She's just a spoiler-candidate to steal votes from the right. That's why the leftist media hype her up.
She came from a party that was the successor to the SED, the communist party of soviet East Germany. She said she is willing to form a coalition with everyone EXCEPT the right. Her suggested governor in a state election is an Antifa sympathizer.
She's nothing but another flavor of uniparty for those who got food poisoning from the old slop.
I know you don't like BSW, but she seems to be drawing more votes from the establishment than from the AFD. There are people who'd not support the AFD at this moment but who would support the BSW. It's good not to have all anti-establishment eggs in one basket.
I also just saw a tweet by her where she called for a Danish policy on 'refugees'. Now you might say that she's insincere and all that. It's similar to what people said about RFK. It turns out that he was very sincere.
Regardless, let's say she does co-operate with the establishment. She would then have to deliver, which is good, or her votes would then go to the AfD, which is also good. Worst case scenario is that she will be a gateway drug.
She doesn't have to deliver anything. She's there to keep the AfD from winning the coming elections. It'll take voters years to realize they've been duped again. By then the establishment will have come up with something new. The Stasi and NGOs are working overtime 24/7. That's the strategy here. She's a stopgap measure.
If she was a real threat, the media, Antifa and the Verfassungsschutz wouldn't just sit there and take it. They'd give her the same treatment as the AfD or the Werte Union.
They don't support the AfD because the German media is just as corrupt as any other Western media because they attack anything that is remotely right wing.
She's winning votes because she will still support the traditional left wing shit with a mild nationalist coat of paint.
Sounds like a traditional communist to me. There's an element of nationalism and in-group bias within communism. What we have growing today is really less of communism and more of a globalist oligarchy.
The programming following WW2 is bone deep, and there is no real European analogue to the "far right" as it exists in the US. The European gestalt is hardwired against anything any reasonable American would even call center right, much less far right.
Almost everyone in Europe supports some sort of welfare state, but in terms of immigration, I've never even encountered followers of the furthest-left party that support it. You may not have ever encountered a European if you think they've been "programmed" successfully.
The most obnoxious thing about Europeans that is somewhat mainstream is climate change alarmism.
Almost everyone in Europe supports some sort of welfare state, but in terms of immigration, I've never even encountered followers of the furthest-left party that support it.
Welfare isn't right wing in any form. Welfare is theft from citizens by government - government control of economy is left wing. You don't understand what right and left wing are.
I think everyone needs to stop trying to shove our current political state into that two-axis system because it's not sufficient to describe what u/acp_k2win is describing.
The problem a lot of people are getting mixed up is that populism is something that's starting to grow to be a dominant ideology and it cannot be sufficiently explained with a two-axis system. Populism has a left wing and a right wing component, but its policies are composed of a mix of things that would make both traditional leftists and right wingers angry.
Ethno-nationalism is right-populism taken to its "final" conclusion. Ethno-nationalism sees that the state is responsible for protecting the NATIVE people from outside threats. So it will use its resources and power to place the native majority population in priority over any other outsiders. To do that, they WILL do shit Lolbertarians hate. Tariffs on incoming foreign goods. Bans on immigration, both "legal" and illegal. Incentives/money/welfare/preferential treatment given to ethnically native citizens over other races and ethnicities.
More examples: Policies that fund projects at the taxpayer's dime to benefit the country as a whole (ROADS), "preferential" treatment given to certain countries over others because of compatible cultures, etc.
These are things that would make a fiscal conservative libertarian type lose their shit, because to do some of this shit requires the state grabbing more power from the people, but the "end result" is to promote not equality, but an intentional inequality that prefers treatment of its native citizens over immigrant/foreigner populations.
Japan has a mild form of this and is often used as an example by white ethnonats.
Those of us who support Trump support a somewhat milder form of right populism/nationalism where we pull back all the race-based shit and just do it under based off of merit and a heavily limited immigration policy, but you bet a lot of us would be for benefits that go towards the American citizen FIRST over any other group of people, which would again violate the average fiscal conservative's mentality.
Hell, we might even revise our welfare policies to cut back the amount of money being spent on the 14/60's and whatnot because we may see that as an actual waste of money that ultimately does not put America First and just puts them first, which never works, and focus it on say, making our trades great again and accessible since those populations tend to at least have enough IQ and physical strength to be able to do well in the trades.
Traditional right wing conservatism and libertarianism is incompatible with populism, including all forms of right wing populism - from MAGA all the way to ethnonationalist utopias.
We are in a time of re-alignment and hopefully able to shed off the decades of post-war indoctrination that suppressed any kind of White racial consciousness.
What makes me really sad is the Christians/catholics and pagans can't stay out of each other's lanes and stop tripping each other up when the brown hoard and their technocrat/jewish puppet masters are the enemy much more than each other.
You're full of shit. You're just justifying centralized government power and theft from the citizenry with "but it's OUR GUYS" while claiming things like borders are inherently anti-right - they are not. Libertarian policies only work together, not individually and not when other nations are playing different games. Free trade only works when both sides play by the same rules, etc etc. Conservatism absolutely favors borders and citizens first nationalism.
Deleting welfare, ejecting non citizens, denying invaders rights - those are not incompatible with right wing positions. Centralizing power into a strong federal government that far oversteps it's authority - that is incompatible with right wing positions, because it is left wing. It is in service of the globalist goals. They want centralized power, in any form. Their specialty is corrupting institutions - they will spit any dogma to gain power, they don't care if you're flying a swastika or a hammer and sickle, as long as the fed has total control they will subvert it.
You're attributing strict characteristics to populism that are not tied to populism at all, as well.
No, they're just retarded and making retarded takes because they are incapable of accepting reality outside of their own Overton window and their attempts to use the same script from the last decade or so is failing now due to the purity spiral intensifying.
Referring to the AFD as far right is that an exaggeration from the the opposition parties? I am just curious because in Cuckanada the media loves to label anyone who is slightly right of Lenin as 'Far right".
Anything that's populism and pro-nationalism, even a slight bit of nationalism (as in stop the migrant invaders) even if you use it as an argument in favor of leftist policies (more migrant invaders = less money for government welfare) is "far right" to these faggots.
No, horseshoe theory is just a weak attempt to explain why a single-axis chart fails so hard at describing different political positions. Even the two-axis political compass is an oversimplification.
I mean, horseshoe theory points out that ultimately two different ideologies can have different end goals but their end results will be the same. i.e. the evangelical right and the far left trying to ban sex in media. I know a bunch of you in this sub are against porn and "degeneracy" but I'm trying to make a point.
I think the op you all are downvoting is pointing out that the article writer has ZERO awareness of the political landscape around him that he isn't even aware of his own hypocrisy.
I think the people getting pissy at OP for not using the right terms for what we're dealing with have to realize this is how you START you de-brainwash someone from leftist idpol shit even if both the faggot article writer and the commie politician they're talking about doesn't get it. If someone with a brain reads this article and goes "wait, aren't they doing the same thing that they claim the other side is doing?" and look it up and find "horseshoe theory", then sometimes it gets people's noggin joggin to explore further.
In other words, I still think we need to keep it as a "gatekeeper" term because it is the first step in getting people to stop thinking like a leftist idpol retard.
The awareness of the endpoint - similarities of the "far (x) ideologies" is how you deprogram someone from the retardation, even if it's not 100% accurate to what ethno-nats believe and may offend you that it's an overused term.
She's just a spoiler-candidate to steal votes from the right. That's why the leftist media hype her up.
She came from a party that was the successor to the SED, the communist party of soviet East Germany. She said she is willing to form a coalition with everyone EXCEPT the right. Her suggested governor in a state election is an Antifa sympathizer.
She's nothing but another flavor of uniparty for those who got food poisoning from the old slop.
I know you don't like BSW, but she seems to be drawing more votes from the establishment than from the AFD. There are people who'd not support the AFD at this moment but who would support the BSW. It's good not to have all anti-establishment eggs in one basket.
I also just saw a tweet by her where she called for a Danish policy on 'refugees'. Now you might say that she's insincere and all that. It's similar to what people said about RFK. It turns out that he was very sincere.
Break the system and good things will happen.
She already said she won't cooperate with the AfD, so any votes she gets will go to the establishment (including the ones she stole from the right).
She's not breaking the system. She's saving it.
So did the parties in the Netherlands.
Regardless, let's say she does co-operate with the establishment. She would then have to deliver, which is good, or her votes would then go to the AfD, which is also good. Worst case scenario is that she will be a gateway drug.
She doesn't have to deliver anything. She's there to keep the AfD from winning the coming elections. It'll take voters years to realize they've been duped again. By then the establishment will have come up with something new. The Stasi and NGOs are working overtime 24/7. That's the strategy here. She's a stopgap measure.
If she was a real threat, the media, Antifa and the Verfassungsschutz wouldn't just sit there and take it. They'd give her the same treatment as the AfD or the Werte Union.
They don't support the AfD because the German media is just as corrupt as any other Western media because they attack anything that is remotely right wing.
She's winning votes because she will still support the traditional left wing shit with a mild nationalist coat of paint.
This and more is why I fucking loathe democracy it’s a horrid system in all implementations.
Sounds like a traditional communist to me. There's an element of nationalism and in-group bias within communism. What we have growing today is really less of communism and more of a globalist oligarchy.
Stalinism is less communism than nationalism with a communist coat of paint.
Trotsky, marx, and slightly less so lenin were the global communists with trotsky being completely crazy for global perpetual revolution.
The programming following WW2 is bone deep, and there is no real European analogue to the "far right" as it exists in the US. The European gestalt is hardwired against anything any reasonable American would even call center right, much less far right.
So what exactly is the American far-right?
Almost everyone in Europe supports some sort of welfare state, but in terms of immigration, I've never even encountered followers of the furthest-left party that support it. You may not have ever encountered a European if you think they've been "programmed" successfully.
The most obnoxious thing about Europeans that is somewhat mainstream is climate change alarmism.
Well, they sure have a funny way of showing it.
In what way specifically?
The part where the continent is drowning in mohammandan subhumans?
White people love importing foreigners. Their birth rates are dropping, the countries will not survive without some form of stimulus.
"white", sure.
Welfare is either left or right depending on if you support multiculturalism.
If you support welfare for people outside of your race you are left, if you support it for people of your race you are right. Same with immigration.
Welfare isn't right wing in any form. Welfare is theft from citizens by government - government control of economy is left wing. You don't understand what right and left wing are.
I think everyone needs to stop trying to shove our current political state into that two-axis system because it's not sufficient to describe what u/acp_k2win is describing.
The problem a lot of people are getting mixed up is that populism is something that's starting to grow to be a dominant ideology and it cannot be sufficiently explained with a two-axis system. Populism has a left wing and a right wing component, but its policies are composed of a mix of things that would make both traditional leftists and right wingers angry.
Ethno-nationalism is right-populism taken to its "final" conclusion. Ethno-nationalism sees that the state is responsible for protecting the NATIVE people from outside threats. So it will use its resources and power to place the native majority population in priority over any other outsiders. To do that, they WILL do shit Lolbertarians hate. Tariffs on incoming foreign goods. Bans on immigration, both "legal" and illegal. Incentives/money/welfare/preferential treatment given to ethnically native citizens over other races and ethnicities.
More examples: Policies that fund projects at the taxpayer's dime to benefit the country as a whole (ROADS), "preferential" treatment given to certain countries over others because of compatible cultures, etc.
These are things that would make a fiscal conservative libertarian type lose their shit, because to do some of this shit requires the state grabbing more power from the people, but the "end result" is to promote not equality, but an intentional inequality that prefers treatment of its native citizens over immigrant/foreigner populations.
Japan has a mild form of this and is often used as an example by white ethnonats.
Those of us who support Trump support a somewhat milder form of right populism/nationalism where we pull back all the race-based shit and just do it under based off of merit and a heavily limited immigration policy, but you bet a lot of us would be for benefits that go towards the American citizen FIRST over any other group of people, which would again violate the average fiscal conservative's mentality.
Hell, we might even revise our welfare policies to cut back the amount of money being spent on the 14/60's and whatnot because we may see that as an actual waste of money that ultimately does not put America First and just puts them first, which never works, and focus it on say, making our trades great again and accessible since those populations tend to at least have enough IQ and physical strength to be able to do well in the trades.
Traditional right wing conservatism and libertarianism is incompatible with populism, including all forms of right wing populism - from MAGA all the way to ethnonationalist utopias.
We are in a time of re-alignment and hopefully able to shed off the decades of post-war indoctrination that suppressed any kind of White racial consciousness.
What makes me really sad is the Christians/catholics and pagans can't stay out of each other's lanes and stop tripping each other up when the brown hoard and their technocrat/jewish puppet masters are the enemy much more than each other.
You're full of shit. You're just justifying centralized government power and theft from the citizenry with "but it's OUR GUYS" while claiming things like borders are inherently anti-right - they are not. Libertarian policies only work together, not individually and not when other nations are playing different games. Free trade only works when both sides play by the same rules, etc etc. Conservatism absolutely favors borders and citizens first nationalism.
Deleting welfare, ejecting non citizens, denying invaders rights - those are not incompatible with right wing positions. Centralizing power into a strong federal government that far oversteps it's authority - that is incompatible with right wing positions, because it is left wing. It is in service of the globalist goals. They want centralized power, in any form. Their specialty is corrupting institutions - they will spit any dogma to gain power, they don't care if you're flying a swastika or a hammer and sickle, as long as the fed has total control they will subvert it.
You're attributing strict characteristics to populism that are not tied to populism at all, as well.
the american far right is whoever wants rivers of illegal blood flowing through the streets. anyone else is a centrist or a leftist.
Women in politics cannot be right-wing. I don't know why this is so tricky for modern people to figure out. Never support women in politics.
Disobedience to establishment piety is far-right.
Aw sweet, we arrived to the leftie cannibalism stage
Congratulations Politico, you discovered Horseshoe Theory.
No, they're just retarded and making retarded takes because they are incapable of accepting reality outside of their own Overton window and their attempts to use the same script from the last decade or so is failing now due to the purity spiral intensifying.
far left is gonna do more damage than muslim hordes ever did than all the muslim incursions into europe over the last +1000 years.
Referring to the AFD as far right is that an exaggeration from the the opposition parties? I am just curious because in Cuckanada the media loves to label anyone who is slightly right of Lenin as 'Far right".
Anything that's populism and pro-nationalism, even a slight bit of nationalism (as in stop the migrant invaders) even if you use it as an argument in favor of leftist policies (more migrant invaders = less money for government welfare) is "far right" to these faggots.
horseshoe theory is real.
No, horseshoe theory is just a weak attempt to explain why a single-axis chart fails so hard at describing different political positions. Even the two-axis political compass is an oversimplification.
Horseshoe theory is deliberate propaganda aimed at confusing normies and blaming crimes leftists commit on the "far right".
I mean, horseshoe theory points out that ultimately two different ideologies can have different end goals but their end results will be the same. i.e. the evangelical right and the far left trying to ban sex in media. I know a bunch of you in this sub are against porn and "degeneracy" but I'm trying to make a point.
I think the op you all are downvoting is pointing out that the article writer has ZERO awareness of the political landscape around him that he isn't even aware of his own hypocrisy.
I think the people getting pissy at OP for not using the right terms for what we're dealing with have to realize this is how you START you de-brainwash someone from leftist idpol shit even if both the faggot article writer and the commie politician they're talking about doesn't get it. If someone with a brain reads this article and goes "wait, aren't they doing the same thing that they claim the other side is doing?" and look it up and find "horseshoe theory", then sometimes it gets people's noggin joggin to explore further.
In other words, I still think we need to keep it as a "gatekeeper" term because it is the first step in getting people to stop thinking like a leftist idpol retard.
The awareness of the endpoint - similarities of the "far (x) ideologies" is how you deprogram someone from the retardation, even if it's not 100% accurate to what ethno-nats believe and may offend you that it's an overused term.
We live in a Ryan Long sketch:
https://youtu.be/Ev373c7wSRg
These writers don't even know what actual "real" communism is.