Young people are driving the far-right in Europe

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What's going to happen IMO is a lot of people are going to regret what they vote for, no matter what. Young people getting behind far-right governments because they want control on immigration are going to be sorry when they find out that what will actually happen is more privatizing of industries making things more expensive, more concentration of wealth, and corruption shifted from government to business. Immigration restrictions too far in the other direction will cause service sectors to collapse and cause other unexpected chaos like Brexit is experiencing. And even worse, governments toying with the idea of leaving NATO or siding with Putin will be in for a nasty surprise worldwide.

This is not American's business. It is their countries. They have right to vote based on what they think is best for themselves and their children.

[Anonymous]

Unfortunate the far left is so wedded to its destructive and destabilizing social policies that it is encouraging a return to European style far right politics. We're seeing it here in the US with the open border policies. Tear it all down is exactly what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’re interested in this topic with regard to how it is or may play out in the US, check out people like Charlie Kirk. He is a conservative founder of Turning Point USA and regularly speaks on college campuses

Last week he was at Cal Poly and had 1200 students show up to see him. He has had similar outcomes on campuses around the country. His take on what is happening is that it is young men who are finally waking up. They see their future with things like home ownership threatened, plus culture issues like the transing of a generation.

As a mother of three boys I concur with his observation.

"Transing?" Do you hear yourself?
Recognizing that trans people are humans is not "transing" anything. Not to you, your kids, your family.

Your fearmongering is revolting.

Nope, sorry. Not going to back down from that one. Yes, there is social contagion that is fueling the trans craze. The teens I know are the ones who use the term “transing.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No young people are smarter than they are given credit for, if not for the indoctrination in American schools we would be seeing it here as well.

Interesting. Some people are America blaming schools and educators, which I find interesting. I have heard that language before — “indoctrination” in schools. IRL .

Where does that language or theory come from?

I heard Jordan Peterson talk about the over influence and over-therapy in kids. ie kids are being directed to therapists too much in the US (he explained it in a snazzy video). I can actually buy that. But Where is this blaming schools thing coming from? Is this in a study or survey that I missed?

I think it just always existed.
Think about it, the whole history course is now about how white people exploited all kinds of non white people.

Why is it SOOOO hard for you to hear that they kind of did?

Because it is history. History is violent and brutal. You think white people were the only bad people? Hell, why don't you go learn about the Arab slave trade from Africa, Ghengis Khan, Chinese and Indian slavery, slavery by indigenous tribes in South and Central America, or the murderous empire of Imperial Japan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because people have wised up to neoliberal stupidity which essentially just "WhItE PpL BaD!!".

How dare Europeans desire to remain European with European identities and values. Liberal want to import and infinite amount of poverty and diversity, even though those diverse groups coming in have completely antagonistic social and religious values as the countries they're flooding into. People have had their limits with immigration and liberals' kumbaya vision for the world that is pure lunacy.

You have clearly do not understand the situation in Europe if you think the liberals are encouraging the importation of poverty and diversity.

Freedom of movement was established under the EU to encourage flexible and mobile labour markets. It was in fact driven by free market economics. This means that any citizen of an EU country has the right to live and work in another country. It predictably resulted in a large movement of migrants from poorer countries to wealthier countries upon enlargement of the EU to include Eastern European countries.

Opposition to migrants in the UK largely sprung from the fairly rapid arrival of large numbers of Eastern Europeans, particularly Poles, in the UK which led to a perception that cheap labour was undercutting the wages and working conditions of locals. The reality was Eastern European workers were more easily exploited and generally were prepared to work for less money. This is somewhat true. Note that these new arrivals were largely white and Christian. In some small towns, changes happened very rapidly as large numbers of migrants arrived.

According to The Economist, areas that saw increases of over 200% in foreign-born population between 2001 and 2014 saw a majority of voters back leave in 94% of cases. The Economist concluded 'High numbers of migrants don't bother Britons; high rates of change do.' Consistent with that notion, research suggests that areas that saw significant influx of migration from Eastern Europe following the accession of 12 mainly Eastern European countries to the European Union in 2004 saw significant growth in support for the UK Independence Party and more likely to vote to leave the European Union.

So please note the negative attitudes towards migration were largely initially fueled by the sudden arrival of large numbers of white Christian migrants. The seeds of Brexit were sown by Eastern European migrants, not by migrants from outside the EU. Ironically, since Brexit, most migrants to the UK are now from outside the EU, particularly the Indian subcontinent and parts of Asia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’re interested in this topic with regard to how it is or may play out in the US, check out people like Charlie Kirk. He is a conservative founder of Turning Point USA and regularly speaks on college campuses

Last week he was at Cal Poly and had 1200 students show up to see him. He has had similar outcomes on campuses around the country. His take on what is happening is that it is young men who are finally waking up. They see their future with things like home ownership threatened, plus culture issues like the transing of a generation.

As a mother of three boys I concur with his observation.

"Transing?" Do you hear yourself?
Recognizing that trans people are humans is not "transing" anything. Not to you, your kids, your family.

Your fearmongering is revolting.

Nope, sorry. Not going to back down from that one. Yes, there is social contagion that is fueling the trans craze. The teens I know are the ones who use the term “transing.”

You know what's fueling the trans craze? $$$$

Expensive surgeries and a lifetime of medicines and counseling. Medical providers make out like a bandit.

Yes there is no question that is all behind it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No young people are smarter than they are given credit for, if not for the indoctrination in American schools we would be seeing it here as well.

Interesting. Some people are America blaming schools and educators, which I find interesting. I have heard that language before — “indoctrination” in schools. IRL .

Where does that language or theory come from?

I heard Jordan Peterson talk about the over influence and over-therapy in kids. ie kids are being directed to therapists too much in the US (he explained it in a snazzy video). I can actually buy that. But Where is this blaming schools thing coming from? Is this in a study or survey that I missed?

I think it just always existed.
Think about it, the whole history course is now about how white people exploited all kinds of non white people.

Why is it SOOOO hard for you to hear that they kind of did?

Because it is history. History is violent and brutal. You think white people were the only bad people? Hell, why don't you go learn about the Arab slave trade from Africa, Ghengis Khan, Chinese and Indian slavery, slavery by indigenous tribes in South and Central America, or the murderous empire of Imperial Japan.

This exactly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because people have wised up to neoliberal stupidity which essentially just "WhItE PpL BaD!!".

How dare Europeans desire to remain European with European identities and values. Liberal want to import and infinite amount of poverty and diversity, even though those diverse groups coming in have completely antagonistic social and religious values as the countries they're flooding into. People have had their limits with immigration and liberals' kumbaya vision for the world that is pure lunacy.

You have clearly do not understand the situation in Europe if you think the liberals are encouraging the importation of poverty and diversity.

Freedom of movement was established under the EU to encourage flexible and mobile labour markets. It was in fact driven by free market economics. This means that any citizen of an EU country has the right to live and work in another country. It predictably resulted in a large movement of migrants from poorer countries to wealthier countries upon enlargement of the EU to include Eastern European countries.

Opposition to migrants in the UK largely sprung from the fairly rapid arrival of large numbers of Eastern Europeans, particularly Poles, in the UK which led to a perception that cheap labour was undercutting the wages and working conditions of locals. The reality was Eastern European workers were more easily exploited and generally were prepared to work for less money. This is somewhat true. Note that these new arrivals were largely white and Christian. In some small towns, changes happened very rapidly as large numbers of migrants arrived.

According to The Economist, areas that saw increases of over 200% in foreign-born population between 2001 and 2014 saw a majority of voters back leave in 94% of cases. The Economist concluded 'High numbers of migrants don't bother Britons; high rates of change do.' Consistent with that notion, research suggests that areas that saw significant influx of migration from Eastern Europe following the accession of 12 mainly Eastern European countries to the European Union in 2004 saw significant growth in support for the UK Independence Party and more likely to vote to leave the European Union.

So please note the negative attitudes towards migration were largely initially fueled by the sudden arrival of large numbers of white Christian migrants. The seeds of Brexit were sown by Eastern European migrants, not by migrants from outside the EU. Ironically, since Brexit, most migrants to the UK are now from outside the EU, particularly the Indian subcontinent and parts of Asia.

While true, this is irrelevant. The immigration issues today driving the shift right are not about Eastern Europeans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because people have wised up to neoliberal stupidity which essentially just "WhItE PpL BaD!!".

How dare Europeans desire to remain European with European identities and values. Liberal want to import and infinite amount of poverty and diversity, even though those diverse groups coming in have completely antagonistic social and religious values as the countries they're flooding into. People have had their limits with immigration and liberals' kumbaya vision for the world that is pure lunacy.

You have clearly do not understand the situation in Europe if you think the liberals are encouraging the importation of poverty and diversity.

Freedom of movement was established under the EU to encourage flexible and mobile labour markets. It was in fact driven by free market economics. This means that any citizen of an EU country has the right to live and work in another country. It predictably resulted in a large movement of migrants from poorer countries to wealthier countries upon enlargement of the EU to include Eastern European countries.

Opposition to migrants in the UK largely sprung from the fairly rapid arrival of large numbers of Eastern Europeans, particularly Poles, in the UK which led to a perception that cheap labour was undercutting the wages and working conditions of locals. The reality was Eastern European workers were more easily exploited and generally were prepared to work for less money. This is somewhat true. Note that these new arrivals were largely white and Christian. In some small towns, changes happened very rapidly as large numbers of migrants arrived.

According to The Economist, areas that saw increases of over 200% in foreign-born population between 2001 and 2014 saw a majority of voters back leave in 94% of cases. The Economist concluded 'High numbers of migrants don't bother Britons; high rates of change do.' Consistent with that notion, research suggests that areas that saw significant influx of migration from Eastern Europe following the accession of 12 mainly Eastern European countries to the European Union in 2004 saw significant growth in support for the UK Independence Party and more likely to vote to leave the European Union.

So please note the negative attitudes towards migration were largely initially fueled by the sudden arrival of large numbers of white Christian migrants. The seeds of Brexit were sown by Eastern European migrants, not by migrants from outside the EU. Ironically, since Brexit, most migrants to the UK are now from outside the EU, particularly the Indian subcontinent and parts of Asia.

While true, this is irrelevant. The immigration issues today driving the shift right are not about Eastern Europeans.

It's not really about non-Eastern Europeans in some of these countries either. The article refers to a social influencer in Portugal.
You may be aware Portugal has one of the most severe housing and cost of living crises in Europe due to foreign investment in real estate, over-tourism, and the advent of the digital nomad (there are over 15,000 in Lisbon). Life is miserable for Portuguese who can barely afford to rent flat and houses if they can indeed find them. Once upon a time, young Portuguese (who almost all speak English) would move to London to spread their wings and look for work. This is no longer available to them.

People who are unhappy look for people to blame. It's definitely not non-white immigrants who are driving up the costs of living.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm European. Young people are indeed moving further to the right in western Europe. There are two issues driving it - immigration and housing. The younger generation doesn't accept the platitudes and social justice mantras of older generations. They look at their communities - whether in Sweden, France, Holland - and note that nearly all violent crime is committed by Arab and African immigrants. And it's younger people that are often the victims of it - from sexual assault to muggings to murder. Most immigrants to Europe do not accept western mores and values. And younger Europeans are tired of it. They will increasingly vote for anti-immigration parties.

Secondly, fewer and fewer Europeans can afford their own home - whether owning or renting. And this is also tied to immigration. They see how much their governments are spending to house and feed immigrants from Mali or Iraq. And that leads to resentment. The traditional left and center-left parties are often seen as out-of-touch dinosaurs that are completely removed from the day to day realities of average Europeans. The energy is increasingly with the right wing parties. Even in liberal and tolerant Holland, the far right candidate - Geert Wilders - got the most votes in the last election. And I suspect that trend will continue throughout western Europe. Young people are fed up, and they are untethered from the past. The Cold War is a long time ago. And World War II is something you read about in a history book. They will increasingly vote for the right because the left has failed to address the issues they are concerned about.

But it should be noted that the European right is nothing like the American right. Every European wants health insurance, pensions, social welfare, vacation time, affordable education, a sane climate policy etc etc. Immigration and the cost of housing is what drives the European right.

And this is why I’ve spent the last 8+ years warning Democrats to not just take the decline of public support for conservative economic policies for granted.

Imagine someone more competent than Trump with economic policies that match up more to Bernie Sanders—yet just as against immigration and social justice issues as Trump is.

I firmly believe there would be a very wide appeal to someone like that. And I don’t see the GOP staying a viable party in the future unless they take that sort of route.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No young people are smarter than they are given credit for, if not for the indoctrination in American schools we would be seeing it here as well.

Interesting. Some people are America blaming schools and educators, which I find interesting. I have heard that language before — “indoctrination” in schools. IRL .

Where does that language or theory come from?

I heard Jordan Peterson talk about the over influence and over-therapy in kids. ie kids are being directed to therapists too much in the US (he explained it in a snazzy video). I can actually buy that. But Where is this blaming schools thing coming from? Is this in a study or survey that I missed?

I think it just always existed.
Think about it, the whole history course is now about how white people exploited all kinds of non white people.

Why is it SOOOO hard for you to hear that they kind of did?

Because it is history. History is violent and brutal. You think white people were the only bad people? Hell, why don't you go learn about the Arab slave trade from Africa, Ghengis Khan, Chinese and Indian slavery, slavery by indigenous tribes in South and Central America, or the murderous empire of Imperial Japan.

This exactly

+2
Inconvenient facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm European. Young people are indeed moving further to the right in western Europe. There are two issues driving it - immigration and housing. The younger generation doesn't accept the platitudes and social justice mantras of older generations. They look at their communities - whether in Sweden, France, Holland - and note that nearly all violent crime is committed by Arab and African immigrants. And it's younger people that are often the victims of it - from sexual assault to muggings to murder. Most immigrants to Europe do not accept western mores and values. And younger Europeans are tired of it. They will increasingly vote for anti-immigration parties.

Secondly, fewer and fewer Europeans can afford their own home - whether owning or renting. And this is also tied to immigration. They see how much their governments are spending to house and feed immigrants from Mali or Iraq. And that leads to resentment. The traditional left and center-left parties are often seen as out-of-touch dinosaurs that are completely removed from the day to day realities of average Europeans. The energy is increasingly with the right wing parties. Even in liberal and tolerant Holland, the far right candidate - Geert Wilders - got the most votes in the last election. And I suspect that trend will continue throughout western Europe. Young people are fed up, and they are untethered from the past. The Cold War is a long time ago. And World War II is something you read about in a history book. They will increasingly vote for the right because the left has failed to address the issues they are concerned about.

But it should be noted that the European right is nothing like the American right. Every European wants health insurance, pensions, social welfare, vacation time, affordable education, a sane climate policy etc etc. Immigration and the cost of housing is what drives the European right.

And this is why I’ve spent the last 8+ years warning Democrats to not just take the decline of public support for conservative economic policies for granted.

Imagine someone more competent than Trump with economic policies that match up more to Bernie Sanders—yet just as against immigration and social justice issues as Trump is.

I firmly believe there would be a very wide appeal to someone like that. And I don’t see the GOP staying a viable party in the future unless they take that sort of route.

But that route costs money. Europeans of all ilks are accustomed to paying higher taxes to get these services. A GOP can’t match Bernie’s policies without a platform of higher taxes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm European. Young people are indeed moving further to the right in western Europe. There are two issues driving it - immigration and housing. The younger generation doesn't accept the platitudes and social justice mantras of older generations. They look at their communities - whether in Sweden, France, Holland - and note that nearly all violent crime is committed by Arab and African immigrants. And it's younger people that are often the victims of it - from sexual assault to muggings to murder. Most immigrants to Europe do not accept western mores and values. And younger Europeans are tired of it. They will increasingly vote for anti-immigration parties.

Secondly, fewer and fewer Europeans can afford their own home - whether owning or renting. And this is also tied to immigration. They see how much their governments are spending to house and feed immigrants from Mali or Iraq. And that leads to resentment. The traditional left and center-left parties are often seen as out-of-touch dinosaurs that are completely removed from the day to day realities of average Europeans. The energy is increasingly with the right wing parties. Even in liberal and tolerant Holland, the far right candidate - Geert Wilders - got the most votes in the last election. And I suspect that trend will continue throughout western Europe. Young people are fed up, and they are untethered from the past. The Cold War is a long time ago. And World War II is something you read about in a history book. They will increasingly vote for the right because the left has failed to address the issues they are concerned about.

But it should be noted that the European right is nothing like the American right. Every European wants health insurance, pensions, social welfare, vacation time, affordable education, a sane climate policy etc etc. Immigration and the cost of housing is what drives the European right.

And this is why I’ve spent the last 8+ years warning Democrats to not just take the decline of public support for conservative economic policies for granted.

Imagine someone more competent than Trump with economic policies that match up more to Bernie Sanders—yet just as against immigration and social justice issues as Trump is.

I firmly believe there would be a very wide appeal to someone like that. And I don’t see the GOP staying a viable party in the future unless they take that sort of route.

+1

You can have a welfare state, or you can have open borders. You can’t have both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No young people are smarter than they are given credit for, if not for the indoctrination in American schools we would be seeing it here as well.

Interesting. Some people are America blaming schools and educators, which I find interesting. I have heard that language before — “indoctrination” in schools. IRL .

Where does that language or theory come from?

I heard Jordan Peterson talk about the over influence and over-therapy in kids. ie kids are being directed to therapists too much in the US (he explained it in a snazzy video). I can actually buy that. But Where is this blaming schools thing coming from? Is this in a study or survey that I missed?

I think it just always existed.
Think about it, the whole history course is now about how white people exploited all kinds of non white people.

Why is it SOOOO hard for you to hear that they kind of did?

Because it is history. History is violent and brutal. You think white people were the only bad people? Hell, why don't you go learn about the Arab slave trade from Africa, Ghengis Khan, Chinese and Indian slavery, slavery by indigenous tribes in South and Central America, or the murderous empire of Imperial Japan.

This exactly

+2
Inconvenient facts.

I agree that history is violent and brutal and that humans have enslaved other humans throughout our history. But that doesn't negate that the main enslavers in recent history were whites. The inconvenient facts post makes no sense. Both things can be true.

And modern day whites need to stop being so crazy about this. If you never enslaved anyone and treat all people kindly, you have nothing to feel guilty about. I don't go around feeling guilt for what other people have done. But I also would like to know more than just whitewashed history and would like to be part of building a better world for everyone. Why would you NOT want to do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because people have wised up to neoliberal stupidity which essentially just "WhItE PpL BaD!!".

How dare Europeans desire to remain European with European identities and values. Liberal want to import and infinite amount of poverty and diversity, even though those diverse groups coming in have completely antagonistic social and religious values as the countries they're flooding into. People have had their limits with immigration and liberals' kumbaya vision for the world that is pure lunacy.

You have clearly do not understand the situation in Europe if you think the liberals are encouraging the importation of poverty and diversity.

Freedom of movement was established under the EU to encourage flexible and mobile labour markets. It was in fact driven by free market economics. This means that any citizen of an EU country has the right to live and work in another country. It predictably resulted in a large movement of migrants from poorer countries to wealthier countries upon enlargement of the EU to include Eastern European countries.

Opposition to migrants in the UK largely sprung from the fairly rapid arrival of large numbers of Eastern Europeans, particularly Poles, in the UK which led to a perception that cheap labour was undercutting the wages and working conditions of locals. The reality was Eastern European workers were more easily exploited and generally were prepared to work for less money. This is somewhat true. Note that these new arrivals were largely white and Christian. In some small towns, changes happened very rapidly as large numbers of migrants arrived.

According to The Economist, areas that saw increases of over 200% in foreign-born population between 2001 and 2014 saw a majority of voters back leave in 94% of cases. The Economist concluded 'High numbers of migrants don't bother Britons; high rates of change do.' Consistent with that notion, research suggests that areas that saw significant influx of migration from Eastern Europe following the accession of 12 mainly Eastern European countries to the European Union in 2004 saw significant growth in support for the UK Independence Party and more likely to vote to leave the European Union.

So please note the negative attitudes towards migration were largely initially fueled by the sudden arrival of large numbers of white Christian migrants. The seeds of Brexit were sown by Eastern European migrants, not by migrants from outside the EU. Ironically, since Brexit, most migrants to the UK are now from outside the EU, particularly the Indian subcontinent and parts of Asia.

While true, this is irrelevant. The immigration issues today driving the shift right are not about Eastern Europeans.

It's not really about non-Eastern Europeans in some of these countries either. The article refers to a social influencer in Portugal.
You may be aware Portugal has one of the most severe housing and cost of living crises in Europe due to foreign investment in real estate, over-tourism, and the advent of the digital nomad (there are over 15,000 in Lisbon). Life is miserable for Portuguese who can barely afford to rent flat and houses if they can indeed find them. Once upon a time, young Portuguese (who almost all speak English) would move to London to spread their wings and look for work. This is no longer available to them.

People who are unhappy look for people to blame. It's definitely not non-white immigrants who are driving up the costs of living.

Again, This is misleading, if not explicitly false. High costs of housing are a result of several different factors, such as policies which are effectively subsidies and drive up prices. However, additional demand caused by uncontrolled migration is also a factor.