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).
- For Asian countries, see the following:
- For East Asian countries (China, South Korea, Japan...), see East Asia News & Politics Thread
.
- For
Best KoreaNorth Korea, see North Korea.
- For
- For the Philippines, see Philippine Politics.
- For South Asian countries, see The South Asia Politics, News, and Analysis Thread.
- For Southeast Asian countries, see Southeast Asia Politics Thread.
- For East Asian countries (China, South Korea, Japan...), see East Asia News & Politics Thread
- For Australia, see General Australian Politics Thread.
- For Europe as a collective whole, see European Politics Thread
- For Eastern Europe as a whole, see Eastern European Politics.
- For Finland, see Finnish politics.
- For France, see French Politics.
- For Germany, see German Politics Thread.
- For Ireland, see Irish Politics Thread.
- For Poland, see General Polish Politics/Other Issues Thread.
- For Russia, see Russian Politics & News Thread.
- For the United Kingdom, see British Politics Thread.
- For Eastern Europe as a whole, see Eastern European Politics
- For the Middle Eastnote and North Africa in general, see General Middle East & North Africa Thread.
- For the Arab Spring specifically, see The Arab Spring.
- For strictly discussing news related to Palestine and Israel/Israel and Palestinenote , see Israel and Palestine.
- For Turkey, see Turkish Politics.
- For the Arab Spring specifically, see The Arab Spring
- For Northern Americanote ...
- For Canada, see Canadian Politics.
- For the United States of America, see General US Politics Thread.
- For Canada, see Canadian Politics
- For Latin America...
- For Argentina, see Argentine Politics Thread.
- For Venezuela, see Venezuela and the Chavez Legacy.
- For Argentina, see Argentine Politics Thread
edited 11th Oct '14 3:17:52 PM by MarqFJA
Shameful Display
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
It's hazy, especially when a dictator is popular. The term illiberal democracy exists to describe many of these state's, where the leader is elected, but that gives the leader a blank check to do whatever the fuck he or she likes, including censoring the media and using the police and or military to intimidate opponents. And their is also the various ways vote's are counted. Hell one could argue that the US itself is not democratic, thanks to the electoral college.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Say, what is the opposite term to "grassroots movement"?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
A procrastination in of itself
A fake grassroots one is an Astro Turfed movement, but one that's only about being top down? I think that's just an organisation or movement, I guess you could say a hierarchical movement, a top-down movement or a centralised movement, all those phrases tell you that power is not with people as a whole but a specific leadership group.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
What about "grasstops"? I've come across this term while trying to google an answer to my question, but most of the usage seems to be about the political "elite" making an effort to close the distance between them and the grassroots elements.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
A procrastination in of itself
I've never heard it used personally.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
V
The BBC: A perfect storm of populism
Mark Urban — Diplomatic and defence editor, BBC Newsnight
The Irish prime minister, addressing a conference of Europe's centre-right parties, warned against "the dangers of populism", referring to the rise of left-wing parties in Spain and Portugal. Meanwhile, similar phrases about the populist spectre have been used in relation to the march of the right in Poland and France.
"Populism" in this context is simply democracy revealing growing electoral extremism or polarisation, and it extends far wider than Europe.
Pat Buchanan, an "outsider" candidate in three US presidential elections, notes: "Nationalism and tribalism and faith - these are the driving forces now, and they are tearing apart transnational institutions all over the world."
In Europe, mass migration has brought matters to a head. Unilateral actions, such as the decision this summer by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban to erect a border fence, have raised the pressure on other European countries and challenged the European Union.
As the migration issue dominates European gatherings, forcing other items off the agenda, some see an existential threat. "No-one can say whether the EU will still exist in this form in 10 years," says the president of the European Parliament - and socialist - Martin Schulz. "The retreat of many governments into nation-based thinking is fatal." The possibility that the UK might vote to leave the EU in 2016 underlines the threat seen by many Eurocrats.
Reflecting on these dilemmas, Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek wrote: "We definitely live in interesting times." He suggests the world may be approaching "a new era of apartheid", in which wealthier countries try to seal themselves off from war-torn, poverty-stricken ones.
As this analysis suggests, the darkening horizons for international co-operation extend well beyond Europe. Donald Trump's policies of walling off Mexico or banning Muslims from entering the country have given him the lead in polls for the Republican party presidential nomination.
Are a Trump or a Marine Le Pen really electable? Regardless of the answer, if the centre is shrinking, sapped by political insurgencies on the left and right, it becomes harder to rally support for unpopular international policies - whether they relate to trade, immigration or military action.
Try to force the issue, as the European Commission's plans for a new border force could do, by inserting frontier enforcement units on to Europe's periphery - even against the will of the country concerned - and you risk a different kind of crisis.
With their national leaders beset by doubt and political polarisation, quite a few of Europe's political insurgents, from left and right, express their admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
At least, their argument goes, he gets things done - for example in Syria. While many, including Barack Obama, compared Mr Putin's actions in Ukraine to the 1930s, the ideological cleavage of those times no longer exists, and the Russian leader has won the admiration of assertive Western nationalists such as Trump and Le Pen.
Russia's recent troubles with Turkey show though that nations guided by ambitious strongmen are also making world politics less predictable as well as less harmonious. The Kremlin has unleashed economic sanctions on Turkey, after the shooting down of a Russian military aircraft, just as its actions in Syria led some to hope that Mr Putin might be about to patch up his relations with the EU.
As for the Middle East, a more assertive Saudi monarchy has waded into Yemen, Syria's President Bashar Assad is saying he won't stand down despite the gathering international peace effort, Israel's leaders are in no mood to restart a peace process with the Palestinians, and Iranian hardliners are promising to stand fast in defence of the oppressed Shia across the region.
In 2016 then, there will be big challenges to the international system - from the possibility of the UK leaving the EU, to the strains within the organisation caused by the ongoing migration crisis, sectarian violence in the Middle East, and increasingly ill-tempered trade disputes.
As nationalistic or left-wing rejection of the international system grows, pity the diplomats struggling for consensus.
A funny thing happened...
Turkey's President Erdogan cites 'Hitler's Germany' as example of effective government
Please activate Sledgehammer, please activate Sledgehammer...
edited 2nd Jan '16 1:20:30 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
I'm barely holding my snark in. Seriously, why did he think citing Nazi Germany as an example was a good idea?
Authoritarian regime, with a myth of efficiency? No wonder the military wanted a coup. Or maybe still wants, who knows.
edited 2nd Jan '16 7:22:47 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
United Earth
That was foolish.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Maybe that's why he was compared to Gollum.
Not the Onion, indeed.
It's an insult to Gollum, by the way.
V
Sméagol 
.
Incidentally, if you're wondering what Peter Jackson thinks, he thinks that the images are a mistake and actually depict Sméagol, not Gollum.
edited 2nd Jan '16 12:47:46 PM by Greenmantle
Keep Rolling On
United Earth
The whole discussion is hilarious. As are the Turkish laws:
Laughable. How insecure and fragile is their Republic?
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
It's an insult to both. Gollum is pathetic because he was twisted by the ring over centuries and still is self-aware enough to hate what he's become.
edited 2nd Jan '16 11:36:50 PM by Khudzlin
Seems like a lot of those laws have been created during the 2000's. Article 299 is basically a resurrection of the earlier Article 301. AKP is insecure.
A nice butterfly
Dang. Municipal elections are held this sunday and I have absolutely no idea whom to vote for.
I rounded it to three choices out of 7.
- Option 1 is a Civil Engineer. Something I like since Infraestructure needs a ton of work. Not very detailed in describing his plans though. He does point out to blaring problems and basically says "I fix them" and that's it but at least he can idetify them
- Option 2 is an Industrial engineer. She is detailed enough in her plan that I think she might actually do something. I just do not honestly think these things are going to you know. Freakin get anything done. DARE for example does shit all about drug abuse, and she seems to think it will. And that's just one example, not to mention the infraestructural ones
- Option 3 is a Municipal planner. He comes from the political party that has as of late lost a ton of rep because of severe proven cases of corruption that landed a former president in jail. This guy's plan tho is actually pretty decent and shows that at the very least he cared enough to do research. I am just not sure how viable they are. For example instead of purifying water soruces he wants us to reach underground water sources (since they are easier to keep clean)
How do you guys make your choices
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Go number 2. Only issue seems to be naivete, and the work will take care of that.
A nice butterfly
lol nm neither of the three ended up winning.The oldest and most bllatant corrupt political group won thanks democracy
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Anyone know where I can find how people are treated under these types of government:
1. Republic
2. Parliamentary Democracy
3. Constitutional Monarchy
4. Federal Republic
5. Parliamentary Republic
6. Authoritarian
7. Constitutional Democracy
8. Communist State
9. Theocratic Republic
10. Constitutional Government in Free Association with the U.S.
11. Federation
Well, republic isn't so much a specific form of government as it is pretty much anything that isn't a monarchy.
So, by extension, it includes a lot of the others on the list and everything from ancient Rome to medieval Venice to the United States to Iran and more.
There's a reason that scales are normally used for measuring how authoritarian and lacking in democracy a country is, hard limits are difficult to establish. Especially as in the modern era all but the nuttiest of dictatorships will normally give themselves at least mock elections so as to claim democratic legitimacy.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran