Is feminism ruining the West?

Aug 2010
16,205
Welsh Marches
I don't think that is a fair characterisation of what I said. I said Farage and Griffin were both nationalist populists and I implied (and will now state it explicitly) that they like to stir up their followers with simplistic narratives about the chicanery of foreigners. Whilst that is not a million miles from what overt fascists such as Mosley did back in the day, I don't argue that every populist is a fascist. Using some (or indeed many) of the same techniques does not necessarily suggest a shared ideology, although neither does it preclude it.



You do have a point here. Although I do not argue for the suppression of far right or racist views per se, I do feel it is morally reprehensible to be a fascist or a racist and I'm happy to say as much. It's also true that when I accuse someone like Griffin of being a fascist, I am indeed seeking to put him and those who agree with him beyond the pale. This is because, in my view, treating them as equals in a debate runs the risk of making their views seem OK, even if I don't share them. I don't believe those views are OK.



I disagree. The whole point of talking about liberal elites is to box off a group of people and say "because they are all politically correct, pampered so and so's who don't live in the real world, we can ignore everything they say." It's exactly the same.



Of course I am illiberal about things I profoundly disagree with. Being liberal doesn't mean not having opinions, or carefully trying to ensure that every single view, no matter how barmy or bigoted, thrives in a culture of relativism. I do indeed believe that my values are superior to those of bigots. But what is wrong with that? This is, after all, a debate between populists and liberals. And in any debate, each side thinks they are right and believes their position and views to be superior to their opponent, at least insofar as the debate in question is concerned. If liberals have to say "it's OK to be a fascist and/or a racist and I fully accept that such views are in every way as valid as my own", then one is asking liberals to be doormats. Tolerate everything except intolerance.

Resp. second para., I am not actually suggesting that it is wrong to want to put fascists beyond the pale, what I do think is wrong is to label non-fascists as fascists to try to put them beyond the pale. When you start a sentence like this 'When people like Griffin or Farage talk about 'liberal elites', I believe...' it is immediately apparent that you are playing that same game. Why drag in Griffin at all? He is not a serious figure in politics now if he ever was, and I don't suppose for a moment that you really know whether he talks about 'liberal elites'. In fact, you plainly wrote in that way, putting Griffin first moreover, to smear Farge by association, as being basically the same kind of person. And likewise in your final paragraph, you miss or avoid the point entirely. Whoever said that is illiberal to attack people who hold offensively intolerant illiberal views? What is illiberal is smearing a substantial portion of the population by suggesting that the Farages of this world are much the same as the Griffins of this world.
 
Likes: Picard
Jan 2014
2,577
Westmorland
When you start a sentence like this 'When people like Griffin or Farage talk about 'liberal elites', I believe...' it is immediately apparent that you are playing that same game. Why drag in Griffin at all? He is not a serious figure in politics now if he ever was, and I don't suppose for a moment that you really know whether he talks about 'liberal elites'.
He specifically liked the phrase "Westminster elites" as I recall. And no - he is no longer a serious figure. But neither was Farage until Cameron miscalculated and fed him his fiftenn minutes of fame on a plate. Farage got lucky and wa sable to break in to a system whch had always been dominated by the big, estabished political parties. Griffin wanted to get lucky and did much to try and clean up the BNP and present them as a serious political party rather than the NF in a cheap new suit. Both were fringe figures, largely regarded as a joke, who tried to turn that to their advantage. Farage succeeded, Griffin didn't.

In fact, you plainly wrote in that way, putting Griffin first moreover, to smear Farge by association, as being basically the same kind of person. And likewise in your final paragraph, you miss or avoid the point entirely. Whoever said that is illiberal to attack people who hold offensively intolerant illiberal views? What is illiberal is smearing a substantial portion of the population by suggesting that the Farages of this world are much the same as the Griffins of this world.
You are reading far too much into my post. I didn't spend hours thinking how I could sneak an innuendo in by the back door - I just wrote it off the top of my head. I'm not trying to smear Farage, but you are right to say I was suggesting he and Griffin were the same type of person. As I explained earlier this morning, whatever Farage's views, his tactics are pretty much the same as Griffin's were. So too are those of Boris Johnson, although whatever else you might think about him, fascist he isn't.

To make that point is not illiberal and neither does it smear Farage or those who follow him. Let me be clear. Although I believe that UKIP (and now his Brexit party) attract more than their fair share of racists, I do not argue for a second that all - or indeed most - of Farage's followers are racists. To the contrary, I don't think they are.

I don't know what to make of Farage himself. He is a great speaker and knows how to work a crowd. He has a knack of always managing to sound incredibly reasonable, but that is more about his skills as an orator than the inherent reasonableness of his position (in my view, at least). My suspicion is that he is indeed an extremist, but I have met enough people who have met him and formed a generally favourable impression of him that I have to accept that might just be my inherent prejudice against tub-thumping nationalists.
 
Aug 2018
490
Southern Indiana
Does the altright have a point when they say that women's empowerment is ruining the West? Basically the argument is that feminism is promoting the rise in female hypergamy which incentivices illegitimacy and deadbeat men, at the cost of the more responsible salary man, also the rise of women in the work force led to an increase in labor supply, which lowered the salary of men, and that female suffrage led to the rise of left wing causes such as mass immigration and communism, although the later predates women's suffrage, and the former is a lot due to corporate demand for cheap labor. Finally the fact that women and men are now in close contact with each other in the workplace lead to an increase in infidelity among women, since they now have more opportunities to cheat, compared to when she was staying all day in the house. Basically the ideal state for the alright seems to be like ancient Athens where women are basically consigned to the house and have very limited rights to go out unaccompanied. But how much of these problems is due to the rise in sexual promiscuity in the West since the 60s rather than women's rights?
Wow, that says a lot about you, "more opportunities for WOMEN to cheat", why didn't you say it provides more opportunity for men to cheat?
 
Aug 2010
16,205
Welsh Marches
He specifically liked the phrase "Westminster elites" as I recall. And no - he is no longer a serious figure. But neither was Farage until Cameron miscalculated and fed him his fiftenn minutes of fame on a plate. Farage got lucky and wa sable to break in to a system whch had always been dominated by the big, estabished political parties. Griffin wanted to get lucky and did much to try and clean up the BNP and present them as a serious political party rather than the NF in a cheap new suit. Both were fringe figures, largely regarded as a joke, who tried to turn that to their advantage. Farage succeeded, Griffin didn't.



You are reading far too much into my post. I didn't spend hours thinking how I could sneak an innuendo in by the back door - I just wrote it off the top of my head. I'm not trying to smear Farage, but you are right to say I was suggesting he and Griffin were the same type of person. As I explained earlier this morning, whatever Farage's views, his tactics are pretty much the same as Griffin's were. So too are those of Boris Johnson, although whatever else you might think about him, fascist he isn't.

To make that point is not illiberal and neither does it smear Farage or those who follow him. Let me be clear. Although I believe that UKIP (and now his Brexit party) attract more than their fair share of racists, I do not argue for a second that all - or indeed most - of Farage's followers are racists. To the contrary, I don't think they are.

I don't know what to make of Farage himself. He is a great speaker and knows how to work a crowd. He has a knack of always managing to sound incredibly reasonable, but that is more about his skills as an orator than the inherent reasonableness of his position (in my view, at least). My suspicion is that he is indeed an extremist, but I have met enough people who have met him and formed a generally favourable impression of him that I have to accept that might just be my inherent prejudice against tub-thumping nationalists.
So, Farage is not a serious politician, he is just a laughable populist who 'got lucky' as a result of an error by Cameron. You might ask why Cameron was led to commit that error in the first place! Whatever you may think of him, Farage is one of the most effective politicians of his time, and we will see him working that effect in the forthcoming EU elections (if they come about). He seems to be getting quite a range of good candidates to stand for his new party, better than he could ever recruit for UKIP, the kind of people who can't be dismissed as closet racists and fruitcakes.
 

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
35,066
T'Republic of Yorkshire
The problem with labelling people like Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg as racist, extremist etc. is that it puts off centrist politicians from associating with them, and that means they are forced to find allies where they can, some of whom are not exactly the most savoury people. And by labelling them as such, it makes them more attractive to the real fascists and racists.
 
Jan 2014
2,577
Westmorland
So, Farage is not a serious politician, he is just a laughable populist who 'got lucky' as a result of an error by Cameron.
That's certainly my view., although I accept that many would disagree with me. He's a one-trick pony and whilst it is quite a good trick, I don't see him as a political heavyweight.

Whatever you may think of him, Farage is one of the most effective politicians of his time, and we will see him working that effect in the forthcoming EU elections (if they come about).
Only in respect of his one trick. UKIP's problem - and it'll be the Brexit party's problem too - is that they are a single issue party. They can gain support when that single issue is at the forefront of everyone's minds, but once Brexit is resolved, their raison d'etre is lost. Serious politicians have to do more than hit the zeitgeist on the issue of the day. UKIP has shown that it is utterly incapable of doing that and my belief is that the Brexit party will be no different.

He seems to be getting quite a range of good candidates to stand for his new party, better than he could ever recruit for UKIP, the kind of people who can't be dismissed as closet racists and fruitcakes.
Good. The more that Brexit is presented as a sober economic or a political choice rather than as some patriotic call to arms against the machinations of dodgy foreigners, the less comfortable the racists and fruitloops will feel about wearing their prejudice as a badge of pride.
 
Jan 2014
2,577
Westmorland
The problem with labelling people like Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg as racist, extremist etc. is that it puts off centrist politicians from associating with them, and that means they are forced to find allies where they can, some of whom are not exactly the most savoury people. And by labelling them as such, it makes them more attractive to the real fascists and racists.
But equally, failing to call out extremism makes extremism no longer appear to be extremism.

I wouldn't personally put Rees Mogg in the same boat as Farage. Whereas Farage likes to present himself as the maverick outsider, Rees-Mogg is very much part of the political establishment. If you can understand enough of his Latin, its clear that he supports the conventions and institutions of government.
 
Likes: World Focker
Aug 2010
16,205
Welsh Marches
That's certainly my view., although I accept that many would disagree with me. He's a one-trick pony and whilst it is quite a good trick, I don't see him as a political heavyweight.



Only in respect of his one trick. UKIP's problem - and it'll be the Brexit party's problem too - is that they are a single issue party. They can gain support when that single issue is at the forefront of everyone's minds, but once Brexit is resolved, their raison d'etre is lost. Serious politicians have to do more than hit the zeitgeist on the issue of the day. UKIP has shown that it is utterly incapable of doing that and my belief is that the Brexit party will be no different.



Good. The more that Brexit is presented as a sober economic or a political choice rather than as some patriotic call to arms against the machinations of dodgy foreigners, the less comfortable the racists and fruitloops will feel about wearing their prejudice as a badge of pride.
Indeed, these are single issue parties and Farage is really a singe issue poltician; but I think you greatly underestimate the political skills of a man who has been able to push through Brexit against the establishment consensus, according to which anyone who supports it must be a fruitcake or loony; it wouldn't have happened without him, and no one else would be able to start a party from scratch and having it reaching the current level of support within weeks.
 
Likes: World Focker

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
35,066
T'Republic of Yorkshire
But equally, failing to call out extremism makes extremism no longer appear to be extremism.

I wouldn't personally put Rees Mogg in the same boat as Farage. Whereas Farage likes to present himself as the maverick outsider, Rees-Mogg is very much part of the political establishment. If you can understand enough of his Latin, its clear that he supports the conventions and institutions of government.
But there's very little difference between their positions.

Why is one an extremist and the other not?
 
Likes: World Focker

Similar History Discussions