The far right [question].

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
lem_
The far right [question].
Printer-friendly version

I am sorry to start another thread but I'm really not understanding this phenomena on any terms what-so-ever.

"Riding a wave of public anger at corrupt politicians, austerity and illegal immigration, Golden Dawn has seen its popularity double in a few months. A survey by VPRC, an independent polling company, put the party's support at 14 percent in October, compared with the seven percent it won in June's election".

Say reuters.

 

So we agree that a european far right state looks possible?

But I can seem pretty unable to find out what happens next - either if it occurs here where I live in the UK or another country like Greece. I just see the warning that it could happen and nothing more, which almost seems irresponsible.

And I am also asking about "barbarism" in general. I think we all agree that it looks like, without communism, things will only get worse and that capitalism won't recover. So then what, are we talking about global war and if so on what scale, or simply abject poverty?

I ask because if things do only progress in the negative direction, then I can't see any concrete outcome besides communism, but that is clearly my lack of imagination. You may ask why it matters, I guess I just want to know what chance there is of large scale executions in the UK, for claiming benefits or associating with communists e.g..

Any insightful replies would be so welcome I can't stress that enough and I'm sorry that I am appearing so much.

mhou
For various reasons I just

For various reasons I just don't see it; we saw the Golden Dawn equivalent in France make it to the last round of voting in the Presidential election (Front Nationale - Le Pen)- but the FN quickly lost the ground that it had gained. The NPD in Germany seems to have had similar success as Golden Dawn a few years ago, but lost it (I think they won 7%-14% in a couple regional elections) in short order. BNP in the UK same way- any steps they take toward being a legitimate party quickly see their base of support melt away. The far right is undoubtedly stronger than it was a decade ago, but is this reason to think they will take state power? The conditions for their rise just don't seem present in Europe. Union sacree's and Grand Compromises seem more likely (between PCF, KKE, the Trot groups that make up RESPECT/Socialist Alliance or whatever in the UK, Syriza, etc and left of center governing parties) I'd like to think.

As far as the course of capitalist developments without a communist revolution- I think the next few years will be like the last few- limping along, high unemployment (that seems to have reached a 'new normal' equilibrium- not really falling or rising drastically), rising costs of living/cost of consumer goods, one debt-crisis-terrorism episode after another (TPTG coined that term; I'm very attached to it and the idea behind it) with varying levels of austerity imposed year after year as it has been since winter 2007. Capital has a huge surplus population that it has expelled or won't integrate into the value production process, and a structural crisis that has been hanging over everything since the late 1960's, now the most recent expression of the crisis with the asset-primed bubbles. I don't forsee a major change from what we have been seeing the last few years (since the latest expression of crisis) in the immediate/short term future. Business is not 'bad' enough and the class struggle not developed enough in my mind to warrant factions of the bourgeoisie propping up crack-pot right-wing extremist regimes in the West.

But the concept of debt-crisis terrorism appears to be the dominant narrative of this era in the crisis: never ending manufacturing political crises which rallies the population to democratic mechanism's, creating a high sense of panic and anxiety over the future and every single legislative issue is given the importance of make-or-break status of the national (and international) economy. This phenomenon appears to be both the political cover of austerity, as well as the mechanism for enacting that austerity (through either 1 party taking charge and ramming changes through, like the retirement age rise in France, or both parties of the bourgeoisie saying they finally after much fighting and effort came to a compromise in everyones best interest that isn't draconian in its level of austerity, but is still austerity- like the debt-ceiling and Fiscal Cliff deals in the United States).

lem_
the common ruin of the

the common ruin of the contending classes...

 

is that simultaneous? just curious thanks :)

jk1921
Crisis

mhou wrote:

As far as the course of capitalist developments without a communist revolution- I think the next few years will be like the last few- limping along, high unemployment (that seems to have reached a 'new normal' equilibrium- not really falling or rising drastically), rising costs of living/cost of consumer goods, one debt-crisis-terrorism episode after another (TPTG coined that term; I'm very attached to it and the idea behind it) with varying levels of austerity imposed year after year as it has been since winter 2007. Capital has a huge surplus population that it has expelled or won't integrate into the value production process, and a structural crisis that has been hanging over everything since the late 1960's, now the most recent expression of the crisis with the asset-primed bubbles. I don't forsee a major change from what we have been seeing the last few years (since the latest expression of crisis) in the immediate/short term future. Business is not 'bad' enough and the class struggle not developed enough in my mind to warrant factions of the bourgeoisie propping up crack-pot right-wing extremist regimes in the West.

But the concept of debt-crisis terrorism appears to be the dominant narrative of this era in the crisis: never ending manufacturing political crises which rallies the population to democratic mechanism's, creating a high sense of panic and anxiety over the future and every single legislative issue is given the importance of make-or-break status of the national (and international) economy. This phenomenon appears to be both the political cover of austerity, as well as the mechanism for enacting that austerity (through either 1 party taking charge and ramming changes through, like the retirement age rise in France, or both parties of the bourgeoisie saying they finally after much fighting and effort came to a compromise in everyones best interest that isn't draconian in its level of austerity, but is still austerity- like the debt-ceiling and Fiscal Cliff deals in the United States).

I think that in the United States at least the poitical crisis has been very real. This doesn't mean that the more rational factions of the bourgeoisie haven't been able to exploit it in a way to give cover to austerity, as you state, but the debt ceiling crisis in the U.S. was a potential major debacle for the national capital, indeed the global economy.

In terms of the far right--it really depends on how this is defined. Is there a threat of some kind of fascist coup coming to fruition anytime soon in one of the major democratic powers? Probably not, but even the so-called democractic state is less and less obliged to kep up the illusion of civil liberties, etc. There may not be mass executions of troublemakers anytime soon, but the U.S. state already has an official policy allowing targeted assasinations of its own citizens without trial. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the latest Boston incident, particularly if it turns out a domestic group is behind it.

Did anyone else catch Gov. Patrick having to fend off a question from a "false flag" conspiracy theorist at last night's press conference?

lem_
"even the so-called

"even the so-called democractic state is less and less obliged to kep up the illusion of civil liberties, etc. There may not be mass executions of troublemakers anytime soon, but the U.S. state"

 

this was kinda what i was thinking about. the bourgeois having to undermine their own values to remain in control. just an idle thought though, of course ;)

Fred
Not an idle thought lem.  lem

Not an idle thought lem. 

lem wrote:
 this was kinda what i was thinking about. the bourgeois having to undermine their own values to remain in control. just an idle thought though, of course...

With regard to undermining their own values. I don't think the bourgeois find this too difficult because most of their supposed values are phony anyway. 

lem_
cheers fred... eventually

cheers fred... eventually though, the second face isn't going to believe / be able to repeat what it is saying.

 

that silly fool nietzsche talked about types of hypocricy.