5 ms·

Very important problem. And the effect it will have on xenophobia and support for anti-democratic politics should not be ignored. The 20th century will feel lik

by nequo 4y ago

Very important problem. And the effect it will have on xenophobia and support for anti-democratic politics should not be ignored. The 20th century will feel like an age of innocence.

engineer_22 4y ago
Please make the connection between xenophobia and democracy EDIT: I agree that it looks like things could get very bad. Let's hope for best possible outcomes.
- Teever 4y ago
  In some people their xenophobic feelings are innately so strong, or can be stoked to become so strong that those people will go to great lengths to keep outsiders outside, even destroying their own democracy in the process.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- MattGaiser 4y ago
  Xenophobia can exist anywhere. But it is a notable turn for modern democracies which seemed to have gotten past that.
- wh313 4y ago
  From the paper "Right-wing extremism/radicalism: reconstructing the concept" [1]: > Although nationalism, racism and xenophobia are all discrete concepts, policies of exclusionary nationalism and cultural homogeneity often go hand-in-hand with racism and/or xenophobia. Homogeneity is usually advocated on the grounds that there are irreconcilable natural differences between groups of people and that these groups should not mix – i.e. according to a racist doctrine. > It is the values inherent in liberal and pluralist democracy and the procedures and institutions that sustain these values that particularly stick in the craw of right-wing extremists/radicals. Indeed, Carter defines right-wing extremism by reference to two elements: ‘a rejection of the fundamental values, procedures and institutions of the democratic constitutional state’, and ‘a rejection of the principle of fundamental human equality’. [1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13569317.2018.1451227 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13569317.2018.1...
  - rayiner 4y ago
    You’re creating a false dichotomy between multiculturalism and right-wing extremism. Most people in the world believe in “exclusionary nationalism and cultural homogeneity” insofar as they believe that their ethnocultural group should have a country of their own to govern according to their culture and values. My home country of Bangladesh was created on this principle. Most people in Asia and the Middle East take it as a given. That’s what the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights calls “the right of self determination.” That doesn’t make them right wing extremists! Bangladeshis (and Japanese and Chinese) don’t believe that they’re superior to everyone else and that entitles them to rule over others. That’s what crosses into right wing extremism.
    - wumpus 4y ago
      [flagged]
      - rayiner 4y ago
        Viewing society the way most people in the world view it makes me “right wing?” It’s not the first time I’ve heard that. I’ve heard Americans on the left say that the Japanese are “bigots” for not wanting immigrants. I don’t think they understand how radical that is. Maybe Bangladeshis (and Japanese and Chinese and Arabs and most everyone else) are “right wing.” Or maybe some folks mostly in a few western countries have adopted a radical preoccupation with minorities, to the point that they deny the right of majorities to structure their society as they see fit according to their culture and values.
        wumpus 4y ago
    - wh313 4y ago
      I was answering a question asking for a link between xenophobia and democracy. This article establishes the link through an analysis of right-wing supremacy in the United States. Could you explain how your reply applies that that context? However, you do touch on an interesting point regarding the link between Nationalism and democracy. This review paper [1] might be of interest to you. The underpinning question seems to be the moral implications of this relationship in regards to climate change, and I'd love to hear you thoughts on it. [1] https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/cis-dam/CIS_DAM_2015/WorkingPapers/Living_Reviews_Democracy/Helbling.pdf https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/c...
thrown_22 4y ago
A lifeboat is only useful so long as it doesn't sink. We are headed to a world where accepting all refugees just means your country collapses faster. Unless you're Canada or Russia the current century will not be a good one.
- chitowneats 4y ago
  Geography is only half of geopolitics. I predict you are correct about Canada.
  - thrown_22 4y ago
    I'm actually less sure about Canada. The US would annex them before it lets them have an independent foreign policy.
- mc32 4y ago
  Russia and Canada are big, but Canada is lots of muskeg and much or Russia is inhospitable, -30 in the Winter and 35 in the Summer. Putin was giving people 200 hectares for free to move into Siberia --few takers.
  - nostrademons 4y ago
    That's the whole climate-change part - it's not going to be inhospitable for long. Global warming affects the poles more than temperate regions - climate models predict up to 10C warming in the arctic winter. As the permafrost melts the biome is going to change dramatically, although the transition is likely to be quite messy.
    - mc32 4y ago
      When the Tundra defrosts it's muck, things sink, vehicles get stuck. And it's freaking hot in the Summer already, so turn it up and I don't know what it is, but it's not hospitable.
      - 4y ago
rayiner 4y ago
That sounds like Newspeak to me. Insofar as climate refugees may trigger “xenophobia” it will be elites trying to overcome democratic resistance to open borders. In the US, all it took was a modest amount of scarcity ($5 gas and a bit of inflation) for the GOP to pull back ahead in the polls.
- wh313 4y ago
  I find your point extremely interesting, though I think I'm missing one of your core assumptions. When you highlight the term "democratic," it seems to me as though you implicitly switched away from the ethical perspective of nequo's comment based on the assumption that universal human rights should be respected no matter what. Instead, you seem to be working from a legal perspective based on American law and ethical theory surrounding it. Do you mind expanding on this?
  - chitowneats 4y ago
    Illiberal democracy is not an American invention. See Hungary. The truth is that people can vote in whichever government they like. As long as that government still ensures free and fair elections it's still a democracy. Whether or not Hungary meets this definition in 2022, however, is an open question.
    - wumpus 4y ago
      There's more to democracy than the tyranny of the majority. Didn't Hungary (and Poland) also destroy their independent court system?
      - chitowneats 4y ago
        A pure democracy is literally tyranny of the majority. Anything restricting that tyranny is anti-democratic. Wholly necessary as well in view.
        wumpus 4y ago
cardamomo 4y ago
I want to offer a hopeful rephrasing: "The effect it could have ... should be a call for us to strengthen migrants' rights today."
- nequo 4y ago
  Action is better than hope. Do you think the rights granted today will still be seen as legitimate in 2050 and not be repealed or overturned by an anti-establishment political movement? What can ensure that they will be?

by nequo 4y ago

Very important problem. And the effect it will have on xenophobia and support for anti-democratic politics should not be ignored. The 20th century will feel like an age of innocence.

engineer_22 4y ago

Please make the connection between xenophobia and democracy EDIT: I agree that it looks like things could get very bad. Let's hope for best possible outcomes.

Teever 4y ago
In some people their xenophobic feelings are innately so strong, or can be stoked to become so strong that those people will go to great lengths to keep outsiders outside, even destroying their own democracy in the process.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
MattGaiser 4y ago
Xenophobia can exist anywhere. But it is a notable turn for modern democracies which seemed to have gotten past that.
wh313 4y ago
From the paper "Right-wing extremism/radicalism: reconstructing the concept" [1]: > Although nationalism, racism and xenophobia are all discrete concepts, policies of exclusionary nationalism and cultural homogeneity often go hand-in-hand with racism and/or xenophobia. Homogeneity is usually advocated on the grounds that there are irreconcilable natural differences between groups of people and that these groups should not mix – i.e. according to a racist doctrine. > It is the values inherent in liberal and pluralist democracy and the procedures and institutions that sustain these values that particularly stick in the craw of right-wing extremists/radicals. Indeed, Carter defines right-wing extremism by reference to two elements: ‘a rejection of the fundamental values, procedures and institutions of the democratic constitutional state’, and ‘a rejection of the principle of fundamental human equality’. [1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13569317.2018.1451227 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13569317.2018.1...
- rayiner 4y ago
  You’re creating a false dichotomy between multiculturalism and right-wing extremism. Most people in the world believe in “exclusionary nationalism and cultural homogeneity” insofar as they believe that their ethnocultural group should have a country of their own to govern according to their culture and values. My home country of Bangladesh was created on this principle. Most people in Asia and the Middle East take it as a given. That’s what the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights calls “the right of self determination.” That doesn’t make them right wing extremists! Bangladeshis (and Japanese and Chinese) don’t believe that they’re superior to everyone else and that entitles them to rule over others. That’s what crosses into right wing extremism.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - rayiner 4y ago
      Viewing society the way most people in the world view it makes me “right wing?” It’s not the first time I’ve heard that. I’ve heard Americans on the left say that the Japanese are “bigots” for not wanting immigrants. I don’t think they understand how radical that is. Maybe Bangladeshis (and Japanese and Chinese and Arabs and most everyone else) are “right wing.” Or maybe some folks mostly in a few western countries have adopted a radical preoccupation with minorities, to the point that they deny the right of majorities to structure their society as they see fit according to their culture and values.
      - wumpus 4y ago
  - wh313 4y ago
    I was answering a question asking for a link between xenophobia and democracy. This article establishes the link through an analysis of right-wing supremacy in the United States. Could you explain how your reply applies that that context? However, you do touch on an interesting point regarding the link between Nationalism and democracy. This review paper [1] might be of interest to you. The underpinning question seems to be the moral implications of this relationship in regards to climate change, and I'd love to hear you thoughts on it. [1] https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/cis-dam/CIS_DAM_2015/WorkingPapers/Living_Reviews_Democracy/Helbling.pdf https://ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/c...

thrown_22 4y ago

A lifeboat is only useful so long as it doesn't sink. We are headed to a world where accepting all refugees just means your country collapses faster. Unless you're Canada or Russia the current century will not be a good one.

chitowneats 4y ago
Geography is only half of geopolitics. I predict you are correct about Canada.
- thrown_22 4y ago
  I'm actually less sure about Canada. The US would annex them before it lets them have an independent foreign policy.
mc32 4y ago
Russia and Canada are big, but Canada is lots of muskeg and much or Russia is inhospitable, -30 in the Winter and 35 in the Summer. Putin was giving people 200 hectares for free to move into Siberia --few takers.
- nostrademons 4y ago
  That's the whole climate-change part - it's not going to be inhospitable for long. Global warming affects the poles more than temperate regions - climate models predict up to 10C warming in the arctic winter. As the permafrost melts the biome is going to change dramatically, although the transition is likely to be quite messy.
  - mc32 4y ago
    When the Tundra defrosts it's muck, things sink, vehicles get stuck. And it's freaking hot in the Summer already, so turn it up and I don't know what it is, but it's not hospitable.
    - 4y ago

rayiner 4y ago

That sounds like Newspeak to me. Insofar as climate refugees may trigger “xenophobia” it will be elites trying to overcome democratic resistance to open borders. In the US, all it took was a modest amount of scarcity ($5 gas and a bit of inflation) for the GOP to pull back ahead in the polls.

wh313 4y ago
I find your point extremely interesting, though I think I'm missing one of your core assumptions. When you highlight the term "democratic," it seems to me as though you implicitly switched away from the ethical perspective of nequo's comment based on the assumption that universal human rights should be respected no matter what. Instead, you seem to be working from a legal perspective based on American law and ethical theory surrounding it. Do you mind expanding on this?
- chitowneats 4y ago
  Illiberal democracy is not an American invention. See Hungary. The truth is that people can vote in whichever government they like. As long as that government still ensures free and fair elections it's still a democracy. Whether or not Hungary meets this definition in 2022, however, is an open question.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    There's more to democracy than the tyranny of the majority. Didn't Hungary (and Poland) also destroy their independent court system?
    - chitowneats 4y ago
      A pure democracy is literally tyranny of the majority. Anything restricting that tyranny is anti-democratic. Wholly necessary as well in view.
      - wumpus 4y ago

cardamomo 4y ago

I want to offer a hopeful rephrasing: "The effect it could have ... should be a call for us to strengthen migrants' rights today."

nequo 4y ago
Action is better than hope. Do you think the rights granted today will still be seen as legitimate in 2050 and not be repealed or overturned by an anti-establishment political movement? What can ensure that they will be?