What Can the EU Do About Euroscepticism

By Liam McCrorie

Euroscepticism has been on the rise in Europe, especially this past decade. Many countries in the EU are beginning to become more Eurosceptic and have more supporters who might be looking for change in the EU or to leave it all together. The UK was probably the most Eurosceptic as they left the EU in 2020, due to concerns over the power of the Euro. And it seems that more and more countries are feeling the same way, even if Brexit didn’t turn out too well for the British.

Many countries in Europe nowadays have a large Eurosceptic party. Hungary has the Fidesz Party run by Viktor Orban, in Italy Giorgia Meloni, an extremely far right Eurosceptic, was recently elected in Italy. But what can the EU really do to combat this rise in far right nationalism and Euroscepticism? They can’t really do much since the EU can’t tell countries how to govern themselves, really all they could do would be impose economic sanctions, but would this even be enough to stop this wave of Euroscepticism.

The Era of Extremes

By Liam McCrorie

The political spectrum has always been made up of the left and the right, with conservatives leaning to the right and liberals to the left, but lately it seems both sides of the spectrum are trying to go as far to their extremes as they can, with neither side really seeming to represent the people, and leaving ordinary people left with nobody to really turn to.

The right has very clearly been turning into the far right for a while now with people like Donald Trump, Giorgia Meloni, Viktor Orban, and others being elected and leading their countries right leaning parties. None of these leaders are moderate conservatives they all lean very heavily into nationalist and sometimes borderline fascist rhetoric. They all talk about wanting to seal the borders to keep the enemies of the state out, and always portray migrants and foreigners as others, and sometimes as the enemy. These far right leaders also usually use Christianity and Christian ideals as a backing for many of their platforms such as banning gay marriage and abortions.

And the left has many issues as well. While the left usually, at least in my opinion, generally is much better than the right in terms of social issues and being progressive, can at times be over sensitive in some areas, which gets us nowhere, and wastes time and resources. Just as a quick example and something I have thought a lot about, gun laws in Canada. Trudeau is trying to pass Bill C-21 which would heavily restrict access to handguns, as well as ban many semi-automatic style rifles. Now this sounds like it would be a good bill except if you look at handgun crime it is nearly always with illegally smuggles handguns so this ban would do nothing other than affect the ability for hunters of target shooters to access what they need. And as for the rifles they would be banning many semi-automatic style rifles such as the Simonov SKS, a semi-automatic rifle she says is commonly used by Indigenous hunters. Now this is a smaller issue but it still shows how the left is trying to ban something because it sounds dangerous, when in reality they aren’t even dealing with the problem. And I do believe hunters should have access to the tools they need for a proper hunt.

The Dangers of Far Right Hate Speech

By Liam McCrorie

I’m sure many of you like me have seen recently the increase in the use of hate speech by people with big followings on the internet, and not just a rise in the use of hate speech but a rise in the tolerance of hate speech. Not even a decade ago it would be crazy and pretty much career suicide for anyone of note to go out and openly spew hate speech about a certain group, and you’d think today with cancel culture it would be even more crazy to spew hateful rhetoric in an open forum, but sadly the opposite is happening.

More and more people with large audiences have seemed to have almost gone off the deep end with some of the stuff they say. Probably most noteworthy and very recent in the news is Ye’s (formerly Kanye West) constant hate speech towards people of the Jewish faith. He has gone on and on spewing his hatred toward Jewish people and the Jewish faith. This has caused him to loose his deals with brands such as Adidas and Balenciaga, and more recently he was recently on the far right conspiracy podcast, Info Wars hosted by Alex Jones, where he admitted he “likes Hitler” and went on to defend the leader of the Third Reich saying everyone has value and he did valuable things as well. This most recent outburst has cost him many fans, but on the other hand, some of Ye’s other followers have decided to agree what he has said and more and more people are spewing hate about Jewish people. It just starts with one hateful person spreading a message and it can spread like wildfire.

Holocaust Memory Revisited

I find it really interesting that Leifer uses the term hijacking to describe the manipulation of holocaust memory. It really is a fitting term when I thought about it because this sort of approach does not align with revisionist history at all. In that field, it is all about taking additional sources and contexts in order to “revisit” historical time periods and events and see if that additional information changes anything. The “hijacking” of holocaust memory on the other hand is exactly that, as it simply seeks to change what actually happened for the sake of an agenda. In the specific case of the conference, it is completely unsurprising to me that it received backlash. It’s only natural that people who are brainwashed by a political agenda would snap back when they are challenged with factual information. The unfortunate side of this conference is that even if a consensus is arrived, there will always be some who disagree, and their ideals will spark up again in the future to cause more problems. The only way to stop that would be to completely stamp out anti-holocaust ideology which is just impossible and unrealistic.

Sources:

https://jewishcurrents.org/the-challenge-of-defending-memory-in-germany

http://newfascismsyllabus.com/news-and-announcements/why-right-wing-appropriation-of-commemoration-harms-the-fight-against-anti-semitism/

The “LEFT”?

BY: Francesco Sacca

Hello again everybody! I have not been responding for some time and I apologize for that. So, without further delay, welcome back.

This week, a 180 degree turn occured in the material and some views that I had not originally been aware of, were revealed. For so long I have considered myself to be leaning left as I have searched for a basis of equality and had a desire to “set fire” (as one of my classmates had once stated during a class debate) to the inefficient ideologies of modern democracy. Although, have I possibly not looked hard enough to notice fallacies within leftist thought? Or perhaps, even more concerningly, have I knowingly ignored the signs?

Before this week, understanding who exactly was responsible for the spread of ideals like xenophobia was quite clear (lying with those in the far right). However, articles like; Flank attacks: Populism and left-right radicalism in Western Europe, and; A plague on both your populisms, have both left me skeptical of this once clear understanding. Further research into this topic has only confirmed these worrying beliefs that there are some who belong to the Left Wing that align themselves with xenophobic ideals (whether they acknowledge it or are ignorant of it). This understanding is also supported by other, peer reviewed Carleton University articles, including one titled; Left-Wing Xenophobia in Europe, which has stated that: “Europeans who identify as extremely left-wing on the political spectrum hold anti-immigrant attitudes”.

Is there becoming a blurred line that separate the two sides? Will there be a eventual solution to these competing forces?

Please feel free to message me on your own personal research on the topic as I am keen to learn more (whether you agree with this outlook or have criticisms about it).

Sneaky Tactics

By: Hannah Long

Cottagecore meaning: Taylor Swift, Animal Crossing, and our endless desire  for calm - Vox
Image: https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2020/8/3/21349640/cottagecore-taylor-swift-folklore-lesbian-clothes-animal-crossing

“Not that much attention is paid to the relationship between populism, media and popular culture” (Özçetin, 2019). 

I find this to be a statement that is both true and false at the same time, true in the fact that there is a general problem with scholars ignoring the power media and popular culture has on the masses, being a central tool in populist rhetoric in modern times. However, on the flip side I think on a much lower level populist formations are well known with the younger demographic, these being the people who are not yet old enough to have obtained PhD, and do not have the experience of an acclaimed researcher. In a digital age you would think that their populist formations would be under more intense scrutiny due to how the internet makes this type of platform dangerously accessible to anyone anywhere, but even as global societies become more interconnected than ever before it becomes a readily expanding force that is impossible to control and more importantly keep up. It has become a tool for the far-right to make subtler, hidden behind “other messages.” These messages can come mainly in social media content, but can also arise from social & political movements of the 2010’s, such was the case for the Charlie Hebdo attack in 2015. The attack against the satirical French newspaper was arguably for some the point where an increasing amount of far-right hate was generated as a backlash response. Furthermore, facism has been able to crowdsurf and lock in on easy exploits through easily corruptible continent, which is becoming increasingly easier to do with even the tamest of topics.

Below is a link to a source about the right-wingafying (if that even is a word) of cottagecore. An aesthetic that has grown popular through its romanticization of a simple life. With many mommy bloggers using this aesthetic to reaffirm domesticity and gender roles:

https://politicalresearch.org/2021/07/29/why-are-gen-z-girls-attracted-tradwife-lifestyle

Right VS. Left Populism

By: Nicole Beswitherick

In the readings this week, we learn a lot about the differences between left and right populism – and why they aren’t the same.

In Luke March’s paper, we learn the definition and expectations of the two. He takes lots of his knowledge from Cas Mudde in saying that the influential view of populism is a ‘thin-centred’ ideology ‘that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups‘. He then lists that there is the ‘pure people’ versus the ‘corrupt elite’, and argues that politics should be an expression of the general will of the people (Mudde, 2004: 543).

Throughout the article, it is learned that right populism is primarily exclusionary, and left populism is primarily inclusionary. Basically, the right populists demarcate key groups as outsiders, and the left more so focus on policies of economic, cultural and political incorporation.

Davide Vampa helps explain the competing forms of populism and territorial politics in his writing but also helps explain the difference between left and right populism. He says there is a clear difference between the both of them in their approach to regionalism and autonomy. One represents the ‘core’ areas of the country where demands have been weaker, and the other is usually more electorally competitive in more ‘peripheral’ areas where demands have been stronger. This is in Spain, so perhaps it is different, but Vampa explains that the territorial factor seems to be the ideal element of contrast between the two forms of populism.

In Catherine Fieschi’s piece, she argues that there is no populism without democracy. To that she is correct. She helps describe what populism is by saying that it is a byproduct of democracy and it arises from a perception of betrayal of democratic promise. This helps explain why revolts against authoritarian regimes obey a different logic and don’t fall into any populist category.

Populism in recent years has undergone a renaissance on the left of the political spectrum. This is leading people to think of one of two things, according to Fieschi.

  1. “I like these people and so they cannot be populists”
  2. This is left-wing populism, so it really can’t be bad”

Overall, this week’s readings show that there is a difference in both left and right populism, and that one does not necessarily rank higher than the other.

Sources:

  1. Catherine Fieschi, “A Plague on Both Your Populisms” (April 19, 2012) Open Democracy https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/plague-on-both-your-populisms/
  2. March L. “Left and right populism compared: The British case” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 19(2) (2017): 282-303.
  3. Davide Vampa, “Competing forms of populism and territorial politics: the cases of Vox and Podemos in Spain” Journal of Contemporary European Studies vol. 28, issue 3 (2020).
  4. Cas Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser, C “Exclusionary vs. inclusionary populism: Comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America” Government and Opposition 48 (2013): 147–174.
  5. Davide Vampa (2020) Competing forms of populism and territorial politics: the cases of Vox and Podemos in Spain, Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 28:3, 304-321,

Populism right versus left

By: Adam Paquin

When looking at these weeks readings we see various definitions for populism. Both from the far-right perspective as well as the far left. March’s article shows us the multitude of answers when asking has the world fallen into a populist world, and at what point do we call all politicians populists. And do we need to re-examine the world populist so as to not classify and far left or far right activist as populist. We also need to come to terms with the fact that populism no matter what side it is on is still populism. Not just far right but far left as well, either extreme can cause larger problems down the road. So, what we spoke about earlier in the semester about a happy medium, or a “third” option. And so, what we end up seeing this week is the different but similar factors between the right and the left. Mudde and March show us that both are two sides of the same coin. Both have the possibility to spread populist views, and so who is bad or good? Well obviously, that depends on one’s own values in life, and what each side can do for you and your future. In similar cases this this we find it very difficult to explain the words good versus bad, as in all politics. When is populism not such a bad thing, and when is it evil? Again, that all depends on who is telling the story, but this of course is a common problem for the average historian so nothing new here.

Populism right versus left

By: Adam Paquin

When looking at these weeks readings we see various definitions for populism. Both from the far-right perspective as well as the far left. March’s article shows us the multitude of answers when asking has the world fallen into a populist world, and at what point do we call all politicians populists. And do we need to re-examine the world populist so as to not classify and far left or far right activist as populist. We also need to come to terms with the fact that populism no matter what side it is on is still populism. Not just far right but far left as well, either extreme can cause larger problems down the road. So, what we spoke about earlier in the semester about a happy medium, or a “third” option. And so, what we end up seeing this week is the different but similar factors between the right and the left. Mudde and March show us that both are two sides of the same coin. Both have the possibility to spread populist views, and so who is bad or good? Well obviously, that depends on one’s own values in life, and what each side can do for you and your future. In similar cases this this we find it very difficult to explain the words good versus bad, as in all politics. When is populism not such a bad thing, and when is it evil? Again, that all depends on who is telling the story, but this of course is a common problem for the average historian so nothing new here.

Nuancing left- and right- wing populism

Frank

One key takeaway from this week’s readings was nuancing understandings of left and right- wing populism. The labels of Inclusionary vs. Exclusionary populist rhetoric and politics put forward by Mudde and Rovira Klatwasser provide a useful framework through which to analyze both right- and left-wing populism. The authors use examples of materialist rhetoric to explore how Latin American left-wing populists include socioeconomically groups in their welfare programs while excluding the wealthy (American-backed) elites, while in Europe right-wing populist discourses around “welfare chauvinism” established groups who deserve social support (their “own people”) and who do not (“aliens,” such as Roma, immigrants, and refugees). However, it is important to stress that right-wing populists also attack economic elites as being a problematic group, something that is more often attributed to the left-wing.

From an inclusion exclusion perspective, xenophobia is clearly a discourse that is much more prevalent on the right rather on the left. This is something that we have seen in many other cases over the course of this semester. However, Fieschi reminds us that xenophobic rhetoric is also used by left-wing populists, as is the case with the Dutch Socialist party. According to Fieschi, this party fits into the “strictly populist” camp, demonstrating populism is not exclusively right-wing. Moreover, Fieschi’s three camps is a very useful spectrum on which to measure many different left and right wing parties and movements’ relation to populism.