farmer actually.

The small, good natured, old-timey farmer? Very doubtful.

The "farmer", meaning whoever owns the land, the machines, the contracts, then yeah maybe.

Still has precious little to do with "leftists" or "fascists" or "snowflakes" or what gender pronoun you want to be called or simply can't stand calling someone else.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Peter Casey's comments were endlessly discussed and, sadly, completely set the agenda for the last week of the Presidential campaign plus the post mortem.

Ever wonder why?

Would it have anything to do with fact that a lot of people actually liked the fact he went against the media and socially liberal driven consensus and actually in his own limited way articulated what a lot of people actually think about travellers and laterally the careerist social welfare spongers.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The Travelling Community is Ireland's most marginalised group, ethnic or otherwise. There are precisely no people who dispute that the undoubted issues within the Travelling Community should be debated. What reasonable people say is that these issues can and should be debated without resorting to crude generalisations and vilification of that community.

That's both the intellectually superior and morally superior position to take.

Why are they marginalised ?

The unvarnished inconvenient truth is they have got opportunities for education, for homes ala the prime example in Tipperary that sparked all of this, but they refuse to take the opportunities.
In the case of the homes it's that they didn't come with stables and grazing land.
FFS give us a break.

They withdraw their children from education and rather than have a go at them, people like you will claim it is the fault of the rest of society and demand even more taxpayers money is diverted, through no doubt another sponging NGO, to yet another initiative to get their kids to stay in school.

Likewise when we discuss the huge levels of criminality endemic in the traveller community you and your ilk will shout about how unfair we are, it is not all of them even if very very high and besides it is not their fault.
Well why don't you go down to Tipperary and tell the Corcoran family that it is their fault for being attacked, it wasn't the fault of the attackers.

And then tell that to all the other victims of traveller crime.
See how the honest decent people of the likes of Rathkeale spoke at the ballot box the other day.
They live with them and they are sick and tired of the shyte.

But of course all these people are racists and bigots to you.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

Peter Casey did not attempt to do this whatsoever. He deliberately whipped up resentment and hatred against Travellers in order to get some cheap votes.

That's intellectual bankruptcy for you.

I haven't seen a single Casey supporter discuss or even acknowledge issues like why the rate of suicide among Travellers is seven times higher than among the settled community, or an acknowledgment that many employers (I've read as much as 70%) refuse to hire Travellers.

There is a very valid reason why people do not hire travellers.
Maybe when you have been continually visited by travellers scoping out what they can steal, then it is damn hard to put faith in another traveller, no matter how good they may be.
How many people have had elderly relatives harassed by travellers?

They have a reputation and it wasn't earned from nowhere.

Yes they have high suicide rates, they also have high rates of unemployment, high rates of criminality, high rates of young marriages.

They Ireland's Mississippi, they score high in anything bad and low in anything good.

And would any of it have anything at all to do with themselves ?

You are a typical modern leftie socially liberal character who actually excuses some groups bad behaviour and failures because you believe they are not at fault for them.
It's as if they are children and incapable of rational thought and to me that stinks of an arrogant superiority complex.

hill16bhoy wrote: »

We can guess why that is. It's likely because it would require a bit too much thinking.

I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that those who found Casey's comments disgustingp, such as myself, portrayed Casey supporters as "lower class ignoramuses", given that Casey's support came primarily from the middle classes, not the lower classes in socio-economic terms, the lower classes preferring Michael D. Higgins. His comments were certainly not aimed at lower class people, given that he vilified those on welfare as well as Travellers, and seems to have a problem with most sorts of welfare in general.

So there was definitely a lot of vilifying people as "lower class ignoramuses", except that pretty much all of it was coming from Peter Casey and those who supported him.

I suppose in non-socio-economic terms, you could call Casey and his supporters "low class ignoramuses", alright, but those terms are clearly not what you had in mind when you made your comment.

You really are playing to type here.
"Someone I disagree with and has a different opinion must of course be an idiot."
And then you wonder why people will turn to the right when this is what the left offers. :rolleyes: