German teenagers and young adults find themselves increasingly unsatisfied and likely to vote for the far right, according to a survey. Fears about prosperity are highlighted as a possible cause.
Young people are more likely to vote for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) than previously, a study on Tuesday showed.
Authors of the “Youth in Germany 2024” study said that under-30s were increasingly disgruntled with their social and economic situation, and that fears about future prosperity were driving a shift to the right.
The AfD’s signature issue is a hard-line anti-immigration stance, and the data showed that migration was among young people’s main concerns.
…
The online study, conducted in January and February, found that young people were becoming increasingly dissatisfied, especially with their social and economic situation, compared with previous years.
After the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors said economic and political worries for example due to inflation, high rents, the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East or the division of society had taken center stage.
I’m super left, almost anarchistic, radically left, after decades of seeing things get worse. But at times you go so far left that you disagree with other liberals, and their first response is “you’re a Maga conservative” just cause I didn’t agree with their elitist, college liberalism ideas that are all talk and ineffective.
The way so many young liberals are becoming way more rude, aggressive. Elitist, and so hard headed that they won’t budge even an inch right or left on an issue is a huge turn off to most people. If someone to their right even so much as disagrees in a polite way, they get called names and insulted, instead of educated. No wonder so many young people just jump to the far right when they see how so many young liberals behave.
I’m for sure gonna get dowvoted and called a conservative for calling out these young of privileged, college liberals who look down on everyone
Nah man, I agree. Many liberals (especially young) have this mindset of punishing people for “wrongthinking” instead of educating and getting them on their side, that shit only further radicalizes moderate people into the polar opposite of what you want. I’ve had this discussion with people before and it seems a lot of people either have a hard time telling the difference between unwitting ignorance from acts of bad faith or they just don’t care at all and think anyone even a bit right from them needs to be in a shallow grave. I feel like this aggressive behavior is part of the problem of why so many people are getting “redpilled” into the far-right.
@Caligvla @Son_of_dad
The far right is not worthy of anything. Nothing.
Define FAR right. Like how far? Cause I picture my dad, a conservative but has a trans grandson, and a gay niece, so he’s had to change his way of thinking in order to accept others. He’s not anywhere near perfect, but he’s trying. But according to most people here, he’s FAR right, because he’s a boomer.
I remember in 2016, anything right of Bernie Sanders was FAR RIGHT to you guys. And that’s a problem when you throw everyone together like that because you’ve dismissed alot of allies that just need a bit of education and coaxing instead of being tossed in the far right bin.
@Son_of_dad
I grew up in the deep south and have lived in Republican territories and households my whole life. I even voted for Trump in 2016, but that was the end of my support for Republicans. I am now an Independent and lean more left than right. Those guys ruined it and I will not support that regime. No more.
We agree on 90% on this issue. Trump, and the type of people he gave a voice to, are the worst thing that has happened not just to the country but to the world in general. And it needs to be stamped out, and the first sign of Revolution, I’ll be out there ready to die for my kid’s future. But I won’t turn good people into my enemies, because they’re consideres “too right”, because many people that have been called far right aren’t, and you lose them by throwing unreasonable hate on them.
After living in left and right states for many years, there is a stupid amount of common ground over stuff like solar, right to repair, rent control and housing, railway infrastructure, healthcare costs, quality careers and compensation, education costs and more.
We might see something like solar for different reasons (climate change vs. energy independence), but there’s ways of rephrasing a solution to have it both ways.
The only thing that really seems to get in the way are petty online disagreements that then snowball into stuff like accusing people of shitting in litterboxes, hypothesising that gender diverse people started an international war or accusing people of genocide because their underwear was just revealed to be made in a super repressive country. That’s the noise that prevents us from getting shit like bullet trains in or healthcare costs drawn down.
Even in more controversial things like abortion there are a large number of people that agree on the same thing on both sides. Once you throw out divisive labels like “pro-life” or “pro-choice” and look at the specifics, you find that it’s not really a 2 sided issue at all: https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-but-they-also-want-restrictions
There’s no way you call yourself “super left” or “radical left” and identify with the term “liberal”… Liberalism is the polar opposite of “radical left”
Jesus. This is exactly what I’m talking about. Is there a news letter or website that gives out the proper terms and most widely accepted labels, 2024 edition? I’ve been around long enough to see all these labels cycle through the mainstream lexicon. They mean something new every few years.
But of course that’s what you wanna single out, the fact that I use different labels than you, therefore I couldn’t possibly be anything like you right? It’s like you people WANT division, tribalism and segregation. You actively seek out things to get upset and in a fight about, which is exactly what they want.
Look mate, if you just said “I’m a democrat so I’m a liberal” I would’ve understood that. I’m not that nitpicky about it. But a self identifying “RADICAL LEFTIST” would absolutely never identify himself with the term “liberal”. Hell, radical leftists (and including the far left) use that term as an insult. Which of course raises some questions when you use it for yourself while also being “far left”. It makes it seem like you’re roleplaying the “radical leftist” role. Just my two cents, you do you.
Also, no, “liberal” hasn’t changed definitions, ever. It was always the same thing: an adherent to liberalism. If you’re far left you’re a commie or an anarchist or whatever. Communism/Anarchism has nothing to do with Liberalism. They’re on different parts of the political spectrum. If you’re from the US I’ll make this easy for you: both democrats and republicans count as liberals. They’re both adherent parties to liberalism.
That’s like claiming you’re a far right socialist lol
I’ve likely been around long before you, I’ve survived transform, I’ve been through war, I’ve survived anti Communist death squads, I’ve seen the jungles full of civilians fleeing capitalist bombs. don’t think you can educate me on the world.
Then go take a political science class.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
There is absolutely nothing to discuss here. This is not “the world”. This is political science. And it isn’t up for any weird debate. It’s a term written in countless research papers and field texts, and is not up for change due to whatever definition you guys happen to read in the news today.
From your link: “In Europe and North America, the establishment of social liberalism (often called simply liberalism in the United States) became a key component in expanding the welfare state.”
Idk, that seems compatible with most of the left-of-center spectrum, and certainly not something you would find a libertarian or conservative supporting. I can see how it’s not compatible with auth-left positions, though.
Perhaps you’re referring to neoliberalism, which, in my understanding, dropped all the social welfare stuff in favor of corporate welfare. In that case, I can understand how that term could be used as an insult.
In my eyes liberalism != neoliberalism. I consider myself liberal, and I despise neoliberal policies.
Whatever kid. Not everyone is a native English speaker, and not everyone is signed up to your own minds definition on things. You’re literally arguing about labels, that’s how I know you’re a child.
You can go on as many ad hominem attacks as you like, that’s not going to make your points more correct. I’m not a kid and I’m definitely not a native English speaker.
People are so touchy about being judged, so ready to be insulted. It all works in favour of the authoritarians.
Sure, we need to talk out the terms and agree on things, but that only works when people have open minds and critical thinking. In the meantime the epic struggle is between those who work, and those who own.
All the quibbles about left and right, about borders and morality, about identity, is distraction from solving the problems of fundamental disparity.
Basically, living in a kleptocracy sucks. Owners vs workers, authoritarians vs egalitarians: these are the real battles.
That smells an awful lot like ring wing indoctrination 101:
.
You wrote two and a half paragraphs that are essentially just liberal bashing. My experience is that liberals are the people who don’t judge you for personal choices, who reach out a hand even if you’re worlds apart.
Liberals aren’t Left since “everybody should be free to do what they want” is often incompatible with “we should have the best life possible for the greatest number”, especially when it comes to money, environmentalism, exploitation of others and so on.
Worse, liberals aren’t even genuinelly pro freedom, as they don’t even try to begin addressing the power imbalances (read reduction of freedom of the many to increase freedom of a few) due to Wealth and Ownership.
One wonders why exactly somebody created this heavilly hollowed derivative of the full fight for Equality that excludes everything to do with the inequality associated with Money and other society-wide forms of Powers, or in other words, the biggest part of societal inequality by quite a distance and the greatest forms of discrimination.
Personally I have this theory that this stuff was created in American think tanks to pull people away from the real leftwing thinking: this pale imitation of pro-Equality stops people from fight for the full Equality (which would have put them against the Wealthy and other established powers) whilst still making them think they were fighting for people to be treated equally and thus making them feel like righteous combatants for good.
As you’ve noticed, once indoctrinated most of those people will blindly and irrationally fight for it and never actually question the rationale of the elements of a political doctrine which has massive logic holes