TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

General Politics Thread

Go To

This thread is for discussing politics, political science, and other politics-related topics in a general, non-country/region-specific context. Do mind sensitive topics, especially controversial ones; I think we'd all rather the thread stay free of Flame Wars.

Please consult the following threads for country/region-specific politics (NOTE: The list is eternally non-comprehensive; it will be gradually updated whenever possible).

Edited by GastonRabbit on Apr 25th 2025 at 9:51:19 AM

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#3851: Mar 20th 2022 at 9:29:00 PM

Who do we ask whether people want to be contacted, though? The government? Individuals on the street?

That's kind of the problem with anti-globalization arguments regarding the plight of the Third World. They're normally not from the actual groups affected by globalization, who are largely unable to get their voices heard for a variety of reasons, and it's unclear to what extent they want more involvement with the West.

raziel365 Anka Aquila from South of the Far West (Veteran) Relationship Status: I've been dreaming of True Love's Kiss
Anka Aquila
#3852: Mar 20th 2022 at 9:37:22 PM

To answer your question, governments do have policies in regards to the degree to which they contact indigenous groups, some areas are literally charted as their territory based on patterns of consumption while the tribes that do have some degree of contact form their own representation to speak with the government in various matters such as land disputes or permission for anthropologists to study them.

As for the other people who are affected by globalization and can only be heard on a local level, protectionism and government investment is one of the first things they ask as their artisanal production will never compete with the industrial output of the First World.

What the small countries want, be them western like Latin America or not like the Middle East, is to be allowed to grow and expand their cultures without the overwhelming imposition by cash of the First World.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, we should find the absolutes that tie us.
unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#3853: Mar 21st 2022 at 12:11:10 AM

"I would prefer the increased usage of 'anti-colonialist' compared to 'anti-imperialist' as the former would likely have more widespread appeal, given the backlash against the latter due to abuse by actual tankies. "

As other have said, I will said the issue of anti colonial and anti imperalism, is there is a sort of pipeline from that to uber nationalism-populism as many of Latam have show.

Why? hard to said but mostly is because while many argument about promoting local culture and not becoming a vassal of Europe or US feel a times is good in theory, it also atract the kind of crowd that is pretty much "we should be allow to do whatever we want in our country and everyone should fuck off!", which it was mostly Chavez taking points.

If anything one can ask why anti imperalist atract this crowd and why tankiest always have this love/hate relationship with authoritarism.

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
TheWildWestPyro from Seattle, WA Since: Sep, 2012 Relationship Status: Healthy, deeply-felt respect for this here Shotgun
#3854: Mar 21st 2022 at 1:50:19 AM

In theory as opposed to praxis?

raziel365 Anka Aquila from South of the Far West (Veteran) Relationship Status: I've been dreaming of True Love's Kiss
Anka Aquila
#3855: Mar 21st 2022 at 6:41:15 AM

[up][up]

I’d say it’s something of a trade-off since anti-imperialism can easily lead to an “us vs them” mentality.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, we should find the absolutes that tie us.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#3856: Mar 21st 2022 at 7:19:25 AM

[up]I mean, logically someone has to be doing the imperialism. If you aren't opposed to a "them" then how exactly do you stop imperialism?

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Mar 21st 2022 at 7:19:44 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
raziel365 Anka Aquila from South of the Far West (Veteran) Relationship Status: I've been dreaming of True Love's Kiss
Anka Aquila
#3857: Mar 21st 2022 at 7:33:04 AM

[up]

I meant in the sense that it becomes a Jumping Off the Slippery Slope scenario of rejecting everything that comes from the other side, including stuff like LGTB+ or cultural minority rights depending of the situation. Hitler Ate Sugar is a real thing.

Edited by raziel365 on Mar 21st 2022 at 7:34:30 AM

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, we should find the absolutes that tie us.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#3858: Mar 21st 2022 at 7:37:19 AM

Ah. I definitely agree that's a risk that leftists and other anti-imperialists should be cognizant of.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
raziel365 Anka Aquila from South of the Far West (Veteran) Relationship Status: I've been dreaming of True Love's Kiss
Anka Aquila
#3859: Mar 21st 2022 at 5:04:30 PM

Ok, so this spun out of the War in Ukraine thread, so I'll address it here.

Yes, the concept of the First, Second and Third World used to be a Cold War definition that separated those aligned with the USA, those with the USSR and those part of the non-aligned movement.

Nowadays, because of the way economical development has gone and the fact that the USSR is dead, the term has taken different connotations to refer mostly to the development aspect. It doesn't help too that the countries of the non-aligned movement also are still economically underdeveloped on average so the term is still handy.

So in light of all of this, what exactly is the new meaning of the Worlds division empirically speaking? Well, first we have to see what is the primary dynamo in the economy of those countries to have a coherent comparison, for this, the Three-sector model of Fourastié is useful to some degree.

The Third World is often left behind with the primary industry, that is the exploitation of natural resources like oil or minerals along with food production, as their main economical driver, if not their sole one. The other two sectors (three if we include knowledge) exist in the background mostly because there's no way to properly develop them as it is cheaper to keep using the current industrial centres.

The thing that makes the Third and Second World different is thus the capacity of industrialisation, the secondary or manufacturing industry, being able to refine materials or to produce mechanical parts in mass production is the first step to jump into a development phase, in this various countries of Europe could be considered Second World countries rather than First ones, though the fact that manufacturing does exist at all is better than nothing since importing raw products to create refined ones always pays out.

Finally there's the First World, now for this I will have to merge both the Tertiary and the proposed Quaternary sectors here, these are the countries that, aside from tapping into the primary and secondary industries, also have a seat in the aforementioned sectors as producers of both services and knowledge, these are the current giants and the ones that get a say more often than not in the world.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, we should find the absolutes that tie us.
DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#3860: Mar 24th 2022 at 10:02:49 AM

Do you have a question relating to all this?

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
raziel365 Anka Aquila from South of the Far West (Veteran) Relationship Status: I've been dreaming of True Love's Kiss
Anka Aquila
#3861: Mar 24th 2022 at 10:47:59 AM

[up]

It relates to a discussion that happened in the same day I made this post to explain why the First/Third World categorization is still commonly used even though the Cold War is over.

Relevant quotes before the mods put their foot down.

Parable

If you're wondering why Third World got associated with poor, undeveloped nations, it's because those were often the ones who tried to stay clear of Cold War politics in Asia, Africa, Latin and South America. Even though you had placed like Finland and Switzerland that were part of the Third World. The collapse of the USSR made the whole Second World part of the organizing moot, which led to the ideas of First and Third World drifting into what we associate them with today. Which is why Cuba gets lumped into Third World now, despite always being associated with the USSR in the past, and those aforementioned European Third World countries being considered First World now.

The First/Third World categorization idea stopped making sense a long time ago though, if it ever even made sense in the first place without the Second World part. Where do you put China? Brazil? India?

SilasW

This by the way is why in the actual study of International Relations you’ll see either Developed World/Developing World used or Global North/Global South used. Though the second pair has serious issues geographically it’s designed to be slightly better than saying “The West”.

The West by the way is another Cold War term, which meant Western Europe, it was never a term meant to cover anything outside of the Iron Curtain divide of Europe.

Protagonist506

To my understanding:

The term "Third World" essentially implies a Hufflepuff House. A common reason a nation would be a Hufflepuff House is that's rather poor.

Now, with the term's modern use, I'd argue it's honestly kind of obsolete. Having said that, if you're going to use it I'd argue China counts as a second-world nation. It's the closest thing the US has to a rival currently and is even nominally communist.

Having said that, that you kind of have to squish definitions around to make it fit shows basically why you shouldn't use the three worlds model these days.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, we should find the absolutes that tie us.
MorningStar1337 The Encounter that ended the Dogma from 🤔 Since: Nov, 2012
The Encounter that ended the Dogma
#3862: Mar 26th 2022 at 6:39:04 PM

I want to ask about a particular phrase, because Its something that I think is true and also a belief that I think many people share for better or worse.

The phase in question being "The personal is political". Originating as a slogan for second-wave feminism. I want to ask about its meaning in a modern content. As I interpret it as alluding to an inextricable overlap betwixt one's identity and ideology (which I also think covers their beliefs, values and ideals), I also want to ask to what extent is this metaphorical Venn diagram a circle.

DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#3863: Mar 28th 2022 at 12:35:04 PM

@ raziel365: I guess what I'm really asking is: who still uses this nomenclature and why is it important?

@Morningstar: To the extent that society and culture still impose values and beliefs on people without many of them explicitly understanding this process, and therefore not being in a position to skeptically question their own attitudes about their own and other's life choices, the phrase still has relevance as a way to remind people that there are often political reasons why members of society are socialized the way that they are (ie, it preserves the traditional distribution of power).

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
ECD Since: Nov, 2021
#3864: Mar 28th 2022 at 7:07:25 PM

[up]Of course, it can also be used to justify imposing political goals on people's (usually other people's) personal lives. The downside of the personal is political is that it accepts that the political should be in the personal.

[down]For most modern discourse I've seen developed/developing/least developed and even that seems to be being phased out. The other term I see sometimes is Global South, a term I personally don't like, but is trying to get at something historic.

Edited by ECD on Mar 28th 2022 at 8:07:52 AM

raziel365 Anka Aquila from South of the Far West (Veteran) Relationship Status: I've been dreaming of True Love's Kiss
Anka Aquila
#3865: Mar 28th 2022 at 7:57:42 PM

[up][up]

I would say, I still see this nomenclature in common use in newspapers and articles, at least here in my country, so at the very least I can say that there are place in which this old categorization is still around even if it has lost its original meaning.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, we should find the absolutes that tie us.
Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#3866: Mar 29th 2022 at 10:23:00 AM

Of course, it can also be used to justify imposing political goals on people's (usually other people's) personal lives. The downside of the personal is political is that it accepts that the political should be in the personal.

I don't think it actually does, "the person is political" isn't a mission statement it's a reflection of reality. Not using that specific phrase would not magically make people immune to personal imposition, if anything it could make such things stronger by stopping us from examining and thus critiquing them.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Mar 29th 2022 at 10:23:13 AM

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#3867: Mar 29th 2022 at 4:42:42 PM

In the ‘60s, “the personal is political” meant, among other things, “spousal abuse and spousal rape are crimes”. It means that not everything that happens on the level of a family is a private matter for the government to stay out of.

Another example is that being a stay-at-home mom is a personal choice, but one that’s influenced by things like work opportunities, availability of childcare, parental leave policies, and social mores. That doesn’t mean we should force people to change those types of personal decisions, it means we should be mindful of the incentives structures and social norms surrounding them, and understand the surrounding structures as something that is political and that can be altered. Doing nothing doesn’t keep politics out of people’s personal lives; choosing the status quo is still a political decision.

(Canada just got a national childcare policy passed for all ten provinces, which is part of what made me think of the example.)

(In my ideal world both parents would alternate staying home with children until the children were school age, and wages would be at a level where they could afford that, as I think that makes more more connection and a better life than having kids in daycare from age 1; but that’s not the world we live in. This will be a huge benefit to dual-income households and lone parents.)

Edited by Galadriel on Mar 29th 2022 at 4:44:59 AM

eagleoftheninth Shop all day, greed is free from a dreamed portrait, imperfect Since: May, 2013 Relationship Status: With my statistically significant other
Shop all day, greed is free
#3868: Apr 24th 2022 at 12:01:55 AM

Historian Priya Satia wrote an article for Slate on how "critical thinking" tools in education can be misused to lead students to whitewash historical atrocities, like British imperialism or American slavery. It's a pretty long read, but it's worth reading through for its takedown of why this practice doesn't work. When school assignments ask students to list the "positives" of these historical cases, they're essentially asking them to repeat the old, racist arguments used to justify them back in the day: that slavery was good for the economy, or that European imperialism brought progress and modernity to India and Africa, as if those places were devoid of their own history and agency to progress without the guiding hands of foreign colonisers.

One day, we will read his name in the news and cheer.
minseok42 A Self-inflicted Disaster from A Six-Tatami Room (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
A Self-inflicted Disaster
#3869: Apr 24th 2022 at 12:55:08 AM

1. Could this be related to the 'new-atheist' movement, which claims to endorse critical thinking, but got co-opted by the alt-right?

2. I wonder if using debates in school as an educational tool leads to this kind of bothsiderism. Just last week, in my country, we had a TV channel host a debate between the leader of the right-wing party and the leader of a disability rights group on whether disabled people should be allowed to use the subway.

"Enshittification truly is how platforms die"-Cory Doctorow
xyzt Since: Apr, 2017 Relationship Status: Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free
#3870: Apr 24th 2022 at 1:53:05 AM

[up][up]I am not sure how much I agree or understand the points here (with reference to my country). If the pros are being used to justify past imperialism or argue that the pros were more than the cons then yeah it is bad, but arguing that colonial rule in India was more nuanced isn't wrong in my opinion. Things like say, the modern dalit movement has its origins in the Raj (although the colonial govt also had made their condition worse in other ways with things like the martial races theory, the criminal tribes act and their initial policies increasing disparities between the upper and lower castes due to said policies not taking into account the already present inequalities and letting the upper castes grab the oppurtunities to enrich themselves more) , and many colonial era indian reformers did try to take help from the colonial govt and were influenced by western values (either directly or as a way to reinterpret their own indigenous scriptures in more progressive way) to combat the social ills of their society.

Edited by xyzt on Apr 24th 2022 at 2:33:26 PM

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#3871: Apr 24th 2022 at 2:10:54 AM

I only see repeating and then viewing the real arguments made as a failure if we at the end of the debate try and pretend both sides were equal.

The point of such an exercise should be to teach kids the skills to look at pro-slavery arguments and go “that’s a load of crap”, they can’t do that if we don’t expose them to the genuine arguments made in favour of slavery.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
ShinyCottonCandy Everyone's friend Malamar from Lumiose City (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Everyone's friend Malamar
#3872: Apr 24th 2022 at 2:12:12 AM

I only see repeating and then viewing the real arguments made as a failure if we at the end of the debate try and pretend both sides were equal.

Which is, in fact, what some schools do.

My musician page
unknowing from somewhere.. Since: Mar, 2014
#3873: Apr 24th 2022 at 4:06:35 AM

There is two thing i guess help ont he idea the british empire was legit.

The issue with nazism and confederacy is that they often no though as state on their own because how little they last and their existence was tie with a war that erase it, in a way we see confederacy more as break away moment not much diferent than Donesk and Donbass region: it dosent matter if they treat their citizen better, we see them as little more than puppet state for the kremlin. the apartheild is seen as bad system but not the country of south even if is root in colonialism and separation of races in general.

In the case of british empire, it exist mostly end of the era were polis could just stright out take another with little justification beyond "I can" so the British india exist as legitimate state, one that was overthrow but it exist. I said this because otherwise the sole act of imperalism made many polis not deserving to exist and incapable of analising.

But on the other tail, I often see of what I call "materalistic positive analysis" in which pretty much the number of bulding you make often indicate whatever is good, as Venezuelan I have see it often again and again with supporter of Marcos perez jimenez, a notorious venezuelan dictator with various crime and yet a lot of people here praise him for all the civil proyect he made(some of them already in the work when he took over) and want him to make Venezuela prosper again.

In short, history often have this thing of "He kill many people but did you see the bulding he made?"

"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
xyzt Since: Apr, 2017 Relationship Status: Yes, I'm alone, but I'm alone and free
#3874: Apr 24th 2022 at 4:49:43 AM

In the case of british empire, it exist mostly end of the era were polis could just stright out take another with little justification beyond "I can" so the British india exist as legitimate state, one that was overthrow but it exist. I said this because otherwise the sole act of imperalism made many polis not deserving to exist and incapable of analising.

To be fair here, the British did justify their rule in India more thoroughly than that. From Shekhar Bandhopadhyay's Plassey to Partition:

Orientalism in practice in its early phase could be seen in the policies of the Company’s government under Warren Hastings. The fundamental principle of this tradition was that the conquered people were to be ruled by their own laws—British rule had to “legitimize itself in an Indian idiom”.7 It therefore needed to produce knowledge about Indian society, a process which Gauri Viswanathan would call “reverse acculturation”. It informed the European rulers of the customs and laws of the land for the purposes of assimilating them into the subject society for more efficient administration.8 It was with this political vision that Fort William College at Calcutta was established in 1800 to train civil servants in Indian languages and tradition. The Orientalist discourse, however, had another political project, as Thomas Trautmann (1997) has argued. By giving currency to the idea of kinship between the British and the Indians dating back to the classical past, it was also morally binding the latter to colonial rule through a rhetoric of “love”. “Every accumulation of knowledge”, Warren Hastings wrote in 1785, “is useful to the state: … it attracts and conciliates distant affections; it lessens the weight of the chain by which the natives are held in subjection; and it imprints on the hearts of our own countrymen the sense and obligation of benevolence.”9 But if the Orientalist discourse was initially premised on a respect for ancient Indian traditions, it produced a knowledge about the subject society, which ultimately prepared the ground for the rejection of Orientalism as a policy of governance. These scholars not only highlighted the classical glory of India—crafted by the Aryans, the distant kin-brothers of the Europeans—but also emphasised the subsequent degeneration of the once magnificent Aryan civilisation. This legitimated authoritarian rule, as India needed to be rescued from the predicament of its own creation and elevated to a desired state of progress as achieved by Europe.

I guess the Aryan invasion theory also helped in that respect in developing a common historical link between the elite caste Hindus and the British. There was also exagerrating Aurangzeb's horrible traits (not that he wasnt awful due to his bigotry) to claim themselves as saviors of the Indian Hindus.

There is also that all pre British rule kingdoms in India were also authoritarian and imperial rulers who were exploitative and ruthless too (and our nationalists here would absolutely love to treat the islamic rulers specifically as just as one dimensionally evil as they see the colonial rulers as). We are for now atleast willing to treat the medieval and ancient imperial rulers with nuance acknowledging both their achievements and flaws, so i don't see anything wrong with the same being done with British colonial rule.

Edited by xyzt on Apr 24th 2022 at 5:56:16 PM

RainehDaze Nero Fangirl (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
Nero Fangirl
#3875: Apr 24th 2022 at 6:08:25 AM

The transformation to more direct rule of India was also something of an accident, if I recall correctly. The interest was more in maintaining client states and controlling trade, but between mutinies and mismanagement it somehow escalated to the Raj.

But then, even that only got started because of an obsessive desire for tea. And the Opium Wars. History is strange. <_>


Total posts: 5,585
Top