Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)FL
FlowVoid @lemmy.world
Posts 1
Comments 1.1K
Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • Non-citizen and immigrant are not the same. Plenty of immigrants are citizens. In fact, the opposite of "immigrant" is ..... "native".

    The next time you meet a Native American, tell them they are considered immigrants. Please post their reaction on YouTube, your video will surely go viral.

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • Yes, colonists were immigrants. Under colonialism, the immigrants are the ones in power.

    You previously argued that wars were preceded by fear of immigrants and the rise of political leaders like Hitler. Now it seems you mean the existence of immigrants and rich people like Koch.

    But that comparison is pointless. Immigrants and rich people preceded WW1, WW2, the American revolution, the invention of penicillin, every Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, and every Cat 4-5 hurricane.

    That's because there are always immigrants and there are always rich people. So pointing out that they also exist right now is not particularly concerning.

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • excluding polish immigrants

    I think you're confused. Prussia had annexed regions of Poland in the 18th century. The Poles in question were born there. They weren't immigrants, just as Native Americans and Hawaiians are not immigrants.

    "Left" you know the left that supported Germany's colonial efforts

    Yes, the "left" that supported organized labor and opposed capital. Which was the original goal of leftism. In Germany, the left was led by August Bebel who was described as a "model worker's leader" by none other than Vladimir Lenin.

    Anti-colonialism is a relatively new project for leftists. Old school leftists, including Marx, defended colonialism as a necessary step from feudalism to communism. Marx himself described the colonization of India as a "tool of history" in ending the "Oriental despotism" of the caste system and other "traditional rules":

    we must not forget that these idyllic village-communities, inoffensive though they may appear, had always been the solid foundation of Oriental despotism, that they restrained the human mind within the smallest possible compass, making it the unresisting tool of superstition, enslaving it beneath traditional rules, depriving it of all grandeur and historical energies. We must not forget the barbarian egotism which, concentrating on some miserable patch of land, had quietly witnessed the ruin of empires, the perpetration of unspeakable cruelties, the massacre of the population of large towns, with no other consideration bestowed upon them than on natural events, itself the helpless prey of any aggressor who deigned to notice it at all. We must not forget that this undignified, stagnatory, and vegetative life, that this passive sort of existence evoked on the other part, in contradistinction, wild, aimless, unbounded forces of destruction and rendered murder itself a religious rite in Hindostan. We must not forget that these little communities were contaminated by distinctions of caste and by slavery, that they subjugated man to external circumstances instead of elevating man the sovereign of circumstances, that they transformed a self-developing social state into never changing natural destiny, and thus brought about a brutalizing worship of nature, exhibiting its degradation in the fact that man, the sovereign of nature, fell down on his knees in adoration of Kanuman, the monkey, and Sabbala, the cow.

    England, it is true, in causing a social revolution in Hindostan, was actuated only by the vilest interests, and was stupid in her manner of enforcing them. But that is not the question. The question is, can mankind fulfil its destiny without a fundamental revolution in the social state of Asia? If not, whatever may have been the crimes of England she was the unconscious tool of history in bringing about that revolution.

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • He considered himself an other in a country that wasn't his own, he's an immigrant.

    No, he's not an immigrant. By definition, immigrants and emigrants migrate, ie they move somewhere else. It's right there in the word.

    If you live in the same place you were born, you aren't an immigrant.

    History shows the charismatic strongman

    "Strongman" is defined as a "one who leads or controls by force of will and character or by military methods". That does not include David Koch or anyone else who merely finances a political movement.

    shitty people doing shitty things that make it shitty for everyone else

    Well, if you're arguing that wars tend to be caused by the actions of shitty people in general then I won't dispute that fact.

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • Perception is much different from reality. It's true, but not how you think. You are perceiving, or at least trying to portray, the causes of WW2 as similar to WW1. But in reality they can't be shoehorned into your framework.

    Again, the left, not the right, was ascendant in that period. The left was in control of the German and French parliaments. The left was on its way to overthrow the government of Russia. After the assassination of a leftist leader, the Second International, a leftist organization, made pro-war statements. This was immediately followed by the entry of France and other countries into the war. The right as we know it did not exist yet.

    Immigration was not a major concern in Europe in the period before WW1. People were not immigrating to Europe. If anything, they were emigrating from Europe to America.

    Germany and other countries were not scheming to gain territory. The geopolitics of the time were aimed at containment, not expansion. The goal was to preserve the balance of power. This was supposed to be achieved by a network of alliances that would deter war. If you must draw an analogy, the politics of the time were far closer to the nuclear detente in the 1970s between NATO and the Warsaw Pact.

    Finally, Germany entered the war because they were obligated by treaty, just as America would have been dragged into a war if someone had invaded Portugal in 1970. Kaiser Wilhelm was notoriously uninterested in military affairs, and he realized almost immediately that war would be pointless. Hence his lack of involvement in Germany's war effort, earning him the nickname "Shadow Kaiser".

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • Bosnian serbs weren't full citizens

    So, not immigrants. Immigration was not a factor, at all.

    was their financial backer

    Someone who finances an organization that tries to influence a group of students is not a "strongman". Merely a rich man, like David Koch.

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • The assassin of Franz Ferdinand was not an immigrant. He was born and lived in Bosnia, and he killed Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo. There was no "fear of immigrants".

    He was not inspired by a "strongman". He was a member of Young Bosnia, a group of socialist/anarchist students with no political power.

    Similar groups had existed for decades, there was no "rise" in nationalism.

    The Ottomans did not industrialize with the rest of Europe, this meant they were still agrarian in the 20th century not that they were "unable to afford to live".

    The Ottoman Empire lasted through the war. It was abolished in 1922, four years after the war ended. Thus, it outlived Austria-Hungary.

    The dismantling of the Ottoman Empire, like that of Austria-Hungary, was not a cause of the war. It was a result of losing the war.

  • Far-right gains in the EU election deal stunning defeats to France's Macron and Germany's Scholz
  • Prior to the First World War, the standard of living in Europe was rising due to industrialization and immigration was not a particular concern.

    In Germany, the left had just retaken control of parliament and the leader was actively trying to use diplomacy to preserve the balance of power. Unfortunately his efforts had the unintended consequence of igniting a war.

    For the actual causes of the First World War, see the other reply.

  • Record-Breaking Accomplishments On Jobs And Unemployment Under Biden
  • The reason a recession never materialized is because the Biden admin literally changed the formula for calculating inflation.

    A recession is not affected by the formula for inflation. In fact, there have been recessions with high inflation (the 1980 recession) and recessions with low inflation (the 2007 recession). There have even been recessions with negative inflation (the Great Depression).

    A recession occurs when the total income of a country decreases. This leads to a vicious cycle of less spending, which causes more unemployment, which causes further decreases in total income.

    Inflation measures change in prices, not income. When incomes increase along with prices, there is no vicious cycle and no recession. And as we know, incomes are increasing.

    Yes, increasing prices are bad. But increasing unemployment is far worse, especially if you want to advance the rights of workers. And unemployment is the bullet that Biden helped us dodge.

  • Biden sets out new Israeli proposal to end war in Gaza

    www.bbc.com Israel-Gaza war: Biden sets out new Israeli proposal to end conflict - BBC News

    US president urges Hamas to accept the three-phase plan, saying "it's time for this war to end".

    Israel-Gaza war: Biden sets out new Israeli proposal to end conflict - BBC News

    Ending the Gaza war: Three phase proposal

    PHASE ONE

    • It would begin with a six-week ceasefire, during which the IDF would withdraw from populated areas of Gaza
    • Hamas would release "a number" of hostages - including women, the elderly and the wounded - in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. Some remains of dead Israeli hostages would be returned to their families
    • Palestinian civilians would return to their homes in all areas of Gaza
    • Humanitarian assistance would "surge", with 600 trucks a day entering the strip, and hundreds of thousands of temporary housing units sent by the international community

    During that six week period, negotiations mediated by the US and Qatar would continue. If successful, the next part of the plan would begin.

    ...

    40