06-26-2016, 09:09 AM
(06-25-2016, 04:29 PM)Dan 82 Wrote: As a nationalist, left wing populist this type of response strikes me as overwrought for a few reasons
Keep in mind though that most of those who voted to Leave were motivated by dislike or fear of immigration. That is not left wing, and it is not populist. It is xenophobic.
Quote:1) Military dictatorship is not the only alternative to democracy, unelected unaccountable bureaucracy is another alternative and it’s been the form that’s actually been successful in last few decades. And the opposition to the EU and much of the current populism is a response to that.
The "unelected bureaucrats" who administer the EU were elected ministers of the various countries. It is the preoccupation with this so-called unelected bureaucracy that may be overwrought. Those who didn't like it were mostly businessmen who want to take advantage of people, by getting rid of regulations that protect the people from them.
Quote:2) It is absurd to claim that the only alternative to multiculturalism, globalism and open borders is fascism.
That's true; but it depends on how far the xenophobic reaction goes. This reaction is certainly the root of Nazism and much of fascism.
Quote:3) I think the globalist; multi-cultural socialism is bound to fail. Socialism broadly defined requires a high level of social trust and cohesion in order to work while multiculturalism and globalism work best with high levels of individualism. I view a strong sense of nationalism is an important factor in allowing the masses the challenge the elites. The few successful left wing parties such as the Scottish National Party and Sinn Féin are also nationalist and populist.
Global multi-culturalism is not something people can control with a vote. That is a delusion. Globalism is just the irreversible trend of our times. People can't shut themselves off in an island anymore. Global communication and transportation make that impossible.
Nor does globalization equal socialism. Socialism is not the inevitable correlate with globalism. But some level of socialism is also necessary for a functioning society today, because of the power of corporations. There has to be a check and balance on their power and their ability to hurt the people.
I don't see any necessary correlation between challenging nationalism, and challenging elites. It depends on who the elites are. Usually nationalists are those who want to protect their status from encroaching interaction and diversity. Nations are just lines on a map. Unless balanced by global institutions, national ones are out of date. They promote war and oppression of some nations over others.
But local institutions, whether "national" or on the community-level, can check the power of elites to take over the large global institutions and run them for their own benefit.