The West for the most part isn’t. Relations between Europe and America have gotten more antagonistic, but for the most part the former is toeing the latter’s party line.
I’ve recently seen a pic with election results in Germany, and it’s spectacular - one block leading in former FRG, another block leading in former GDR (AfD), and it’s very clean.
If you think about it, “Europe” has lots of political stability. No democratic uncertainty whatsoever. AfD pretends to be that, but really after that map I can’t think so.
And the elites are fine with the way US is choosing. They’ll just be the next on it, tinker a bit with the new stuff for their own convenience, soften some sharp bits.
It’s rather that the rest of the world should unite against the west until it’s too late. Pakistan and DPRK should share their nuclear toys so that everyone had a nuke.
The coalition of anti-western states, mostly totalitarian and not very nice, would in some bits work like Curtis Yarvin’s (I know it’s mostly wrong people dreaming of it) idea of paradise - the right of exit (changing a country among them) would de-facto exist, and every such state having nuclear deterrence would mean that those more attractive for immigrants won’t be pressured to stop, which will mean slow evolutionary change for more liberty.
I personally think that (at some point) open immigration is what made the USA more democratic (except racism). Getting more and more different people of non-elite background willing to build a new life is a powerful source of constant hardly predictable change.
It’s sad that I can’t explain these ideas to people closest to me in their worldview, they are just a bit too conserved in their understanding, and for them I’m picking cannibals over “imperfect civilization” for some abstract benefit. But how is that different from “white man’s burden”, I’m not sure, except “white man’s burden” implied some responsibility for what you’re doing, and Kipling was kinda sad the British empire didn’t find that responsibility in itself. I think it’s the same or worse and the more cynical people understood this earlier.
Dude what are you on about? The previous German government collapsed.
That map you are talking about only represents which party was the strongest in that particular area. It does not specify by how much. In total 5 parties (ignoring that one Nordic minority party seat) made it into the federal parliament and two more parties came close to it.
This is the current federal seat distribution. Note that in Germany constitutional changes require a 2/3 majority. The far right CDU/CSU is extremely hostile to the Left party but so far does not want to embrace working directly with the AfD Fascists although they have done so “accidentally, wink wink” in the past.
Germany is not politically stable. The current government is running around largely headless, on most points directly opposing what they had said just before the election which was solely aimed at blowing everything up politically speaking. There is no long term strategy except for more racist and authoritarianism and a respectful and peaceful transition of power becomes less and less likely while Trumpist tactics are embraced.
The minister of the interior has announced to defy the courts to continue illegal deportations of asylum seekers, claiming that a recent court ruling would only apply in the specific case, despite that evidently not being the case.
The West for the most part isn’t. Relations between Europe and America have gotten more antagonistic, but for the most part the former is toeing the latter’s party line.
I’ve recently seen a pic with election results in Germany, and it’s spectacular - one block leading in former FRG, another block leading in former GDR (AfD), and it’s very clean.
If you think about it, “Europe” has lots of political stability. No democratic uncertainty whatsoever. AfD pretends to be that, but really after that map I can’t think so.
And the elites are fine with the way US is choosing. They’ll just be the next on it, tinker a bit with the new stuff for their own convenience, soften some sharp bits.
It’s rather that the rest of the world should unite against the west until it’s too late. Pakistan and DPRK should share their nuclear toys so that everyone had a nuke.
The coalition of anti-western states, mostly totalitarian and not very nice, would in some bits work like Curtis Yarvin’s (I know it’s mostly wrong people dreaming of it) idea of paradise - the right of exit (changing a country among them) would de-facto exist, and every such state having nuclear deterrence would mean that those more attractive for immigrants won’t be pressured to stop, which will mean slow evolutionary change for more liberty.
I personally think that (at some point) open immigration is what made the USA more democratic (except racism). Getting more and more different people of non-elite background willing to build a new life is a powerful source of constant hardly predictable change.
It’s sad that I can’t explain these ideas to people closest to me in their worldview, they are just a bit too conserved in their understanding, and for them I’m picking cannibals over “imperfect civilization” for some abstract benefit. But how is that different from “white man’s burden”, I’m not sure, except “white man’s burden” implied some responsibility for what you’re doing, and Kipling was kinda sad the British empire didn’t find that responsibility in itself. I think it’s the same or worse and the more cynical people understood this earlier.
Dude what are you on about? The previous German government collapsed.
That map you are talking about only represents which party was the strongest in that particular area. It does not specify by how much. In total 5 parties (ignoring that one Nordic minority party seat) made it into the federal parliament and two more parties came close to it.
This is the current federal seat distribution. Note that in Germany constitutional changes require a 2/3 majority. The far right CDU/CSU is extremely hostile to the Left party but so far does not want to embrace working directly with the AfD Fascists although they have done so “accidentally, wink wink” in the past.
Germany is not politically stable. The current government is running around largely headless, on most points directly opposing what they had said just before the election which was solely aimed at blowing everything up politically speaking. There is no long term strategy except for more racist and authoritarianism and a respectful and peaceful transition of power becomes less and less likely while Trumpist tactics are embraced.
The minister of the interior has announced to defy the courts to continue illegal deportations of asylum seekers, claiming that a recent court ruling would only apply in the specific case, despite that evidently not being the case.
“Stable” doesn’t mean “good”.
It’s neither. That’s the point.