About politico.eu
-
Axel Springer isn't centrist. They are openly right wing and call out progressive positions as "woke bullshit" and stuff like that. They openly say that they are right wing.
-
You can be a neoliberal and against wokeness. Neoliberalism is about money. You don’t need to accept their label, they are using it because it serves their needs at the moment. Look at what they do rather what they say.
One day people will connect dots between „centrism” and far-right, it’ll be too late then based on what I’m seeing here though
-
What is there to reconcile?
They are not part of the left. They are more moderate than neoliberals since they do (in theory) believe that capitalism must be at least somewhat regulated unlike neo liberals.
-
Political views are more than a single axis. Not being left doesn’t right, especially today when we have politician businessmen who don’t even have to concern themselves with ideologies.
-
Do you know the general difference between progressive and conservative or "left" and "right" wing policies? Both see differences in people most of which are innate. Progressivism (left wing) generally aims to level the playing field so that these differences do not affect your chances to be a member of society and live the life you want. Conservativism (right wing) infers hierarchies due to said differences and aims to build a society based on those hierarchies. Religious groups (like christian democrats) work with their religion, often arguing with "god's plan" or divine punishment, neoliberalism works with money and hustle culture.
true right wing ideology. It can be a compassionate philosophy that focuses on common good
No, it doesn't. It's the opposite of that.
-
Even in those systems the positions on capitalism are on the horizontal, left to right axis. Because when talking about politics left and right are used to describe positions on capitalism.
Neoliberalism is a pro capitalism ideology therefore it's a right wing ideology.
That people may not hold political ideologies is irrelevant to neoliberalism being a right Wong ideology. Its also not a new phenomenon by any means.
-
Agreed. But it’s one of the more harmless sources people often share here. People share right wing billionaire owned sources all the time. It really ticks me off.
-
So now we have one axis, progressivism. You can have a progressive right wing (Tories legalised gay marriage arguing it’s for families), progressive neoliberals (Democratic party) and progressive left (like Zapatero in Spain). How do we differentiate between them? Their attitude towards wealth inequality, authoritarianism etc. That’s why liberals are distinct from left or right, there’s as much difference between a liberal and a conservative as between a liberal and a leftist, but those are differences on other axis.
-
See my other comment for reply to this. This is much more complex and this oversimplified view is a big factor in why politics are so bad now.
-
I 've seen it. You want to rename the axes. The US Democrats are socially progressive right wingers, Zapatero is socially progressive left winger.
I am also not denying that there different dimensions of politics ideologies and that people can hold different combinations of them.
But neoliberalism is a position in the left-right axis. On the right. If you describe someone as a neoliberal you are describing a right winger. They might be socially progressive or they might not be. I also expect that whatever else they are they will primarily act based on their neoliberal convictions. Just like I expect the US Democrats (at least the high profile officials and politicians) to put neo liberalism before social progress.
-
Yes, it's more complex than an on-off-switch. Congratulations. Different liberal movements focus on different aspects. Neoliberalism is a radical economic movement building hierarchy on wealth and ability. Some liberal movements focus on individual freedoms (and when everyone is to have the same individual freedoms, differences must be compensated).
But this isn't about liberalism, it's about how neoliberalism is a right wing ideology. And that is because it builds and enforces hierarchies. -
I'll start: The Guardian (UK) is self-owned (owned by an organization whose purpose is the long term economic viability and editorial independence of the Guardian).
-
Euronews is even worse: It was bought by some shell company belonging to the Victor Orban circle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euronews#Post-NBC,_Alpac_Capital_ownership,relocation_to_Brussels(2022%E2%80%93present)
-
No, the axis will be there regardless of their names and regardless of whether you choose to recognise them or not. I reject treating politics this reductively because it benefits conservatives and neoliberals primarily.
-
You make neoliberalism sound like fringe when it is the mainstream ideology that dictates how the world works.
-
First, that's your reading. I never commented on the spread of any ideology.
Second, what do you want to argue about? I answered your question about bow neoliberalism is a right wing ideology (that you framed as center-left btw). -
It's a bit exhausting. I use https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ to see biases and credibility of different websites. Anything that's not at least Center-X and High I pretty much dismiss. Rest I take with heaps of salt.
How do I know that site is trustworthy? I don't 🫠
-
I'd like to urge more good-faith argumentation from your side here. Whether or not neoliberalism is "fringe" was not the question.
This discussion was about Politico = Axel Springer = neoliberalism = right-wing.
