Why do so many communist/socialists types seem to believe this?

[Dryas]

This doesn’t seem right at all. Thoughts?

[DocWatts]

Some more context would be helpful, as I'm not quite sure exactly what that statement is intending to convey. Is it that Trump voters are closer to flirting with fascism than middle class Democrats are to Socialism or Marxism? If so, that's hardly a profound statement.

Also the spirit in which the word 'radicalization' is used is a bit unclear. Is it supposed to be aspirational? A pejorative? My own connotation on the word is a negative one, but that will vary widely depending on one's political biases and worldview.

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, Dryas said:

This doesn’t seem right at all. Thoughts?

It is correct. It bears out in reality in other places. 

Populist radical movements come up when things get tough for the poor and working class. And that's true whether a person's politics are on the right or on the left.

When people radicalize to the left, it is mobilization against large power structures.

When people radicalize to the right, it can become mobilization against large power structures as well... but only if that power structure is a perceived "other". This is why mass mobilization on the right can lead to Fascism.

But you find in other countries that America is an imperialist influence, where it seeks to keep the populace subjugated and desperate so that America has a cheap labor force... you have both right wing and left wing populist movements popping up. Both of which are antithetical to American interests as a power structure. 

But within America, right wing populists will identify with America and then demonize anyone who is perceived as an "enemy of the state". And so, right wing radicalization is very good for American power structures and their interests as right wing populist movements can become another arm of the power structure.

So, it is absolutely true that that the poor, working class, and desperate masses are ripe for radicalization regardless of political affilation or preference. While, the upper classes are doing okay, so there is no reason to radicalize... other than for ideological reasons. And ideological reasons are not as compelling as genuine desperation and poverty.

Edited January 5, 2021 by Emerald

[DocWatts]

24 minutes ago, Emerald said:

It is correct. It bears out in reality in other places. 

Populist radical movements come up when things get tough for the poor and working class. And that's true whether a person's politics are on the right or on the left.

When people radicalize to the left, it is mobilization against large power structures.

When people radicalize to the right, it can become mobilization against large power structures as well... but only if that power structure is a perceived "other". This is why mass mobilization on the right can lead to Fascism.

But you find in other countries that America is an imperialist influence, where it seeks to keep the populace subjugated and desperate so that America has a cheap labor force... you have both right wing and left wing populist movements popping up. Both of which are antithetical to American interests as a power structure. 

But within America, right wing populists will identify with America and then demonize anyone who is perceived as an "enemy of the state". And so, right wing radicalization is very good for American power structures and their interests.

So, it is absolutely true that that the poor, working class, and desperate masses are ripe for radicalization regardless of political affilation or preference. While, the upper classes are doing okay, so there is no reason to radicalize... other than for ideological reasons. And ideological reasons are not as compelling as genuine desperation and poverty.

That's actually a great explanation, and matches many of my own intuitions on populist movements in a rather clear and succinct way. So, thanks for that.  

Edited January 5, 2021 by DocWatts

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, DocWatts said:

That's actually a great explanation, and matches many of my own intuitions on populist movements in a rather clear and succinct way. So, thanks for that.  

Glad to hear that it was helpful.

 

[aurum]

@Dryas

Likely because those in the middle class are still receiving the benefits of our current system. It hasn't totally failed them yet.

Rural republicans though are often lower class. And the system is squeezing them, which is one of the reasons Donald Trump gained so much popularity. He was their populist leader, no matter how misguided that belief was.

Goes to show that systemic problems don't inherently care about your political party or race.

[Dryas]

By radicalization they’re probably referring to some sort of communist revolution. 

This might be the case but only if you don’t tell them the revolution is about establishing a communist society. 
 

 

[Emerald]

12 hours ago, Dryas said:

By radicalization they’re probably referring to some sort of communist revolution. 

This might be the case but only if you don’t tell them the revolution is about establishing a communist society. 
 

 

No. Radicalization is when people buck the status quo. What is radical is always defined in relation to the status quo. 

So, when people are radicalized, they are turning against the status quo... either toward the left or the right. Whether toward the challenging of power structures or toward deeper levels of nationalism and authoritarianism.