holy f***

info on this person/party

Why is nationalism on the rise in like every developed country

a former Eastern Bloc country succumbing to fascism? imagine that.

that said i doubt they'll win, at least not this time.

Fr tho whatsup with eastern europe

Communists ITT pretending they don’t hate Israel and America.

the common social wealth of eastern european socialism has been obliterated and capitalism in crisis naturally leads to fascism.

yup, as it turns out Stalin was right about everything, who wouldve thought. gonna be a real bummer when this erupts into some sort of massive military conflict

Donbass (or maybe Russia or Greece) might be a turning point sometime in the future where socialism in europe gets "rebooted", but at this point it looks pretty grim. hopefully workers will be able to resist.

Because liberals

the real answer is multi-faceted: reconstruction from communist regimes still ongoing, fearmongering regarding the refugee migration, in certain cases an overreaction to the increasing centralization of the EU, and your bog-standard ethnic strife

some may disagree though

I think attacking people ad-hominem is one of the biggest causers of this, actually. Your ignorance is showing.

Yeah, liberalism failing to offer a better alternative than nationalism is because I was mean.

Also I think the aging/declining population is a factor

Gives more power to old people nostalgic for outright dictatorship and can make people feel like there's no hope in their country

dont you support Sanders?

I don't see how that's relevant to the trajectory of the political climate over the past half century.

im just confused. you just said that liberalism has provided no alternative other than nationalist tendencies, but you support a liberal that holds relatively little nationalist tendencies.

i think his point is that liberalism cannot stave off right-wing nationalism in the long run, which is what you're observing now and have observed since the fall of the Weimar Republic/Liberal Italy, among other governments

Really makes you think

You know, I was originally against neo-nazis but after finding out that they’re just people who express moderate positions on the Internet, I think I’ve changed my mind.

Sanders is a new deal democrat which might as well be communism post-Reagan. He's in a field comprised of actual republicans parroting leftist platitudes they have never stood for. It's not like I hand picked somebody who perfectly mirrored my views. David Harvey's work on neoliberalism best illustrates the gulf between a FDR democrat and a Clintonian one. At present, it's easier to refer to the former as socialists and the latter as (neo)liberals.

Europeans love pretending they not racist and stupid like "those Americans" and yet

The irony is that the same people who are preaching about racist America are so isolated in American culture that they don’t realize we’re the most diverse nation in the world

but how is that a fault of liberalism? the participation of democracy is in part of the socio-demographic, attitudinal, and mobilization-related characteristics of citizenry. it doesn't matter what political theory you paint the country with, because the nations are inherently nationalistic.

time and time again, greedy imperialists (or "faux" empires) have attempted to take over the Balkans, only for their control to implode and leave behind devastation. this isn't going to change.

it's also just funny that people want to be "against the libs", but have no problem championing liberal politicians.

The idea of Slavic Neo Nazis always makes me laugh.

"new deal" democrat doesn't mean anything. the new deal coalition was a union of Democrats that ranged from communists to Southern whites who wanted to maintain Jim Crowe. it only existed to push through FDR's legislation.

and yes, while Sanders is pretty "left" compared to other politicians in the US, he's still staunchly liberal. you can't be a socialist if you still, in some capacity, regard the political and economic unit of the society as the individual. you support liberalism.

i think you're mixed up with the American interpretations of "liberal", "left", "conservative", and "socialist". no one on the democratic stage is calling for the removal of capitalism and relinquishment of the ruling class. they may be co-opting socialist policies and beliefs, but none of them are close to being socialist, including our boy Sanders.

unless I'm missing something idk

The new deal were sweeping social programs and that's what anybody who says new deal means by it. It's not archaic lingo.

You can support Sanders as a transitional candidate. Again, nobody conjured him into existence as a reflection of their politics. There are no viable candidates further left. Few enough non-viable ones.

You seem really buried in semantics. Lots of these terms don't even have agreed upon implications. Leading communist academics have vastly different interpretations over what it actually is. The expanse of time you're looking at is also important. A democrat of the Civil War era is not a modern democrat. Labels change. Meanings change. It's perfectly coherent to refer to socialized medicine as a socialist policy and the candidate proposing it as the socialist candidate.

i fundamentally disagree, but in the end we both support the best candidate, and that's the matter at hand