Because in western Europe, after the wounds of fascist regimes, people such as Santorum, Perry, Bachman, Palin are assimilatd to extreme-right wing, whose nickname is fascism.
why? because of their religious fanatism, their backward points of view, their opposition to most basic women's rights (such as abortion, contraceptive pills for examples), their homophobia, their laws that forbid workers to protect themselves from greed of corporations, their laws against political freedom and freedom of speech (such as patriot act, such as breaking unions protests, such as forbidding people to strike, and so forth), and the fact that they give all power to companies, corporations, banks and greedy employers.
Far too true, and in a way, it would be most beneficial if Santorum did become the Republican candidate. I say this because he would be completely unelectable rather than mostly unelectable like Romney. It would be much better to have a nut with a small following run for President than a more "moderate" Republican like Romney who just might have a chance of beating Obama.
However, I think Romney getting the nomination is far more likely at this point. He needs only a third of possible delegates to get the nomination, whereas Santorum or Gingrich would need nearly two thirds if not more. Regardless of who is the Republican nominee, I sincerely doubt Obama will lose the election in November...
Not that I genuinely like Obama either. He is, for all intents and purposes, the lesser of two evils. Much as any Democrat, really...
I know Santorum may not win, but whatever, in my country he would probably be banned from politic (anti-secularism is something people really don't appreciate here), and he may have problems with justice/law because of his homophobia (our prime minister is gay(wich means here : the leader of the country ), or be rejected by most of population. That's why I make such deviation, because I can't understand how some people can vote for someone who's so close to fascism. There're people like him as well in Belgium as well of course, but they're labelled fascists, and represent only a low percentage of population actually.
The PM of Belgium is gay? How fascinating. A rather splendid example to the rest of the world, I believe.
Most European political systems would likely frown on a good few of the Republican politicians here. I personally believe that US politics is a rather stagnant and fetid arena.
And if we must be honest, I think many conservative Americans have had a secret love affair with Fascism since before the Second World War. Especially in the "Old South" and perhaps Alaska. No one would ever admit to it, of course, but in some manner Fascism is alive and well in the United States.
the interesting thing in your reply is how fascinating a gay PM may look in USA, here people don't care at all about this, or at least, don't seem to care. it's a bit like that : "he's gay? ok." (or "he's gay, so?"). I mean, they don't talk about it in the medias, it doesn't come on debate table, and there are no demonstrations in the street to complain about it. It's the same thing with religion, people usually don't know what is the faith of their politicians, and they globally don't care as well. The guy can be catholic, protestant or atheist, it doesn't matter,a politician won't be rejected because of it; afterall Belgium is a secular country. Belgium is far from being perfect, but at least people seem to focus on what the candidate proposes, on his/her political actions and reforms he/she may have made, rather than focus on futile non-political details such as the sexual orientation and personnal faith. while in USA, from what I see from here, a big part of people seem to focus first on the religion of the candidate, and some other private-life details. In two words, people focus on things that have nothing to do with politic and abilities to gerate and handle the country. For example, Santorum got a good number of votes in MA only because he's catholic (lots of cathos in MA). Like if because this candidate doesn't belong to each or each faith, it would make him/her not able to run a country correctly.
And yes, I guess some Republicans would have a heart-attack in Europe, I think especially about countries such as Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Denmark, and France as well. in Scandinavian countries, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and I think Portugal as well now, homosexuals have full right of marriage, and can even adopt. In Netherlands marijuana is legal, and they're sexually very open. In France, Belgium, Sweden and Norway (not sure about other countries, Germany is a bit particular) religion is globally out of public sphere/political debates, and creationism is "forbidden". And then, Belgium, Sweden and Norway have such health care and social security that they would be labelled "communist" by the most ignorant conservatives. all the EU is trying to force Belgium to stop the salary indexation (if there's an inflation of 3%, all the salaries/wages will increase of 3%). Plus the fact that in Finland and Belgium, around 70% of population is member of a trade union. Globally, Palin, Perry, Bachman, Herman Cain, Santorum and others of the same kind, if they had to make politic in Western Europe, would have to go in extreme-right wing parties, and would be labelled fascists, or fanatics, or christian integrists by the progressives. Liberals and social-democrats are the most powerful political families, with centrits and sometimes ecologists.
About fascism and USA, this deviation is quite interesting :[link] (more about nazism, but this guy is an interesting fellow, he has in his gallery a lot of good political documented satires about "american heroes", and as well honouring deviations about the ones who fought for more justice, and natives (he's a member of the AIM) And indeed for anyone with a bit of political knowledge or conscience, there're many similarities between fascists and the most radical wing of the Republican party.
Frankly, my fascination was more awe of social tolerances. I find it most impressive, considering it's taken the US this long to even elect a half-black president. Hell, we have yet to elect a female leader, which is something that has been common enough in Europe.
Yes, for as secular as the US is, there are places where religion and faith most certainly matter in the polls. It makes very little sense to vote based on "This guy is just like me, so I'm going to vote for him."
It is a fortunate thing that it is only the most radical Republicans that could be equated to Fascists. Otherwise, we might be in trouble...
It should be interesting to analyse why people in Western Europe have turned more tolerant indeed. I think it has maybe a link with WW2 actually : this war was the negation of life itself, the destruction of human dignity, the top of mass and industrial death. At the end of it, people had a will to reconstruct, to rebuild, and to recover their humanity, so, maybe it bred a kind of spirit of tolerance, the feeling that all humans deserve the same rights (Declaration of Human rights in/of 1948) and so on. USA didn't know this traumatism, their towns weren't bombed, their states weren't invaded and spoiled,they didn't lived under the fist of nazi occupation, most civilians could sleep quietly in their beds. So, it's maybe a reason why they lack conscience : they haven't lived the horror. Of course this is only a theory.
Something quite interesting to notice is that Spain, while they lived under a national-catholic dictatorship (very religious and conservative, actually, a kind of fascist theocracy) is now way more progressive toward LGBT than France, a country theorically extremely secular, and theorycally "the country of human rights". Nicolas sarkozy firmly stands against gay marriage. Nowadays, Portugal has turned more progressive than France as well on that subject (once again : country that lived under fascist-like conservative religious dictatorship until the 80's).
Anyway, the progressivism of my welfare state country could explain why I'm less extreme or radical than some other comrades, capitalism has been more "human" around here (but I know it wasn't the case everywhere, so, I can clearly understand why some are way more radical, and that's legitimate). But now it's changing, capitalism gets more agressive under the neoliberal assaults, the financial world gets more tyrannical, and radicalism will rise again. Let's hope people won't slip too much in the dangerous pit of nationalism, populism and fold. extreme right wing is dangerously rising.
these 3 maps are interesting, they show LGBT rights in the world, but at different years.
2008 : [link] (as you can see,in western Europe homophobia is punished as a form of discrimination, a lot of republicans would have problems with law/justice around here) Europe 2011 : [link] world 2011 : [link]
I believe your theory on the effects of the Second War is a very plausible argument. Certainly, those who do not experience the complete alienation of human rights (except for the "sacred Master Race") will never truly understand just how precious such things are. The Second War taught alot of peoples just how valued such rights are.
Hm, why does it not amaze me that France is losing it's edge in progressive tendencies? I think some of it has to do with a potentially defensive attitude towards their place in the world. France, like many, was a genuine Great Power (still is really), but their loss of empire and erosion of true world power likely has made them a bit reactionary. Just my theory, and perhaps not a great one. Certainly Germany has experienced worse in it's global position, but I believe utter destruction and division has taught Germany unique lessons. I'm also willing to bet the increase in progressive attitudes in Iberia are a direct result of their long-standing dictatorships.
Nationalism is a terrible scourge, one that coincided with the rise of Internationalism, and likely as a direct response to Marxist and Socialist ideals. Sadly, as Nationalism is a very strong thing, it has tended to outlast most of the Marxist tendencies so prevalent during the first half of the Twentieth Century. I'd also venture that the USSR's murky and contradictory existence didn't help the Left cause in the long run. Well, the Old Left cause anyway. As such, Nationalism is still very alive and well across the globe, especially as so many nations seek to preserve a unique culture and identity in an ever-shrinking world. Whatever strong rise in Nationalism and Nationalist parties will come out of this (hopefully nothing much) might end up undoing alot of the things so many have struggled for since the end of the Second War.
Those maps are indeed interesting. It would seem that dramatic change has been seen in Africa between 2008 and 2011.
Welcome CSS can be
you're unfamiliar to
it. So that's why
we're writing these
articles! If you
have any suggestions
or would like to
write a section in
future CSS Did You
are like Ogres by
Magepresented by the
This article came
about after a
requested that we
write ten clear,
simple tips for
information can be
very useful, but
it down into
chunks is so much
easier. So without
further ado plea...
--- dear friends and
ly I'm not longer
able to make my
large news in
deviant art... the
shows the numbers of
the thumbs but not
the pics...so I'm
just going on here
with my little
hope you enjoy it
See the light and
in photography is a
art. One of the most
of a photographer is
to see light and to
remember it. Light
is the most changing
element in our daily
life. We move among
solid objects and
among people who do
`anmari has been spreading her infectious positivity throughout our community for over 6 years. Throughout this time Ana has been at the core of all things devious, passionately developing an eclectic gallery, helping organise devmeets, participating in chat events and also recently completed dedicating her time as a Community Volunteer. We are absolutely delighted to bestow the Deviousness Award for May 2013 to `anmari, congratulations! Read More