General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGreenwald calls-out the dominant Brexit narrative
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/25/brexit-is-only-the-latest-proof-of-the-insularity-and-failure-of-western-establishment-institutions/Brexit is Only the Latest Proof of the Insularity and Failure of Western Establishment Institutions
THE DECISION BY UK VOTERS to leave the EU is such a glaring repudiation of the wisdom and relevance of elite political and media institutions that – for once – their failures have become a prominent part of the storyline. Media reaction to the Brexit vote falls into two general categories: (1) earnest, candid attempts to understand what motivated voters to make this choice, even if that means indicting one’s own establishment circles, and (2) petulant, self-serving, simple-minded attacks on disobedient pro-leave voters for being primitive, xenophobic bigots (and stupid to boot), all to evade any reckoning with their own responsibility. Virtually every reaction that falls into the former category emphasizes the profound failures of western establishment factions; these institutions have spawned pervasive misery and inequality, only to spew condescending scorn at their victims when they object.
The Los Angeles Times‘ Vincent Bevins, in an outstanding and concise analysis, wrote that “both Brexit and Trumpism are the very, very wrong answers to legitimate questions that urban elites have refused to ask for thirty years”; in particular, “since the 1980s the elites in rich countries have overplayed their hand, taking all the gains for themselves and just covering their ears when anyone else talks, and now they are watching in horror as voters revolt.” The British journalist Tom Ewing, in a comprehensive Brexit explanation, said the same dynamic driving the UK vote prevails in Europe and North America as well: “the arrogance of neoliberal elites in constructing a politics designed to sideline and work around democracy while leaving democracy formally intact.”
In an interview with The New Statesman, the political philosopher Michael Sandel also said that the dynamics driving the pro-Brexit sentiment were now dominant throughout the west generally: “a large constituency of working-class voters feel that not only has the economy left them behind, but so has the culture, that the sources of their dignity, the dignity of labour, have been eroded and mocked by developments with globalisation, the rise of finance, the attention that is lavished by parties across the political spectrum on economic and financial elites, the technocratic emphasis of the established political parties.” After the market-venerating radicalism of Reagan and Thatcher, he said, “the centre left” – Blair and Clinton and various European parties – “managed to regain political office but failed to reimagine the mission and purpose of social democracy, which became empty and obsolete.”
(snip)
Corrupt elites always try to persuade people to continue to submit to their dominance in exchange for protection from forces that are even worse. That’s their game. But at some point, they themselves, and their prevailing order, become so destructive, so deceitful, so toxic, that their victims are willing to gamble that the alternatives will not be worse, or at least, they decide to embrace the satisfaction of spitting in the faces of those who have displayed nothing but contempt and condescension for them.
(boldface emphases added by me)
As I write this, two of the top five "Greatest Threads" here at DU are precisely the dominant Brexit narrative that Greenwald eviscerates above (with plenty more detail and evidence at the link). I think that DU can and should bring a more critical eye to the Brexit issue, and take the lessons of it to heart before the USA's politics goes similarly off the rails.
-app
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)There is an arrogance that runs with the oligarchy that is independent of party affiliation in the US, and is fueling the chaos in this election cycle.
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)appal_jack
(3,813 posts)
explain using Greenwald worldview.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)were heavily older and more politically conservative.
KPN
(15,643 posts)That simple comment is an excellent example of what he so accurately described. An institution/government that does not benefit the majority of its constituency is not of value to that constituency. What is so hard to understand about that?
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)cerebral cortex.
840high
(17,196 posts)xocet
(3,871 posts)Response to NuclearDem (Reply #2)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
TheFarseer
(9,322 posts)Brexit won. People here act like it lost 90-10% and is completely laughable. Most party elites just try to convince us 52% of brits are racist and can't afford to let on that there might be another explanation.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It's clear this was about immigration. Not all of it - but enough to make it pass. It passed because older conservatives voted. It's also why the more liberal areas of the UK, including Scotland and London, didn't vote for it.
TheFarseer
(9,322 posts)I think it's almost certain it would have just because of the increasing polarization of party politics. I really don't get folks who believe 100% of evetything can be explained by racism.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)It was a reaction to a black man being in power.
Number23
(24,544 posts)and pay him hand over fist to be loud and wrong to boot.
rpannier
(24,329 posts)Paul Mason a Remain supporter argues that it should happen, just not while Grove and Johnson are around to steer the ship
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/16/brexit-eu-referendum-boris-johnson-greece-tory
On June 6, Richard Tuck, the Frank G. Thomson Professor of Government at Harvard, laid out a pretty cogent argument for leaving in his piece 'The Left Case for Brexit'
And Peter Mandler, in his piece. 'Britain's Problem is a London Problem' lays out how the Remain camp failed miserably to understand the dynamics at play
When I return from holiday in England (Jul 3 - 10) I'll get back to you and see what people there think/thought
You may be right and me wrong or vice-verse
pampango
(24,692 posts)Fantasy Island" is set to govern. With liberal Scotland set to secede and join the EU, the rest of England and the UK will become even more conservative than it is now.
Unless a "lot of smart people on the left" were looking for a liberal independent, EU-member Scotland to emerge and for the UK run by the far-right, I doubt that this was the right time and method for Brexit. (A lot of 'not-so-smart' people on the right were hugely in favor of Brexit as this time and in this method.)
nikto
(3,284 posts)
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)You are right that the dominant narrative is strong here on DU, it is simplistic, and most criticism of that narrative is treated as siding with xenophobia, nationalism, RW mentality etc. I am happy to see that some are trying to look at this in a more nuanced way.
I may not agree with everything Greenwald is saying, but I'm glad he is saying it and it is being posted here. I also noticed some threads about Brexit in the Good Reads part of DU with articles by Yves Smith and others who are looking at this more clearly without partisan blinders.
I think here, in the US, especially during an election year, we get so caught up in binary thinking that we can't conceive of a third (or fourth, or fifth) angle on anything. It's a shame.
Thanks for posting this.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)bbgrunt
(5,281 posts)ancianita
(36,053 posts)
arikara
(5,562 posts)The old crowd would not be so quick to agree with the dominant narrative of today.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
transatlantica
(49 posts)
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...from Sid, who thinks we are pie-in-the-sky dreamers when we support single-payer health care here in the US -- from the comfort of his home in Canada -- where they, and he, already have it.
But he never fails to denigrate anyone who expresses liberal, but non-Third-Way opinions.
And especially Greenwald, who seems to have really gotten under the skin of a large contingent here at DU.
Well in this case, Sid, Greenwald is 100% correct. He isn't denying that xenophobia played its part; he is merely pointing out that it is a direct result of policies that benefit the elites and leave everyone else behind, creating fertile grounds for the demagogues to come in and whip up anger against "the other".
But that, apparently, is a little too complicated for some here to grasp. It is much easier to say that it's nothing but a bunch of stupid racists, with no real grievances.
And that, of course, is the formula for fomenting more rage. Since that attitude is largely shared by the elites who have set up our current structures, then more rage from the masses is sure to ensue. Hope y'all enjoy it. I, for one, am quite worried about how this will play out. I am very glad we have people like Greenwald to so eloquently express the TRUTH about these issues.
rpannier
(24,329 posts)that it was pie-in-the-sky to revolt against the UK
It's always the same with him, 'Don't rock the boat. Don't make waves. Give it time - 1000 years - and it'll be better.'
I've given up responding to him
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Without reading responses to this thread, I'll predict that the knee-jerk response will be to attack Greenwald. He's not part of the establishment, so he's always a hated target when he calls out the establishment.
He's right. Neoliberals would like to focus on xenophobia and bigotry, which certainly exist, while they distract from their economic and political agendas that are the source of much of the problem.
And yes, I've seen DU embracing neoliberalism, submitting to that "protection," at a rapidly increasing pace in the last several days.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)the "Leave" campaign was mostly about xenophobia, the leaders of that campaign were by and large "elites" cynically exploiting the resentments of the working classes to their own ends by blatantly lying about what would happen in the event of a "leave" vote ("£350 million a week for the NHS? Never said that!" "Well we won't actually see much reduction in immigration", "all those things we said? those weren't actually promises, that was just a series of possibilities"
.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)I recall a conversation I had with one of the Hanford nuclear waste site activists back in the early 1990's. He told me that as the cancers climbed and the local economy fell apart through the 1970's, and the full scope of pollution on the Hanford Reservation in Washington became known many hate groups and fringe activists attempted to leverage the issue to their own ends. The KKK recruited there on the basis that the nuclear waste was due to Jewish bankers, Stormfront types said in local meetings that the USA cared more about giving welfare to black urbanites than helping rural white people, LaRouch-ites said whatever nonsense they always do, the Revolutionary Communist Party said that capitalism depended upon poisoning the working class, etc. All of them saw the crisis of nuclear waste ruining a whole community not as something that needed to be solved, but as an opportunity to spread their preferred narrative. My activist friend was smart enough to ignore these campaigns, and stuck to pressuring the US Department of Defense to clean up its mess (an issue not yet resolved today, from my understanding). But some of his neighbors embraced the Klan or other hatemongers. Desperate people will take desperate measures.
I see the failure of modern western neoliberal entities as a similar moment, but on a global scale. If we don't fix the underlying issues, the racists and xenophobes will definitely make hay of it. But their hateful opportunism does not excuse modern western neoliberal institutions for their oligarchic and anti-democratic practices that cause the underlying problems.
-app
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)No one is going to lose their right to vote due to being called out as a xenophobe. So they're xenophobic, so what? If they shrug and own it, what then? Wouldn't it be preferable to engage and try to change their minds via dialog rather than just spew useless vitriol?
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)
cprise
(8,445 posts)Economic inequality is having repercussions, creating instability. Its astounding that people on DU can't admit that. Learn some history!
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)KPN
(15,643 posts)xenophobes? That view strikes me as overly simplistic ... and shallow. Plumbing the depths of Brexit (and the general rise of populism on-going in the western world today) it's not too hard to recognize that distrust, resentment and exasperation of the establishment (it is so nice to see that term return to the relevance and notoriety it held inthe 70s-early 70s) run much deeper and broader than xenophobia.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Human101948
(3,457 posts)Just tired of being screwed by the one percenters.
The parallel here in the USA is that some people support Trump because they know the powers that be are screwing them royally. Many supported Bernie because they know they are getting screwed royally. Some are xenophobic and racist, many are not. But, truth is, they are getting screwed royally.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)That has NOTHING to do with it at all. Anyone who says "blah blah one percent blah blah austerity blah blah Greece" should shut up and go away because they have NO IDEA AT ALL what they're talking about re the "Brexit" referendum.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)You seem to be very sure of yourself, there must be an advanced degree involved.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)That would be that I live in the UK and have seen this whole referendum campaign up close. I've seen the "Leave" campaigners on television, I've gotten their flyers through the door, I've seen their supporters, I've heard their arguments. I know much more about it than any ignorant American who just went scrambling for something that conforms with their pre-existing political prejudices.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)I bow to your superiority almighty Brit.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)clearly makes me more qualified to speak to it than you who have no clue, I'd say.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)What has certainly happened is that decades of globalization, deregulation, and policy changes that favored the wealthy have left Britain a more unequal place, with vast regional disparities. “It’s the shape of our long lasting and deeply entrenched national geographic inequality that drove differences in voting patterns,” Torsten Bell, the director of the Resolution Foundation, a bipartisan think tank, commented on Friday morning. “The legacy of increased national inequality in the 1980s, the heavy concentration of those costs in certain areas, and our collective failure to address it has more to say about what happened last night than shorter term considerations from the financial crisis or changed migration flows.”
That argument sounds persuasive to me. On Thursday night, it was the early announcement of a huge Leave vote in Sunderland, a depressed city in the Northeast that used to be a big shipbuilding center, that indicated the way the night was headed and caused the pound sterling to plummet in the Asian markets. Meanwhile, the Remain vote was consistently stronger in prosperous areas. Economics matters.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/why-the-remain-campaign-lost-the-brexit-vote?mbid=nl_160625_Daily&CNDID=27694289&spMailingID=9111072&spUserID=MTE0MTYzMzk5ODg3S0&spJobID=942410256&spReportId=OTQyNDEwMjU2S0
KPN
(15,643 posts)if the xenophobes who voted in favor of Brexit hadn't voted, the Remain supporters would have WON ... and the hell with the 45% (or whatever that specific number is) of voters who voted for Brexit because they lost faith in the institutions that affect their livelihood, and that have served the 1% -- the elites -- but not them.
Brexit is not the fault of xenophobes, but the fault of elites responsible for economic policies that dislocated the millions of people who voted for Brexit. They got it wrong and ignored all of the warning signs that have been flashing for two decades now. Brexit is the result of mass discontent with "leaders".
The establishment ignores the masses at its own risk here in the US as well ... and, yes, xenophobes make up a share of the millions who are discontent -- but they are small part of the pie -- as they were in the UK.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)And also sadly ignorant. Do you know who was leading the campaign? Boris fucking Johnson. Old Etonian, Oxbridge, as "establishment" as you can get. Along with people like Nigel Farage (privately educated former City commodities broker). The "Leave" campaign was largely led by members of the "establishment". With the goal of making the UK more "neoliberal" than is allowed under EU regulations relating to human rights and worker protection and the environment. Painting this as some victory against "the establishment" is shockingly stupid.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)Because you just answered your own post.
Response to Human101948 (Reply #209)
Post removed
KPN
(15,643 posts)I'm not defending the correctness of Brexit. This whole discussion is a result of you saying it's all about xenophobes and fear-mongering. All I'm saying is the Brexit vote is far mnore complicated than that -- and to disregard that is, using your word, stupid.
KPN
(15,643 posts)Are all those people irrational? Do you have anything more meaningful to say than "blah, blah, blah", "shut up and go away"?
Absent substantive argument, your post seems childish at best.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)
pampango
(24,692 posts)strongest unions and most equitable incomes in the world.
If Brits are tired of that they are in for a rude awakening. Instead of the EU they will turn things over to the Conservative Party and their next prime minister, Boris Johnson who, in his own words, wants to turn the UK into a "hyper-capitalist island freed from EU regulation", a "neoliberal fantasy island".
There is a reason that British unions, Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders all supported the UK remaining in the EU - and it wasn't because they support neo-liberalism.
Responding to the unhappiness of your face by cutting of your nose is not an effective tactic.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)
TomVilmer
(1,832 posts)Boris Johnson who, in his own words, wants to turn the UK into a "hyper-capitalist island freed from EU regulation", a "neoliberal fantasy island".
Nice quotes, but Google is no help - where did you pick them?
KPN
(15,643 posts)KPN
(15,643 posts)other than it's irrational on its face. Why do people act irrationally? Or put another way, is it likely that lack of education and economic well-being play a role in xenophobia?
If so, doing something to help alleviate those growing conditions might affect levels of xenophobia. Or, neoliberal could just find ways to get xenophobes to vote according to their views.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)poll after poll has shown this. It has nothing to do with "conditions". It has to do with racist fearmongering and overt lies on the front pages of right-wing newspapers.
KPN
(15,643 posts)I get it. Short sighted basically.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)Anytime someone says "blah blah neoliberal" in reference to what happened with the UK's "Brexit" vote I know I can safely disregard their opinions. The "Leave" campaign has been a right-wing "let's close the door to immigration and scrap the European Court of Human Rights" thing from the beginning.
The facts tell a different story: culture and personality, not material circumstances, separate Leave and Remain voters. This is not a class conflict so much as a values divide that cuts across lines of age, income, education and even party. A nice way to show this is to examine the relationship between so-called ‘authoritarianism’ questions such as whether children should obey or the death penalty is appropriate, and support for the EU. The British Election Study’s internet panel survey of 2015-16 asked a sample of over 24,000 individuals about their views on these matters and whether they would vote to leave the EU. The graph below, restricted to White British respondents, shows almost no statistically significant difference in EU vote intention between rich and poor. By contrast, the probability of voting Brexit rises from around 20 per cent for those most opposed to the death penalty to 70 per cent for those most in favour. Wealthy people who back capital punishment back Brexit. Poor folk who oppose the death penalty support Remain.
A similar pattern holds in the British Values Survey for the strongly worded question probing respondents’ desire to see those who commit sex crimes ‘publicly whipped, or worse.’ Political psychologists show a close relationship between feeling fearful of change, desiring certainty, and calling for harsh penalties for criminals and discipline for children. These are people who want a more stable, ordered world. By contrast, those who seek change and novelty are willing to embrace immigration and the EU.
Precisely the same relationship – based on values rather than class – characterises support for Donald Trump. “I’ve found a single statistically significant variable predicts whether a voter supports Trump—and it’s not race, income or education levels: It’s authoritarianism,” wrote Matthew MacWilliams back in January.
http://www.fabians.org.uk/brexit-voters-not-the-left-behind/
KPN
(15,643 posts)They say nothing about xenophobia which is what you attribute the vote to. There is nothing surprising about the fact that some wealthy people have a conscience about the current economic system/structure and would vote in manners that would alter it. There are plenty of economic progressives who are wealthy.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)okay then, I see you're utterly impervious to reason, have fun in your fantasyland.
KPN
(15,643 posts)Listen, you are making a zillion assumptions about what I think -- and from what I can tell, they are all wrong. At the base, you assume that I think Brexit is good -- you are wrong about that. The European Union was a great idea -- but in my view, it has lost its way over time, just like the USA, in following trickle-down economic theory and, more recently, austerity, despite all of the evidence that it is not working. If the EU was working better, i.e., serving everyone better, the populist opposition to it would not exist to the extent it currently does.
As far as why Brits voted Brexit, my point has simply been that it continues to be foolish to discount and disregard the failure of trickle down theory and the growing popular discontent that has resulted. Sure, playing to xenophobia and other fears helped the Brexit front carry the day. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that. We have the same going on here with Trump (and the GOP frankly).
But blaming the outcome of the vote on xenophobes would be like me blaming Sanders' loss to Hillary on the southern blacks because without their en masse support of Hillary, Bernie would have won. That argument ignores all of the underlying reasons behind people's choice when they actually vote. That's basically what I think you are doing. And I have no idea why you would ignore underlying reasons driving the millions of non-xenophobes who voted Brexit.
AntiBank
(1,339 posts)for the wrong reasons.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)Much of it was drawn from natural Tory voters - predominantly older, perhaps relatively affluent Little Englanders with a longstanding dislike of immigration and pretty much anything that isn't British. Often too polite (or devious) to be overtly racist, but getting a kick out of the winking racism their political heroes on the right serve up from time to time. Many tolerate the more 'one nation' Tories but idolize the Europhobes and ideologues in the Party. They don't resent the establishment, they resent anything or anybody that isn't establishment enough (British establishment that is). The Tories got 11,000,000 mill votes in 2015. Brexit was made for many of them.
Then there was the natural UKIP vote - they got 4,000,000 votes in last years general election i think, more than the Liberal Democrat party - and UKIP only really targeted 25 out of a total of 650 seats in that election. They had national scope in the referendum of course so there could well have been additional pent up demand for their brand of petty fascism.
In terms of the natural Labour supporters who voted Brexit, UKIP and their noxious cronies really did pull out all the stops to make sure that their pain and frustration was minted into resentment of immigration and the EU. Of course it didn't work with everyone, but it worked with a lot. I saw the impact among my own family and friends and encountered many, many Brexit voters who, rather than pointing the finger at successive Conservative and Blairite governments for their economic distress, blamed it on immigration and that fictitious £350 million a week we were paying into EU coffers.
pampango
(24,692 posts)The right played on voters fear of immigrants and OTHERS, just like Trump does here.
Sometimes FEAR wins. Donald is counting on it.
cali
(114,904 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)
Response to MohRokTah (Reply #9)
Post removed
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)It's sad somebody who supports the rightwing and is a racist gets so much play on DU, too. I mean seriously, the guy supported a Neo-Nazi for goodness sake!
Don't you agree?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)The Admins are the ones who included it and precisely for the reason I used it, too!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)blame the Admins?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Before you alert, I want to say that I fully support the Democratic Party and in no way advocate voting Republicon. But we shouldn't be in fear here of mentioning the major chasm in our party. The bitter primary battle was proof. Please don't bother with rationalizations about how every primary is contentious. Not like this one. The Progressives that have stood up will not "sit down and shut up."
How people feel about Glen Greenwald shows the difference in the sides of our Party. One side thinks he is a hero, willing to speak truth to power while the other side show a deep hatred for him. We are not close on this issue as many other issues.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts) ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)With Trump on the "build a wall" side, and many more traditional moderates on the internationalist side.
It was exactly the same in the Brexit vote. Extremist leftists and rightists equally imagined that erecting barriers and bashing immigrants would be a good thing. The young, in Britain at least, weren't so stupid.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)ask on which issues do you think the Progressives are extreme? And after asking that question 100 times, when we are called extremist or ideologues, I have yet to get an answer.
Part of the time the Clinton supporters call us extremists and part of the time they are claiming that there is no chasm in the Party. I wish they'd make up their minds.
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)...by stating that anyone of the left who, like you, refuses to vote for the Democratic nominee, because you're so extremist you can't tell the difference between Democrats and Donald Trump, is so far out in koo-koo-land, "extremist" is the nice way to describe you.
Democrats make up about 35% of the country, of which the people who voted for Sanders made up about 45%, meaning 17%. Of them, only 8% are Bernie or Busters, which by my math, is less than 1.5% of the general voting public. Given that that percentage is less than a tenth of Americans who believe the Earth revolves around the sun, one might say with reasonable certainty that that's fringe.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I will vote for Trump or stay home is a STRAWMAN.
Now I will again ask the question that you are terrified to answer. When you vilify the left, on which issues do you disagree with us?
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)You are exceptionally clear about how you are going to (not) vote in the general in the link I provided.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)still_one
(92,187 posts)ljm2002
(10,751 posts)
puke: fbc
(1,668 posts)"since the 1980s the elites in rich countries have overplayed their hand, taking all the gains for themselves and just covering their ears when anyone else talks, and now they are watching in horror as voters revolt."
Democrats almost overthrew their establishment elites this primary season. The republicans did.
If the US had a Brexit type vote, where the fascists and racists on the right would combine with the disaffected working class on the left, we'd vote "Leave" too. In fact, this entire primary season was one long "leave" vote for most of the population.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Response to Cryptoad (Reply #16)
Post removed
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)on situations that are nothing about that narrative.
Several folks have the facts here including Spider Jerusalem who actually lives in Britain and Muriel Volestrangler in this excellent post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7957988
Looking ahead to the Referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union on June 23rd, which, if any, issues do you think will be very important to you in helping you decide which way to vote?
Answers from those voting 'leave':
52%: The number of immigrants coming into Britain
22%: Britain's ability to make its own laws
18%: The impact on Britain's economy
14%: Impact on public services/housing
10%: The cost of EU immigration on Britain's welfare system
7%: Cost of EU membership fees
5%: The impact on British jobs
Others under 5%.
page 36: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/pm-16-june-2016-tables.pdf
Inequality may have set the scene for this, but the right wing media has successfully stirred up anti-immigrant feeling - especially in older age groups.
Greenwald acknowledges that Corbyn is 'authentically left-wing', and was elected leader of the Labour party. And Corbyn campaigned for Remain. The majority of Labour voters (about two thirds) voted Remain. The malcontents were mainly right wing.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The Classic case is from the 1950s, two surveys were done by two different auto makers, one asked people what type of car they will buy. The response was a car for four people, small fuel efficient engine, good mileage nothing fancy. The other car maker asked people what type of car they NEIGHBOR wanted. The response was a large car, a large engine, a lot of chrome and tall fins (This was the 1950s). Both companies built car based on their surveys,. The company that asked what people wanted in their cars, folded no one bought they car. The car maker that asked what type of car their neighbor wanted, make a lot of money.
That story is taught to this day in marketing classes. People what to response that makes then seem logic and something they see at present driving their decisions. The problem is people are driven by unseen forces and at the same time want to appear logical. Thus people decided saying immigrants was the reason for the decline in their economic decline is based on their present impression and appears to be logical. Austerity has driven a lot of hardship to a lot of people but at the same time people want to appear logical, thus they opt for immigration as what is driving wages down. They also look at local politicians helping them as a solution to their economic decline.
Just a comment that just because people said they voted one way do to X, does NOT mean X is wanted forced them to vote the way they did. In most cases it ends up being economics, for if all boats are going up, opposition to immigration and racism tends to decline (that is what happened in the US in the 1940s till the 1960s), on the other hand if the lower economic classes see a decline in their standard of living, they will look for reasons including racism and other rationales. We have to understand that what people SAY they did something is often NOT the real reason, but some sort of rationale, when the real reason is economics.
PaulaFarrell
(1,236 posts)It's not something people want to admit to, so they cloak it in other issues. No one would be ashmed to say they were voting for economic reasons, so why didn't they say that? It doesn't make logical sense, especially when you read the wailing and gnashing of teeth, 'don't call me racist!'.
I also live in the UK and this was an immigration vote - remember, the Tories were only re-elected last year and this referendum was a promise they made to stop Tories switching to UKIP. It is the Tories who are the architects of austerity here, but then people often do not vote in their best interest, they vote their prejudices and favorite 'single issue'.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)Looking ahead to the Referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union on June 23rd, which, if any, issues do you think will be very important to you in helping you decide which way to vote?
Answers from those voting 'leave':
52%: The number of immigrants coming into Britain
22%: Britain's ability to make its own laws
18%: The impact on Britain's economy
14%: Impact on public services/housing
10%: The cost of EU immigration on Britain's welfare system
7%: Cost of EU membership fees
5%: The impact on British jobs
Others under 5%.
page 36: https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/pm-16-june-2016-tables.pdf
Inequality may have set the scene for this, but the right wing media has successfully stirred up anti-immigrant feeling - especially in older age groups.
Greenwald acknowledges that Corbyn is 'authentically left-wing', and was elected leader of the Labour party. And Corbyn campaigned for Remain. The majority of Labour voters (about two thirds) voted Remain. The malcontents were mainly right wing.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)In other words, your own link shows that more than 3/4 of the respondents felt that the locus of control had slipped further from their reach, and that was a problem.
-app
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)22%: Britain's ability to make its own laws
18%: The impact on Britain's economy
7%: Cost of EU membership fees
5%: The impact on British jobs
versus the immigration ones, which are what add up to 76%:
52%: The number of immigrants coming into Britain
14%: Impact on public services/housing
10%: The cost of EU immigration on Britain's welfare system
(and 'the impact on British jobs' can be taken 2 ways; it could be "there will be fewer jobs overall", or "immigrants are taking too many jobs". But, for the sake of argument, we'll take it as a non-immigrant one).
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Could you use some...words...to make a point in reply?
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)massive increase in racist incidents with Brexiteers shouting racist abuse at obvious "foreigners" and telling them "we won, time for you to go home"? If you don't see how that relates then you're not clever enough to be having this conversation.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)That they show nothing about xenophobia.
marchellojones
(112 posts)conversation but when David Beckham got sent off in 98 world cup, people were ready to lynch him. Month later it was all forgotten. British people get emotional sometimes.
pampango
(24,692 posts)The whole Republican Party is built on anti-immigration. Every Democratic candidate is pro-immigration and seeking a way to enact comprehensive immigration reform.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)nativist and non-nativist, though I'm sure some liberal non-nativists joined their ranks.
If Trump wins here in November the same will be true. For trump to win he has to hope that some liberal non-nativists join the ranks of his conservative nativist and non-nativist supporters. I doubt Trump will get many liberal votes but it ain't over til it's over.
If the only way we can beat Trump is with the help of racists, nativists, homophobes, I would not be happy. I figure the only way he can beat us is with the help of such voters.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)I interpreted the 14%: Impact on public services/housing, and 10%: The cost of EU immigration on Britain's welfare system as both non-xenophobia-related since whether or not the immigrants are there is one issue, and how their costs are funded is another.
The EU not only mandated that Britain accept a certain number of immigrants, but failed to support Britain's public housing and other sectors in a manner that would have mitigated the costs borne by British citizens. One need not be racist at all to be angry that you were bumped 50 places down the list for public housing due to an EU mandate.
-app
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)Britain's public housing is not something that the EU has any control or influence over. It's the fault of the Tories who endlessly made sure councils had to sell off houses while making it impossible for them to build more, and all politicians (national and local) for restricting the amount of new private houses.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)
TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)That one alone reduces the non-immigration reasons to 48%, by its very definition. That doesn't even include the other responses that are related to immigration issues.
Your assertion makes no sense.
mythology
(9,527 posts)When you add 52 and 76 you get more than 100. Obviously people were able to vote for more than one thing. But a flat majority of people voted for immigration. More than double for any other item.
Oh and lumping the cost of immigration on the national welfare system as not immigration is at best disingenuous. Not to mention how do you differentiate between costs on housing that would also go to immigrants.
Greenwald is continuing is habit of being willing to twist any evidence to support the conclusion he wanted from the beginning. The Brexit vote was clearly based on bigotry and hatred.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)uponit7771
(90,335 posts)happyslug
(14,779 posts)The Classic case is from the 1950s, two surveys were done by two different auto makers, one asked people what type of car they will buy. The response was a car for four people, small fuel efficient engine, good mileage nothing fancy. The other car maker asked people what type of car they NEIGHBOR wanted. The response was a large car, a large engine, a lot of chrome and tall fins (This was the 1950s). Both companies built car based on their surveys,. The company that asked what people wanted in their cars, folded no one bought they car. The car maker that asked what type of car their neighbor wanted, make a lot of money.
That story is taught to this day in marketing classes. People what to response that makes then seem logic and something they see at present driving their decisions. The problem is people are driven by unseen forces and at the same time want to appear logical. Thus people decided saying immigrants was the reason for the decline in their economic decline is based on their present impression and appears to be logical. Austerity has driven a lot of hardship to a lot of people but at the same time people want to appear logical, thus they opt for immigration as what is driving wages down. They also look at local politicians helping them as a solution to their economic decline.
Just a comment that just because people said they voted one way do to X, does NOT mean X is wanted forced them to vote the way they did. In most cases it ends up being economics, for if all boats are going up, opposition to immigration and racism tends to decline (that is what happened in the US in the 1940s till the 1960s), on the other hand if the lower economic classes see a decline in their standard of living, they will look for reasons including racism and other rationales. We have to understand that what people SAY they did something is often NOT the real reason, but some sort of rationale, when the real reason is economics.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,311 posts)It's not as if economics was not brought up in the election; the Remain case was primarily "the economy will be better if we stay in the EU". You're arguing that you knew the real drivers behind British voters better than the voters knew themselves. You don't have evidence for that, just your opinion that you know better than they do.
Scientific
(314 posts)interesting perspective
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)is the solution nor the Problem in stopping the growth of Corporate Socialism that was seeded and promoted by Conservative Economic Doctrine in EU. Greenwald is unable to even frame the problem and once again chasing his tail!
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Not really surprising when you think about it.
TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)Those renowned experts on British politics.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)it's not surprising at all.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Anyone who knows what Greenwalds schtick is could have written this for him in advance.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)
ismnotwasm
(41,976 posts)Hyperbolic, meandering article. I'll never get the time back from reading that.
Aaand...tucked way down in there...what's this?
So is Brexit a good thing or a bad thing?
PSPS
(13,594 posts)Greenwald is correct, of course. In this case, though, any opinion contrary to the "official" DU stance means you are uninformed or stupid.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)we probably have a better idea than you, or Greenwald.
Dworkin
(164 posts)Hi,
I have lost count of the people I meet who said "I'm not racist but...." before going on to criticise immigrants in the UK.
Interestingly, no one doing this in my presence drew a distinction between EU immigrants and others, although immigration from outside the EU has been more. I suspect some conflation on this point.
D.
Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)and post-referendum there has been a lot of public expression of racism directed at people who aren't immigrants from the EU (Indian/Pakistani, Muslim, Sikh, etc, visibly brown people, not white Europeans) telling them "we won, you need to go home now". And one of the big slogans of the "Vote Leave" campaign was "take back control" (which seems to be a kind of dog-whistle related to "take back control of our borders" . A significant number of the "Leave" voters are...well, a little thick, to be charitable.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)agenda, which generally has nothing to do with it. It's hilarious to see. Bernie supporters claiming Bernie inspired it. Anti-Establishment people claiming it is about the Establishment. Glenn has to be relevant, the vote just happened, so he weaves it into his preexisting narrative agenda.
bbgrunt
(5,281 posts)
bucolic_frolic
(43,148 posts)Elect Hillary and allow the GOP Congress to tie her up as progressives
try to drag her left, which gives us time to work on our gerrymandering
predicament
or
elect Trump and sign the country over to Paul Ryan's budget and agenda.
Democrats will be reduced to filibusters and sit-in's.
Take your choice.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)I called it out long ago.....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2353888
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Unbelieveable.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)IMO both LW and RW populists are two sides of the same coin, they want to go back to a mythical "golden age" when all was supposedly right with the world. My usual talking point against these people is that the answer to Globalist Capitalism is a Globalist labor movement and Globalist Socialism, not nostalgia about an idealized past prosperity that was ultimately based on the Capitalist exploitation of the developing world.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)Nice find. Thanks for posting. His backpedaling isn't terribly convincing.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)often wonder at attorneys who take up the civil defense of property rights of those who advocate violence.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)He's obviously a sheister, millionaire click bait journalist. Takes checks from billionaires, bitches about them.
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)it's at the TOP of the post:
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2005/11/gop-fights-itself-on-illegal.html
That was a 6 yrs ago: 3 weeks after I began blogging, when I had zero readers. I've discussed many times before how there were many uninformed things I believed back then, before I focused on politics full-time - due to uncritically ingesting conventional wisdom, propaganda, etc. I've written many times since then about how immigrants are exploited by the Right for fear-mongering purposes. I'm 100% in favor of amnesty, think defeat of the DREAM Act was an act of evil, etc. That said, I do think illegal immigration is a serious problem: having millions of people live without legal rights; having a legal scheme that is so pervasively disregarded breeds contempt for the rule of law; virtually every country - not just the U.S. insists on border control because having a manageable immigration process is vital on multiple levels. But that post is something I wrote literally a few weeks after I began blogging when nobody was reading my blog; it was anything but thoughtful, contemplative, and informed, and - like so many things I thought were true then - has nothing to do with what I believe now.
That's why Obama cultists have to dig back 6 years into my archives to try to find things to discredit me.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Sure.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)TwilightZone
(25,471 posts)pretty much went out the window, especially after he said they're exactly like Bush cultists.
"I didn't really mean it" seems a little hollow in that context.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... is one of the reasons why a lot of winger repentance rings hollow.
Hell... even on DU stuff has to be sourced ... just taking someones word for it good or bad doesn't fly
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)He's politically stuck in the "edgy teenage anarchist" phase.
EU regulations are protecting British workers and labor unions from conservatives wanting to go Full Thatcherism.
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)Still bullshit though, but somewhat more eloquent bullshit.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)
yurbud
(39,405 posts)Do you deny that they have hollowed out our democracy and work around it?
That they screw the middle and working class while filling their own pockets with all the gains in productivity that have resulted from technological advancement?
Every hour of our work produces more wealth, but that wealth only goes to the investor class not the people doing the work.
Then when wars to control gas, oil, and routes to transport the same produce oceans of refugees, those same people who already feel economically precarious resent the refugees instead of looking past them to those who are driving the refugees out of their homes.
This is the basic economic reality of our time. People have noticed and want it to change.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)and their reasons don't agree with Greenwalds take at all.
Chakab
(1,727 posts)they're practically yelling from the rooftops that they're fed up with foreigners.
I agree that not all concerns about immigration are invalid, but it is patently obvious that bigotry was a driving force behind the leave campaign and votes.
Response to Chakab (Reply #106)
Name removed Message auto-removed
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Sometimes it is what it is....and this was fueled by right-wing smears against immigrants more than anything else. ...
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)They outright lied in their campaign to exit the EU. But the main focus of the lies was on immigration--the pro-Brexit elite knew the 84% white Brits would fall for those lies. The Brexit vote was wrong on so many levels. You can't put lipstick on that pig by repeating one of the pro-Brexit bullshit slogans.
yurbud
(39,405 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Demagogues being demagogues?
yurbud
(39,405 posts)I'm not sure if Trump's demagoguery serves any bigger agenda than his own ego.
TiberiusB
(487 posts)Last edited Sun Jun 26, 2016, 10:49 PM - Edit history (1)
Trump is pursuing an agenda that serves Trump, which is hardly a surprise. However, it can hardly be argued credibly that the GOP hasn't been leveraging the same misogyny and racism for decades to push their own agenda. And therein lies the problem, for me, with the superficial analysis of the Brexit vote that tries to dumb it down to just simple racism. Yes, rampant nativism dripping with overt racism fueled the vote itself, but what brought the UK to this point?
Think of it like the discovery of HIV. This may seem odd, but stick with me. Back in the 70's, gay men were dying at an alarming rate due to high incidences of certain types of pneumonia and cancer. It took years of research to find the culprit, but finally HIV was identified and, after a lot of political and social debate, action taken. Now imagine if those early researchers had simply settled on treating just the obvious problems, the cancers and other infections. If that were the plan, we would be trapped in an endless loop of fighting one opportunistic infection after another in a slow march to a predictably fatal outcome. They looked a bit harder and now we know the truth and have decades of progress to show for it.
Now replace "HIV" with "neo-liberalism" and "cancer' with "racism". Neo-liberal economic policies and the associated consequences (austerity, inequality, job loss, diminished educational opportunies, TTIP, etc.) create ever increasing pressure on the middle and lower classes, many of whom are at a loss to see a way out of their predicament. Along comes a Trump or a UKIP, proclaiming the system corrupt. They point to all the immigrants the elites are welcoming into the country to take jobs and spread disease and wrap their message in some pseudo heroic nonsense about "taking their country back!" Those destructive messages find willing minds among the disenfranchised and uneducated, an increasingly desperate group who are all too quick to throw their loyalty behind any slick snakeoil salesman with promises of a return to glory. It seems cliche to go the the WWII well and bring up Hitler, but here we are. Take an economically ravaged, post WWI Germany, add a bucket of deeply wounded national pride, point a finger or two at the Jews, the gypsies, and the homosexuals, and before you know it, you get WWII.
While many here are seasoned experts at dismissing everything with the byline "Greenwald" in it with deep and well reasoned arguments like or "Greenwald...BOO!", I think it might help to consider the possibility that the Brexit vote might be indicative of both a deep nativism AND a growing distrust of government. Getting people to recognize what neo-liberalism is and how to effectively fight it without giving in to simplistic pandering and racial hatred is the problem, no matter what side of the pond you're from. I don't really see anyone claiming that there was no racism or nativism involved in the Brexit results. I see plenty of people arguing that there is more to the story, and that if we don't want to repeat this scenario again, we need to treat the disease and not just the symptom.
yurbud
(39,405 posts)There are some critics of Chomsky, Pilger, and respected voices on the left and I take their criticism with about as much weight, especially since it is seldom backed by evidence.
LuvNewcastle
(16,844 posts)Neoliberalism created this underclass of uneducated resentful people, and then neoliberals are shocked when someone comes along and exploits that resentfulness. These people have been shat upon continuously by a financial system that has diverted virtually all the gains from their labor, but they're supposed to sit back and eat their fucking peas. Uneducated people don't know the best way to make their voices heard, but things eventually come to a boiling point and in their anger, they throw vulnerable people in society on the bonfire when they're ready to burn it all down. It's a shame, but it has happened so many times in history that it should be no surprise now. The peasants will not put up with being ignored forever. Economic problems often become masked as social upheaval. Widening opportunities and better distribution of wealth are the remedies for an intolerant society.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts) 
wysi
(1,512 posts)Descending to pick over the bones of the UK economy. And those wanting to get rid of pesky environmental and related rules that "hurt profits".
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I don't see why this is so hard for so many people to grasp.
The EU sets standards which members' labor laws must meet.
Tories want to lower those standards. If they stay in the EU, they can't.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)They've (quite knowingly) created and maintained a precariat in this country - they like it, it suits them and their cronies - but it's nothing short of heartbreaking for those of us struggling to stay afloat on zero hour contracts, poverty level wages and punishing rents.
Blairite Labour governments don't have entirely clean hands in this context either, but what the Tories are particularly adept at is dodging responsibility for their actions. They've been using the EU as a scapegoat for years.
I know that the Tories love selective austerity, that it's second nature to them, that they need absolutely no external prompting when it comes to visiting it on the working poor and other vulnerable groups. I know that, but many others don't. There's always another culprit pushed forward for vilification: the EU and (by implication and dog whistles) the immigrants, global economic conditions, cleaning up after an outgoing, oh so profligate (LOL) Labour government............
The chief irony of the Brexit fiasco is that it's EU standards that have kept Tory hands off the workplace rights we have left.
So here we are, post Brexit. What's in the offing? A gung ho, freshly mandated Boris Johnson or the like, with even more scope to do what the Conservatives like doing best. It's hard to see any sort victory for the left in that, I certainly don't feel like we've struck a blow against the establishment.
AntiBank
(1,339 posts) Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)“the arrogance of neoliberal elites in constructing a politics designed to sideline and work around democracy while leaving democracy formally intact.”
Fucking nailed it.
840high
(17,196 posts)Akamai
(1,779 posts)other manifestations of corporate and oligarch greed -- e.g., monopolies, tax evasion, taking over our electoral system, having the mainstream media distract us with the latest shiny object -- our economic and overall wellbeing has been diminished.
The poor and middle-class are hurting and the wealthy and the Republicans don't give a damn.
pampango
(24,692 posts)island' vision for the UK).
The UK as a member of the EU had high labor, high regulatory and high environmental standards tied to their trade with other EU countries. Now they will not - particularly under Conservative Johson's vision.
IF (a BIG IF) Brits were voting against "free trade", they really did not think this through. If they were voting against immigrants, they are very likely to get what they want. And if they need a wall in the English Channel, Americans can recommend just the man to build it.
Akamai
(1,779 posts)job prospects, their futures. It sure seems that this vote is one way for them to try to "cast off the yoke" imposed on them by the wealthy elites.
I believe that if you asked them what they thought of austerity spending or rules imposed on their countries by wealthy elites many hundreds of miles away, they would react very strongly. They see their wages declining, their actual wealth decreasing, etc.
I sure hope Obama also pays attention to this and stops trying to push the TPP on the American people.I sure hope that Hillary as well comes out full-throated in her opposition to it.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)or rather selective austerity, and they've never required outside pressure to apply it.
Of course, they've always been happy to be seen as under the yoke of the EU in this respect, and you can often catch them pushing this perception, but that really isn't reality.
Akamai
(1,779 posts)be difficult to show.
Or maybe not. But let's see your stats on this!
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)I'm baffled by your defence of the the UK Conservatives.
Strange bedfellows indeed.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Akamai
(1,779 posts)yes. maybe no.
But I would be willing to bet many, many thousands of kids are concerned about their jobs in the future, etc. About how their prospects are diminishing as time goes by.
Maybe I am wrong, but I don't think so and I don't want people to suffer unnecessarily.
Let's roll back all these "free trade" agreements and help the average American family, the average American, even those among us will lesser abilities.
Denzil_DC
(7,233 posts)would like to see the UK a free trade paradise. Their vision for the UK, as much as they have a coherent one, is as an offshore tax haven with low regulation.
Some of the people trying to inform you here actually live in the UK. It's up to you whether you listen to them.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)has allowed Greenwald to run his business from Brazil, without heavy tax obligations in multiple countries. He can live in that country because of generous immigration polcies, and he can travel freely because of globalist policies easing travel restrictions.
He's against "elites" taking advantage, unless the elite is him.
reACTIONary
(5,770 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)The polling is clear. The main issue was immigration.
struggle4progress
(118,282 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)Cosmocat
(14,564 posts)we see this in various forms on this issue, and trumpism in particular,
Trying to negatively cast tertiary elements.
This is like the bullshit trying to blame Hillary or Obama for republicans' being jackasses.
Trying to blame other people for
1) Shit stirring jackasses foaming up bigotry and divisiveness
2) The masses being stupid enough to gobble it up and vote against their own interests
This need to somehow romanticize it.
It is simple, real simple.
People are fucking stupid asses in mass, and sometimes the stupid reaches a critical mass.
Like in 94 with republicans taking the house and senate.
Like in 2000 when this country elected a moron at POTUS.
Like in 2010 when this country saw fit to once again give republicans the house and senate.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Response to appal_jack (Original post)
Post removed
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)sometimes you could be led to believe that they think/believe that attacking the messenger is complete rebuttal to the content of thoise critiques, when really they just stupidly leave them entirely intact and unrebutted.
It's almost like they attended Trump University debating classes or something...lol
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)It's the conservative reaction to problems to find a group to blame. Fascism was born of economic hardship the last time around, as we know.
And the Brexit folks sure did hit economic promises (false ones) hard:
http://infacts.org/vote-leave-lying-saying-send-eu-350-million-week/
So arguing about "polling" is a bit facile. The right-wing is always there, selling racism and fear. They get people to buy it when people are suffering.
Response to DirkGently (Reply #103)
Name removed Message auto-removed
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)Why did This Guy support stay?
Bezos held a gun to his head?
treestar
(82,383 posts)DirkGently
(12,151 posts)No one gets this worked up over a simple "preference." Setting aside of course that Brexit likely won't change immigration policy at all of course.
This is how racists and fascists traditionally get traction. Doesn't work when times are good, whether immigration is high or low.
It works as a way for simple-minded people to feel like there's someone to blame. Someone easier to identify than short-sighted political leaders or bad economic policy.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Pitting one side against the other.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)beat that keeps getting thrown up against the wall..
What it appears is being attempted is that economic populism of any kind goes hand-in-hand with racism / xenophobia, because racism / xenophobia is also broadly populist.
Even though, you know, it's right-wingers. Who call themselves "right-wingers." Because they are right-wingers.
But it looks like people who feel aligned with economic elites would like to somehow conflate calls for economic reform, which comes from the people, with right-wing, nationalist, xenophobic extremism, on the basis that it also comes from "the people."
Not the same "people," but apparently that can be overlooked.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)the Powers That Be, and give up economic justice for the weak promise of some social justice. It's not rational.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Wealthy interests don't have a thing to lose from an inclusive, socially equitable society. No one does, although obviously plenty of people have thought otherwise.
But if it will keep people quiet, they'll certainly share depressed wages and a system of inequitably distributed resources with everyone.
Just don't ask for a raise or for Social Security not be handed over to the banks or less war anything like that. That would affect money, and money will not be compromised.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)lose if they yield. That's why even the Third Way doesn't want to give out too much social justice.
still_one
(92,187 posts)was right across generational lines. The younger generation approved staying, and the older generation approved leaving.
We will see just how well it works out for Great Britain in the months to come. Either way, Mr. Greewald won't be affected, and living quite comfortably in Brasil, while others will have to deal with the consequences.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)... upthread someone posted the numbers.
Greenwald's spinning
still_one
(92,187 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)from their economic thievery.
still_one
(92,187 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Tell the people that it's the ______________ fault that they are economically hurting, while in fact it's the corporatists that are causing the economic problems for the 99%.
still_one
(92,187 posts)
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)can someone clue me into who and what a Greenwald is and why I would want to give a rat?
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)during the Bush years because he was one of the most hard hitting columnists on the net. Go back a few years: http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/
But then 2009 came, and instead of twisting his principles like a pretzel he kept writing about the same things (drone bombs, war, MIC) and his popularity sank like a rock. People may one day pretend to care about those things again but anyone paying attention will see right through their fake concerns.
"Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything"
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)and the Cato Institute, as well as some mainstream publications.
Not everyone on DU is a Democrat and some push Greenwald here.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Just about the only part of the right worth regularly reading, though.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)he's taken state's rights positions on gun laws and marriage equality.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)These are paleos, after all. They said none of the Republican field could be endorsed by a "conservative" as they understand the term, and of the rest that leaves Sanders as the one they prefer. (This was early, I think, before Gary Johnson's campaign had solidified.)
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Land Shark
(6,346 posts)The U.K. would not have been in any top five lists of racist countries before Brexit, but misunderstanding the Brexit majority probably puts it on a top five list now.
Simply put, a majority there will risk being associated with a Brexit minority of clear bigots and racists in order to reject failed elite projects like the EU. The bigots are listening to that majority while the establishment has refused to listen for decades and continues to double down on that number.
Everything clearly outside the establishment has or will do better than expected: Samders, Libertarians, Trump, racists. To say this is not an endorsement, but to fail to honestly wrestle with this "mood" that was decades in the making is political suicide, and worse yet, entirely cedes the anti-establishment power to some of the worst forces. Democrats need Sanders and Warren front and center to.Occupy Anti-Establishmentarianism.
some guy
(3,448 posts)the EU, or BRexit, but looking from afar at the way the EU has treated Greece, which I also don't know very much about, I am inclined to be unenthusiastic about the EU as a system to enable and elevate the people.
PatrickforO
(14,572 posts)in keeping informed has allowed the forces of xenophobia and chest-pounding nationalism to co-opt what should be a people's movement. Plays right into the hands of the MIC if you ask me.
still_one
(92,187 posts)"Now some pundits are suggesting that the real lesson of Brexit is that ordinary Britons are bearing an unacceptable economic cost from immigration, and that elites should heed that lesson and think about restricting immigration to other Western countries to prevent a similar populist backlash.
There’s just one problem: this narrative isn’t actually true. Data shows that Britain wasn’t suffering harmful economic effects from too many new migrants.
What Britain was suffering from too much of, however, was xenophobia — fear and hatred of immigrants. Bigotry on the basis of national origin."
http://www.vox.com/2016/6/25/12029786/brexit-uk-eu-immigration-xenophobia
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)rockfordfile
(8,702 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Greenwald is thoughtful and always has good points, even if he doesn't doesn't parrot the Democratic narrative.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)" (2) petulant, self-serving, simple-minded attacks on disobedient pro-leave voters for being primitive, xenophobic bigots (and stupid to boot), all to evade any reckoning with their own responsibility. Virtually every reaction that falls into the former category emphasizes the profound failures of western establishment factions; these institutions have spawned pervasive misery and inequality, only to spew condescending scorn at their victims when they object. "
The fact of the matter is that there are a lot of primitive, xenophobic bigots who are indeed stupid. They are not limited to either America or Britain, but exist all over the world. There are issues of economics and security to consider in regards to immigration, and some few have genuine concerns about that. The real issue though (here as well as there) has to do with a deep sense of entitlement, racism, xenophobia - and indeed - stupidity.
How many armed militia groups exist today that are trying to "police the borders"? How many Republican voters condemn any attempt at all to resolve our immigration problems? To, for example, even permit children who were born here to remain - and for, perhaps, their parents to remain with them? From the right, we see stories of so called "anchor babies", angry denouncements of Mexicans taking all their jobs, receiving medical treatment when ill or injured... or worse, horror of horrors, receiving some kind of financial assistance through government programs.
There are issues of our time that have to do with Neoliberalism, or NeoConservatism, but the issues of white privilege, racism, ignorance, xenophobia and so on... these issues are the driving force behind a great deal of both poor policy decisions - and utter obstructionism in regards to any kind of legitimate progress.
Greenwald should consider how many Brits who voted to leave didn't actually know what they were really voting for. Were their issues with the Neoliberal elite? Neoliberal politics? Would they even comprehend what those things are? Do they even care? Somehow, for the most part... I doubt it. There may have been some level of resentment over economic issues and so on... but I'll bet you whatever pathetic change I have in my piggy bank, that a lot of that resentment was the idea that people who weren't British Nationals, who had come from away, who were of different race, Nationality, religion and so on... were being helped by funds and programs which they felt should not have been used for anyone but white British Nationals - if even them.
You can hear it all the time from American conservatives (and even some American democrats - though fewer), the frequent rants about the welfare system. Welfare Queens. Lazy free loaders. Gaming the system. Living "high on the hog" through TANF dollars, food stamps and so on. It's beyond stupid - when you consider just how little is actually done to help the poorest among us. Our social safety net does not lift people out of poverty. Government programs in general, whether state or federal... do not pay enough to maintain a reasonable standard of living.
I suspect that Britain and America, in this regards, have a lot in common. I don't know how Greenwald thinks engaging the "Neoliberal elite" is going to resolve this. What we should be doing (in my, perhaps, not so humble opinion) is combating the forces of ignorance, racism, stupidity, Nationalism, white supremacy, greed and selfishness. I am so damned tired of these imbeciles who could not take a simple lesson (learned in most Kindergarten classes and in most Sunday schools) to heart.
Share.
I feel that Greenwald is underestimating the power of petulant white people - and overestimating the power of the "Neoliberal elite". Fact of the matter is, we - and by we I mean white people in general - have some soul searching to do, some growing up. It is time to abandon that part of our ego that suggests that we are what is most important, to embrace, instead, the notion that we are all in this fight for survival... for progress... for liberty, together. We should be building bridges, bringing all peoples of the world together to address the issues of our time, to unify in resolving the issues of poverty, hunger, war, violence... and climate change.
This is no movement founded for justice against the wealthy powers that be, rather, it is the result of misunderstandings, poor education, ignorance, xenophobia, racism... and yes, even stupidity.
Don't get me wrong. America has the same damn issues - and, if anything, white people here are, in general, more xenophobic, racist, petulant, angry - and stupid. Many Brits who voted to leave the EU did not know what it was. Well, many Americans who voted for Bush could not have named the three branches of government. Could not have told you the difference between Iraq and Iran. We've got climate change deniers, evolution deniers, people who believe the earth is only a few thousand years old and disregard science to such an extent that it boggles the mind.
The stupid is everywhere - but that does not mean greater intellect is the solution.
The solution is really damn simple, actually. Let's all agree to share what we have with each other and to make the world a better place. If we can abandon our egos, swallow our pride and screw up our courage enough to give a damn... none of these debates will be necessary in the future.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Was there anger at the "elites"? Sure, but the vote at is base was xenophobic...it had almost fuck all to do with "taking back control", there was no control to take back, this was a vote against Johnny Foreigner pure and simple.
malaise
(268,976 posts)The neo-liberals promote any meme except the abysmal failure of the Reagan/Thatcher neo-liberal new world order.
THey prefer to promote racism and xenophobia than condemn this failed model
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)Thatcherites old and new were all over it.
ETA: I'm more than happy to condemn neo-liberalism, been doing it for years, particularly the Thatcherite version that the modern Conservative Party is using to victimise me and mine at the moment.
Brexit empowers those even further right than this character, some revolution:
David Cameron makes leaner state a permanent goal
The government is to forge a "leaner, more efficient state" on a permanent basis, David Cameron has said as he signalled he had no intention of resuming spending once the structural deficit has been eliminated, a clear change to claims made after the last general election .
In a change of tack from saying in 2010 that he was imposing cuts out of necessity, rather than from "some ideological zeal", the prime minister told the Lord Mayor's banquet that the government has shown in the last three years that better services can be delivered with lower spending.
Cameron said that the government would press ahead with tackling the deficit after cutting it by a third. But he made clear that his party intended to go further.
"We are sticking to the task. But that doesn't just mean making difficult decisions on public spending. It also means something more profound. It means building a leaner, more efficient state. We need to do more with less. Not just now, but permanently."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/11/david-cameron-policy-shift-leaner-efficient-state
malaise
(268,976 posts)but the dog whistles were racist and xenophobic. At the end of the day it is nothing more than the Reagan/Thatcher New World Order of neo-liberalism. Deregulate, Devalue, Divest increase debt and die.
They played the immigration card to the max.
It was odious.
Albertoo
(2,016 posts)From those I knew
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts) Albertoo
(2,016 posts)People who were Reaganites/Thatcherites were those drawn by an economic discourse,
not a social one, even less a racist one.
Now, racist hillbillies did vote for Reagan, but didn't do so on the grounds of Reaganomics.
Albertoo
(2,016 posts)Notably when he thinks he's making a point here:
IF Brexit had been a rejection of the elites grabbing all the money,
Cameron would not have been reelected after savage cuts in social budgets and public service.
As usual, Greenwald is more of a fanatic than an analyst.
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)Back in May of 2015, was Cameron's rival the genuinely leftist Jeremy Corbyn? No, on the Labour side it was classically failed neoliberal politics of Ed Milliband. Not a very clear choice for voters.
When voters are only offered two choices, they will often gravitate to "B" after years of "A" failing to deliver on its promises. It often does not matter that "B" is a total shit sandwich, 10x worse than "A."
In the Brexit vote, the neoliberal EU with its distant, unaccountable, meddling Eurocrats was "A." I agree with you that "B"ritain (see what I did there?) will not suddenly become a grass roots workers' paradise just due to the vote. But I still maintain that the failures of neoliberal Europe contributed heavily to the results of the Brexit vote.
-app
Albertoo
(2,016 posts)Blair was a rational reformer.
Ed Milliband, half his brother.
Jeremy Corbyn, an antisemitic Marxist clown.
Recently, Labour has been like London Bridge, falling down, down, down
Rabid Marxism is not an efficient defence of lower income people.
Response to appal_jack (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
