- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Summary
At the Munich Security Conference, JD Vance criticized European leaders for suppressing free speech, mishandling migration, and ignoring populist concerns.
He questioned whether Europe’s values still aligned with America’s and warned of a “threat from within,” rather than Russia or China.
His speech, which largely avoided discussing Ukraine, shocked attendees and drew condemnation from EU and German officials but was praised by Russian state media.
Vance’s private meeting with Germany’s far-right AfD leader and his dismissal of mainstream politicians further deepened tensions between the U.S. and Europe.
I think Vance is a tool, but can someone explain how these two points aren’t objectively true?
“In Germany, a firewall has long existed preventing mainstream parties from engaging with the far-right Alternative für Deutschland owing to its Nazi origins. But Vance said there was no room for such barriers.”
Is this the ‘populism’ you’re so concerned about?
While Vance is whining about European censorship, his boss in the US is throwing legitimate press organizations out of the White House briefing room and removing any mention of people of color or LGBT people from education and government documentation.
I didn’t mention the censorship because he is wrong about that
I also don’t agree with his quote about “no need for barriers”. I wasn’t aware he had said that.
He is referring to the poor handling of migration in Europe, which is true. And the general ignoring of popular outrage at how migration is managed.
That he is a fascist dickhead is indicative of the problem. Many many people who are not racist think migration is handled terribly in Europe and the problem is moderate politicians are hopelessly slow to engage with this and as a result the only people talking about it are fascist nutbags…
For Vance, this is just “otherism”. It’s an old trick — your problems are not something you actually need to take responsibility for — it’s all the fault of the “others” in your country. While migration may be a hot mess, the republicans play the card of “all crime is due to these others”. Pay no attention to the grifters elected in the US currently stealing all your money and data.
Indeed. Which makes it an even bigger problem that there are hardly enough moderate politicians saying “here’s what we hear you saying about migration and he’s what we will actually do to rectify that”
It’s a good point you make.
Migration being a model for creating both a scapegoat and a lowest of the low wage slavery class is a capitalist and fascist strategy. Vance acts as a critic of it, but right wingers, populists, are never onboard with enabling new residents to have better chances, education, work etc.
“Mishandling migration” is a pessimist position. With this position you can be wrong all the time, and then when an event occurs that false in the pessimistic view “you” claim full victory. It is similar to the story of doctors and a terminal patient that keeps outliving the diagnosis (although doctors dont celebrate the moment thay are proven right).
For example why “populist concerns” are not to be taken too seriously are football hooligans. True (white) nationals tearing down city centres, yet you don’t hear anything about “bad integration” or “religion of peace”, or any conversation from that corner.
If you follow that logic nobody is allowed to genuinely criticise immigration policy.
I can try: