I wanted to examine the European phenomenon of the collapse of the left but I realized that it would take a lot of posts in order to explain the phenomenon. So I decided to break the subject into two posts, of which this is the part before. In the first part we will examine the first of the phenomena that cause the electoral collapse of the left.
The left are not collapsing, as they think the extreme left analysts, because the votes of the left end in populist parties. According to the Vulgate inequalities would push people on the left to pass, in the Italian case, Pd in M5S, or in the case of the German SPD at AFD.
These are absolute crap: if you can pass off the bale in the Italian case (as in Italy few can tell you that M5S is a fascist party balbista mold instead exquisitely Mussolini: the figure of Di Battista should be enough, but it does not happen), it becomes almost impossible to explain the migration from SPD to AfD, for one simple reason: in the states where he won AfD, SPD was not strong . And since you can not yield voters who have not , the speech ends.
What is happening is a very different phenomenon:
- the voters of the left stop to vote / participate and become inactive.
- inactive before electors are “excited by propaganda” and become active in the populist parties.
Although the two phenomena occur together, why grow the populists and the reason for which the sinister collapse is very different. They are two separate phenomena, and you can not use one to explain the other, although there may be weak interactions.
So if we look at the phenomenon of collapse of the left social democratic (in Germany to say greens grow terribly, so you can not really speak of collapse of the left but collapse of the SPD ), we must ask what convinces voters to go to sleep.
All the analysis thus focuses on the reasons for which the one who before was voting on the left today stays at home and does not vote their own.
The first reason is, quite simply, press the left . The left parties are born, in fact, as Enlightenment . In view of the traditional left, the left was a Enlightenment . On all fronts. Even a basically phony newspaper as the unit tended to provide a appriccio rational and scientific , or at least he tried to sell his approach as such. In doing so, historically it attracted a nation of people who loved to hear analyze problems in numerical terms, without sentimentality and with a very different approach than the normal approach of human sciences, who were the workhorse of newspapers Catholic . Not for nothing atheists once focused on the left: to the right there were the superstitions and fables of the humanists, left science and reason uncompromising. And “no compromise” meant “without sentimentality.”
Today is not the case, and the press left was colonized by the masters of humanist thought. With the result of appearing stupid and repugnant to all those who have been attracted by the Enlightenment of the left. Not that today are not enlightened, but are literary rather than rational terms, much less scientific. Here’s an example to illustrate the decay:
The first concept that Stille (which has a liberal arts education) does not understand is that distribution. According to him, the population is a blur cake that has an input and an output, but the distribution seems fair. In practice, according to drops whoever is not dead is a person of working age, since the age of 5. There is a problem. It’s called “distribution.”
The first concept that Stille (which has a liberal arts education) does not understand is that distribution. According to him, the population is a blur cake that has an input and an output, but the distribution seems fair. In practice, according to drops whoever is not dead is a person of working age, since the age of 5.
There is a problem. It’s called “distribution.”
As you can see, the population is distributed by age. And as you can see, there is a segment of the population today is around 45 years old (about five) which is dominant, and constitutes a social security catastrophe in 10-15 years. But that’s not the point: we return to the problem.
The fewer children who are born today are the foundation of this pyramid. The dead are obviously concentrated in the top of the pyramid (unless epidemics that have occurred are not killed 600,000 people and only Stille’s knowledge). The people in “working age” starting around the fifth-sixth of the graph layer if they are educated, the fourth if you are not.
As a result, if they die many elders and few young are born, absolute percentage em workers> when growing . Obvious: we are doing to lose weight TWO of the population that is NOT working, leaving intact the ones that work.
In the short term, in the five years mentioned by Stille, this trend does increased the absolute proportion of the population at work, which (unless you leave the country) occupies a larger slice of the population.
For instance, if tomorrow there was an epidemic that kills all pensioners and young people of school age, the percentage of workers would increase, and if the epidemic would kill anyone who does not work, this figure would grow even more until reaching the 100% of the population.
But remaining in practice, the Stille speech does not stand: population loss that he describes is concentrated among the elderly and infants, which not are “working age population” over the next five years . If the Italian population decrescesse in this way to one million units in five years, that is, the absolute percentage of Italians to grow jobs. (In the short term, ie in five years).
An article like for those without a liberal arts education is literally illegible . The numbers do not speak at all to the author (it is clear), and the “simple arithmetic” he appears to have completely ignored. He does not know how to handle a simple FIFO queue either intuitively (in practice it means that he has no idea how to save money, this guy can not handle their own domestic savings).
The first of the reasons why the voter no longer recognizes in the writing of the left is that it has become unreadable. The left seems to have embraced the rhetoric of the humanities area, after speaking of progress, science, the technique for decades. They are celebrating the first man on the moon with people who, when he writes, describing the distance between earth and moon wrong unit of measure.
This phenomenon occurred almost anywhere in the West. I could waste time and tradurvi the cataclysmic crap devoid of logic that writes Sasha Lobo of SPIEGEL, to show that they are completely unreadable to anyone attempting to put orders of magnitude, temporal sequences, quantity and definitions to things.
So we have a people that is enhanced for years thinking about the progress that has been excited with Yuri Gagarin, who was in front of the TV watching the men landing on the moon, and we hear that children aged 0 to five years working population. Interesting, is not it?
And to make matters worse, a population that suffers from a excess workers , ie high unemployment, must be told that the problem is that workers are not enough. Perhaps the writer refers to workers from 0 to 5 years. I also read the rest of the article with a trick – I never pay to contrologica unscientific and shit like that – and it’s even worse. But let us focus on the example.
Let’s face it openly: the problem is not “who is a worker and who is not.” The problem is that the worker has always done jobs requiring technical, with more and more technical time, logical discipline, mathematics and precision. A common warehouseman would know Stille locate the error due to the daily work. Anyone for work should fill and empty a tank would know to identify the error. Whoever manages queues of any kind can do it. The postman knows how to do it by force of circumstances. Only Stille not understand.
The first among the reasons for which the left-wing voters dumped the left, and remains at home s suffer in silence, is that to a class of average skilled workers may not patently busted hustling accounts, reasoning illogical and meaning, a rhetoric that is, shows you that the speaker knows how to be right but not understand a shit .
The humanist, that is, does not believe the reality. When reading the ‘art of getting right to Schopenhauer, plays the title as “The Art of Being Right even though you have wronged “, when “The Art of Being Right in spite of practical evidence “. Clearly the electorate of reference will retire disgusted and stop playing press Left .
And this thing the press is, to use an overused term, “horizontal.” It covers in general the way of thinking of the left, but not just skilled workers or those who make technical occupations. When you said that last center-left government / whateveritwas returned a country with better finances, while the debt has increased by 250 billion , also the home of Voghera normal can tell you that if you made even more debt your finances have not improved .
The cultural left has become literally unreadable to anyone expected of the parties that were good in practice, or even pragmatic. But if you say “pragmatic” to a humanist he does not understand a thing as “oriented to reality as it interacts with us in practice,” but “one that thinks like
This is the first phase of the left voter detachment, which consists of several phases:
- Ok, you, say crap, but you’re good. We vote and participate in politics, but do not listen to you.
- Ok, you, say crap and make a lot of crap, but I want to give you confidence and you score yet. I do not participate breasts I feel like smashing your face.
- Ok, you, say crap and do just bullshit, but you are always better than those guys. Do not participate because I can not stand you, and do not vote either willingly, but the alternative is Hitler.
- You say bullshit, you just bullshit, and I’m not even 100% sure that you are better than Hitler. So you do not vote either, but I remember that once I was left so continuous preferirvi words to say.
- No, enough. Enough is enough. You broke my balls, and in order not to be confused with one of you I wear the SS uniform and go for a walk to the pits Ardeatine. I spit upon him, but at least I no longer associated with Zingaretti.
This first article describes the first phase.