202
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Summary

Far-right leaders are gaining globally, with Trump’s victory in the US presidential election echoing trends in Hungary, India, and other countries.

Donald Trump’s 2024 victory marks a historic first where he won the U.S. popular vote, supported by diverse groups including young, Black, and Latino voters, as well as the working class—a reversal from previous elections.

This win aligns with global far-right gains, reflecting voter frustration with economic hardships and liberal policies.

Analysts argue that the far right’s appeal lies in its “politics of existential revenge,” which vilifies minority groups and offers imaginary disasters as scapegoats.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

I love that you've tried so hard to lead a veneer of intellectualism to the contradictory and reactionary thought processes of the far right.

To sum up your post, you're describing “anything mush-brained right wingers don’t like” but with fancy bullet points.

[-] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago

I wasnt aware that using a word then providing a definition when asked was was a contradictory and reactionary thought proccess of the far right.

Do u have an alternative word u would prefer me to use instead of woke to describe the outlined definition i provided?

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Do u have an alternative word u would prefer me to use instead of woke to describe the outlined definition i provided?

You didn't provide a definition, for instance "The importance of group identity over individual identity". You might as well be talking about communism, or the military, or a sports team.

[-] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Thats how words work u use combine multiple concepts together to create a new things that encapsules the whole. For instance if u where to define a table as having legs a table top etc then some moron claimed well i have legs ur definition sucks that wouldnt be a good faith interpretation would it?

[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Thats how words work u use combine multiple concepts together to create a new things that encapsules the whole.

Sure, you didn't do that though. Let's take the second item, "The existence of systemic oppression and power imbalances"

That's the original definition, not what right wingers use to deflect away from the original. You're all over the place.

For instance if u where to define a table as having legs a table top etc then some moron claimed well i have legs ur definition sucks that wouldnt be a good faith interpretation would it?

I'm interpreting in good faith, the problem is on your side. You're trying (and failing) to assign a definition to something that doesn't have one other than “anything mush-brained right wingers don’t like”. Just accept it instead of tying your brain in knots.

this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
202 points (95.5% liked)

politics

19202 readers
2516 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS