Excellent Reads

1738 readers

134 users here now

Are you tired of clickbait and the current state of journalism? This community is meant to remind you that excellent journalism still happens. While not sticking to a specific topic, the focus will be on high-quality articles and discussion around their topics.

Politics is allowed, but should not be the main focus of the community.

Submissions should be articles of medium length or longer. As in, it should take you 5 minutes or more to read it. Article series’ would also qualify.

Rules:

Common Sense. Civility, etc.
Server rules.
Please either submit an archive link, or include it in your summary.

Other comms that might be of interest:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

In an Age of Right-Wing Populism, Why Are Denmark’s Liberals Winning? (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 22 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Around the world, progressive parties have come to see tight immigration restrictions as unnecessary, even cruel. What if they’re actually the only way for progressivism to flourish?

That the era of low immigration was also the era of progressive triumph is no coincidence. [...] The United States felt more like a cohesive nation to many voters, with higher levels of social trust and national pride, and politicians were able to enact higher taxes on the rich and new benefits like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Yep NYT, what if for progressivism to flourish it needs to be less progressive and more reactionary and fascist?

Deep thoughts with The Deep.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

It does, actually. Democracies should bend to the will of the people, after all. The only way to remain sort of progressive when the public demands that you compromise your principles is obvious: You simply have to compromise.

I know you disagree with that, when the people are wrong you think the progressives should make the decisions while the people should be lectured.

Edit: Yeah go ahead and keep not listening to the public YOU FUCKING IDIOTS. Stay a minority, keep losing, lose it all. Gay rights, women's rights, worker's rights and more.

You'd rather leave the reins in the hands of literal Nazis than turn immigrants away. The amount of pro immigration pressure from certain progressives is fucking ridiculous, it's absolutely wild how much of a death grip you have on the gate, keeping it as open as you can, and with the other hand holding back the boot that tries to kick some out, you hold it back for dear fucking life.

I feel so fucking betrayed by the absolute incompetence and denial that seems to be defining the left right now.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Democrayies should bend to the will of the people

Yep, if one has an understanding of democracy pre-WW II

The new understanding the west came to agree upon also contained

Democracies should bend to the will of the people, but there are some unnegotiable core principles, which are to be upheld, even if the will of the people dictates differently. We call them human rights

Funnily enough those human rights basically are the extension of core Christian values, which are usually not considered progressive.

And among them are the right to asylum and the right not to be deported somewhere, where murder and torture are to be expected.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

Immigration to Denmark is not a human right.

Additionally, the vast majority of immigrants are under no specific risk of murder and torture, besides the part where the country they come from is just generally dangerous.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

As we do not share values, let's disuss technicalities instead:

what to do with immigrants, of whom we do not know the state of origin?
what to do with immigrants where the state of origin does not want to take them back?

Then everybody is like "Muh, but Dublin rules". Yeah right, because those will work out perfectly for Europe, when all the southern states are left alone with all the immigrants.

In consequence, every "we want immigration to go down" comes down to using brutal violence against those immigrants. And now we're back to square one: questions about human rights ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Yes, it does come down to that.

Now either accept it, or lose the voters and lose elections and fight to overthrow the "unethical" democracy that refuses to share their country sufficiently.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

besides the part where the country they come from is just generally dangerous.

That's exactly what asylum is about and why asylum is a human right. (That said, asylum approval in Denmark is higher than the EU average and doesn't seem like a problem.)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm an Atheist who is very acutely aware of where most of the danger in most of these countries comes from. It's not left behind at the border. It's also most of what makes conservatives in general dangerous, not just foreign conservatives.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Could you explain?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Sufficiently religious people always make everything bad, in big and small ways.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

The "will of the people" is a highly questionable concept in the era of widespread propaganda that selectively highlights some issues and some instances of some issues and ignores others completely. And I am not even talking about social media, just the behavior of the regular old media.