Italy's far right set to win election

[Estro Felino]

A policy can be far-right. Fascism is about the big picture. In my view, and the views of many others, Giorgia Meloni is overall a fascist, not as a result of one or two policies, but as a result of numerous policies, rhetoric and statements throughout her political career.

Do you consider Orban a fascist too?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Do you consider Orban a fascist too?

I don't know too much about Orban, but from what I have read so far I think it's fair to say he is.

 

[Estro Felino]

I don't know too much about Orban, but from what I have read so far I think it's fair to say he is.

So this has nothing to do with Italian past.

With all due respect, I guess you believe that all the European leaders and governors who prefer to preserve the integrity of their own history, of their own country with strength and determination, are fascists.
Do you?

 

[Rival]

So this has nothing to do with Italian past.

With all due respect, I guess you believe that all the European leaders and governors who prefer to preserve the integrity of their own history, of their own country with strength and determination, are fascists.
Do you?

Traditionalism is now Fascism

Want to give your kids a Western, Christian education? Fascist

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So this has nothing to do with Italian past.

No. It has to do with the things she says and does.

With all due respect, I guess you believe that all the European leaders and governors who prefer to preserve the integrity of their own history, of their own country with strength and resolution are fascists.
Do you?

If you're just going to ignore everything I say and my numerous attempts to explain my position and instead just generate bad faith interpretations of my position based on nothing, what is the point of even asking me?

Deal with the claims put before you rather than imagining strawmen and dealing with them. Why is this so hard for you? When I talk about her wanting to render LGBT people in second-class citizens, you avoid it and talk about American drag queens (or throwing up a pathetic video of her being civil to a person with an LGBT flag because "Look! She's nice to him! This means we can ignore all the actual stated positions she has which would render that person a second-class citizen and remove their basic human rights"). When I bring up her fascist rhetoric, you ask me about other politicians entirely. When I explain that fascism is a malleable ideology not characterized by a single policy position or attitude, you suggest I would call any isolationist or traditionalist country fascist.

Please examine yourself and come back to the debate when you are actually willing to engage with what I am saying and not constantly avoid talking about things you cannot defend.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Traditionalism is now Fascism

Want to give your kids a Western, Christian education? Fascist

Why do I bother explaining things to you if you're going to ignore everything I write and instead adopt a strawman?

 

[Estro Felino]

No. It has to do with the things she says and does.


If you're just going to ignore everything I say and my numerous attempts to explain my position and instead just generate bad faith interpretations of my position based on nothing, what is the point of even asking me?

Deal with the claims put before you rather than imagining strawmen and dealing with them. Why is this so hard for you? When I talk about her wanting to render LGBT people in second-class citizens, you avoid it and talk about American drag queens (or throwing up a pathetic video of her being civil to a person with an LGBT flag because "Look! She's nice to him! This means we can ignore all the actual stated positions she has which would render that person a second-class citizen and remove their basic human rights"). When I bring up her fascist rhetoric, you ask me about other politicians entirely. When I explain that fascism is a malleable ideology not characterized by a single policy position or attitude, you suggest I would call any isolationist or traditionalist country fascist.

Please examine yourself and come back to the debate when you are actually willing to engage with what I am saying and not constantly avoid talking about things you cannot defend.

I do respect your view,
I didn't mean to misunderstand you. You think her rhetoric is fascist: that's okay. It's understandable.
But I disagree.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I do respect your view,
I didn't mean to misunderstand you. You think her rhetoric is fascist: that's okay. It's understandable.
But I disagree.

Okay, fine. But can you please explain to me why treating gay people as second-class citizens is okay?

And why do you use euphemisms such as "European leaders and governors who prefer to preserve the integrity of their own history, of their own country with strength and resolution" to categorize certain political groups? You realize that this sentence can be used to define a very wide-range of actions, from governments which simply support public funding of cultural centres, museums and the arts, to governments which outright call for the extermination of "non-native" races and ethnicities. What specific policies are you defending?

 

[Estro Felino]

Okay, fine. But can you please explain to me why treating gay people as second-class citizens is okay?

And why do you use euphemisms such as "European leaders and governors who prefer to preserve the integrity of their own history, of their own country with strength and resolution" to categorize certain political groups? You realize that this sentence can be used to define a very wide-range of actions, from governments which simply support public funding of cultural centres, museums and the arts, to governments which outright call for the extermination of "non-native" races and ethnicities. What specific policies are you defending?

What Orban does. That's what I meant. He defends the borders of his own country.
Hungary is a small country that has its own fragile equilibrium, being reconstructed after the fall of Communism.

 

[wellwisher]

They're not exactly far right, they're just standard social conservatives. I align with many of their views.

Brothers of Italy is anti-immigrant, anti-gay marriage, and pro the traditional family unit, with leader Giorgia Meloni promoting a public image herself as a “woman, mother, Christian” whose mission is to defend “God, country and family”.

Many of the party’s policies are pro-natalist and aimed at combatting Italy’s plummeting birthrate, which Meloni has described as “a true emergency”. They include increased child benefits; reducing VAT rates on nappies, baby bottles and formula; free childcare provision, and incentivising employers to hire new mothers.

Political cheat sheet: Understanding the Brothers of Italy (thelocal.it)

This is standard right-wing stuff. It's not exactly extreme.

Idk what the left expects the right to be these days, but this is not 'far right'.

Conservative policies, such as the strong nuclear family, go back hundred or thousand of years and have a lot of test proven data in terms of being the most efficient social structure. The Left wing policies are very expensive and add a huge tax burden on all people.

If you look at the nuclear family, when this was strong, social needs were much less for the children and the elderly. The family could make ends meet. When this changed cost escalated. For example, children from broken homes, due to Leftist alternate lifestyles, requires all types of extra social support. A divorce will require two homes and due to the laws of supply and demand will increase costs for even the nuclear family. The broken home lifestyle, in large Democrat run inner cities, correlates with drug addiction, gangs and crime. This adds even more to the expenses of all and adds a high opportunity costs to these young people.

We would better off if the Left was taxed extra, to pay for their social projects, they think are so good. They created these messes. Those who choose the efficient path of the nuclear family should be exempt from all the added expense of failed leftist social engineering.

Transgender, for example would become a medical and social money pit, since it fis rom the same brain trust that added a lot of previous expense.This type of behavior has been deemed pathology by medicine and psychiatry for decades and therefore to pretend to say it is normal will require a lifetime of care at the tax payers expense. It also requires a lot of accommodations in all levels of culture, since letting the patient run the asylum will not just be accepted. by all. Accommodations has an opportunity cost. It is not good to make this a new lifestyle, unless the goal is to cheat the tax payers and grow government. But if the Left agrees to cove the entire tab, then I would go along, so they can learn the hard way.

If the Left like its social policies, then pay the tab, and give a tax break to those who follow a more efficient social path. Your ideas needs a lot of propping up to create the illusions of equal. We should do a side by side cost analysis of Right and Left social policies, to quantify what is the more intelligent and efficient path. We can end the debate once and for all and turned the ship around, or tax just those who want inefficiency.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What Orban does. That's what I meant. He defends the borders of his own country.

Again "defends the borders" has quite a broad meaning, euphemistically. It can mean that you are in favour of a strong legal immigration policy and cooperation with neighbouring countries, or it could mean engaging in isolationist ethno-statism.

From what I have seen, Orban is in favour of Hungary as an ethno-state. So are you?

Hungary is a small country that has its own fragile equilibrium, being reconstructed after the fall of Communism.

So you are in favour of ethno-states as long as they are small and restructuring?

 

[Estro Felino]

From what I have seen, Orban is in favour of Hungary as an ethno-state. So are you?

Is that a crime? No.

 

[Revoltingest]

That is your own fabrication.

Sometimes people confuse emergent properties of
a system (one that is simply defined) with the definition.
Male leaders in fashion fascism is indeed a tendency.
So I understand the error.
More people should consult dictionaries, & not just
rely upon common usage in gabfest venues like RF.

BTW, I really did accidentally type in "fashion".

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Is that a crime? No.

This is the weakest argument ever.

Are you for or against ethno-states?

 

[Estro Felino]

This is the weakest argument ever.

Are you for or against ethno-states?

I do respect your view Really.
But I prefer not to answer this question, because the matter is very complex.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What they do in the US. Drag queens in kindergartens and primary schools. That's indoctrination, in my humble opinion.

How is that indoctrination? Please elaborate. When I was a kid, we used to have a guy dressed up as a bear come read stories to us. Was that indoctrination too?

My studies are juridical. I didn't study pedagogy, psychology, sociology.
In my humble opinion as a non-expert, I think that gay couples can be a loving family. So I am for.
But I think that straight couples should have the priority on the adoption list.

Why do you think straight couples should have priority on adoption lists?

 

[Estro Felino]

Sometimes people confuse emergent properties of
a system (one that is simply defined) with the definition.
Male leaders in fashion fascism is indeed a tendency.

BTW, I really did accidentally type in "fashion".

Because we always pronounce sc as sh before E and I.
LoL.

So in English it would be fashism.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because we always pronounce sc as sh before E and I.
LoL.

So in English it would be fashism.

That would be a good improvement.
Perhaps I'll adopt it.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I do respect your view Really.
But I prefer not to answer this question, because the matter is very complex.

I don't think it's that complex. It's a yes or no question.

Are you in favour of ethno-states?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Conservative policies, such as the strong nuclear family, go back hundred or thousand of years and have a lot of test proven data in terms of being the most efficient social structure. The Left wing policies are very expensive and add a huge tax burden on all people.

If you look at the nuclear family, when this was strong, social needs were much less for the children and the elderly. The family could make ends meet. When this changed cost escalated. For example, children from broken homes, due to Leftist alternate lifestyles, requires all types of extra social support. A divorce will require two homes and due to the laws of supply and demand will increase costs for even the nuclear family. The broken home lifestyle, in large Democrat run inner cities, correlates with drug addiction, gangs and crime. This adds even more to the expenses of all and adds a high opportunity costs to these young people.

We would better off if the Left was taxed extra, to pay for their social projects, they think are so good. They created these messes. Those who choose the efficient path of the nuclear family should be exempt from all the added expense of failed leftist social engineering.

Transgender, for example would become a medical and social money pit, since it fis rom the same brain trust that added a lot of previous expense.This type of behavior has been deemed pathology by medicine and psychiatry for decades and therefore to pretend to say it is normal will require a lifetime of care at the tax payers expense. It also requires a lot of accommodations in all levels of culture, since letting the patient run the asylum will not just be accepted. by all. Accommodations has an opportunity cost. It is not good to make this a new lifestyle, unless the goal is to cheat the tax payers and grow government. But if the Left agrees to cove the entire tab, then I would go along, so they can learn the hard way.

If the Left like its social policies, then pay the tab, and give a tax break to those who follow a more efficient social path. Your ideas needs a lot of propping up to create the illusions of equal. We should do a side by side cost analysis of Right and Left social policies, to quantify what is the more intelligent and efficient path. We can end the debate once and for all and turned the ship around, or tax just those who want inefficiency.

"Children from broken homes, due to Leftist alternate lifestyles ..."
Good grief, you crack me up. Stuff like that is why I can't take you seriously. I'd love to know which alt-right websites you're pulling this nonsense from.