3 ms·

Chomsky say exactly the same without using the term. What does Wikipedia say? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty "S

Chomsky say exactly the same without using the term. What does Wikipedia say? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty "Supporters of the 2000 Green Party presidential bid of Ralph Nader used the term extensively, and Nader himself called the prevailing political structure a 'corporate uniparty' in his 2002 book Crashing the Party." Pinning this term the right is the usual tactic to outlaw the term and remove it from the dictionary.

OKRainbowKid 2y ago
We are now 3 comments deep into talking about the term in the context of the US. The thread and the original comments were about Germany. Can you explain to us how the former relates to the latter? Germany has a much more diverse set of parties. However, terms similar to "uniparty" are used by AFD (and perhaps BSW) to refer to "all the regular" (read: democratic) parties, that they stand in fundamental opposition to.
- aduj 2y ago
  Because you refuse to read and ignore that "uniparty" was used so that the international English audience understands it. Besides, the complaint that the SPD under Schroeder destroyed the welfare state and was increasingly indistinguishable from the CDU predates the AfD. Arguments like these of course require historical knowledge and nuance rather than crying "far right".
  - OKRainbowKid 2y ago
    Why are you replying on behalf of the person I actually asked? You created your account today, this was your first comment, and I perceive it to be exceedingly aggressive and antagonistic. You're also putting words in my mouth. I don't believe you're acting in good faith and engaging with you is not a productive use of my time.
komali2 2y ago
In the USA "Libertarian" and "Anarchist" also almost mean the same thing except the points they differ on identify them as fundamentally opposed ideologies. Uniparty specifically is a term Americans mostly use from the right wing to describe what they call Globalist interests, which almost means the same thing as when anticapitalists describe Capitalist interests, except the points they differ on identify them as fundamentally opposed ideologies. I've never heard any european politicians use the actual term "uniparty," if someone on this sub is using that exact term, they're likely adopting the American right wing definition of the term in the same way if you see someone referring to "libertarian values" on this sub they probably don't mean values like forming cooperative relationships of mutual aid, they probably mean american libertarian values like privatized unregulated industry. My sibling comment mentions that we're discussing Germany, and that's why I'm being a stickler, if you hear a German refer to the concept of "one party" meaning many parties being enthralled to capitalism, that's very different than the typical usage english word "Uniparty." Chomsky is talking about capitalist interests, he's not talking about the modern American right wing "globalist interests" which is a sort of umbrella term vaguely blaming economic hardship on trade deficits, exporting factories, importing cheap labor, and sometimes simply antisemitism (global jewish conspiracy to pump nations dry for example). What chomsky is talking about is more like how both parties are required to serve capitalist interests e.g. by not socializing healthcare since that would hurt the bottom line of healthcare companies, or by not banning fracking since that hurts the profits of massive transnational oil companies.

OKRainbowKid 2y ago

We are now 3 comments deep into talking about the term in the context of the US. The thread and the original comments were about Germany. Can you explain to us how the former relates to the latter? Germany has a much more diverse set of parties. However, terms similar to "uniparty" are used by AFD (and perhaps BSW) to refer to "all the regular" (read: democratic) parties, that they stand in fundamental opposition to.

aduj 2y ago
Because you refuse to read and ignore that "uniparty" was used so that the international English audience understands it. Besides, the complaint that the SPD under Schroeder destroyed the welfare state and was increasingly indistinguishable from the CDU predates the AfD. Arguments like these of course require historical knowledge and nuance rather than crying "far right".
- OKRainbowKid 2y ago
  Why are you replying on behalf of the person I actually asked? You created your account today, this was your first comment, and I perceive it to be exceedingly aggressive and antagonistic. You're also putting words in my mouth. I don't believe you're acting in good faith and engaging with you is not a productive use of my time.

komali2 2y ago

In the USA "Libertarian" and "Anarchist" also almost mean the same thing except the points they differ on identify them as fundamentally opposed ideologies. Uniparty specifically is a term Americans mostly use from the right wing to describe what they call Globalist interests, which almost means the same thing as when anticapitalists describe Capitalist interests, except the points they differ on identify them as fundamentally opposed ideologies. I've never heard any european politicians use the actual term "uniparty," if someone on this sub is using that exact term, they're likely adopting the American right wing definition of the term in the same way if you see someone referring to "libertarian values" on this sub they probably don't mean values like forming cooperative relationships of mutual aid, they probably mean american libertarian values like privatized unregulated industry. My sibling comment mentions that we're discussing Germany, and that's why I'm being a stickler, if you hear a German refer to the concept of "one party" meaning many parties being enthralled to capitalism, that's very different than the typical usage english word "Uniparty." Chomsky is talking about capitalist interests, he's not talking about the modern American right wing "globalist interests" which is a sort of umbrella term vaguely blaming economic hardship on trade deficits, exporting factories, importing cheap labor, and sometimes simply antisemitism (global jewish conspiracy to pump nations dry for example). What chomsky is talking about is more like how both parties are required to serve capitalist interests e.g. by not socializing healthcare since that would hurt the bottom line of healthcare companies, or by not banning fracking since that hurts the profits of massive transnational oil companies.