To ask why opposition seems so powerless against the resurgence of the right on our continent?

[damaged]

Italy and Salvini being a prime example at the moment, but they are obviously not the only ones. Here at home we have moved to the right, and our future is currently uncertain.

It seems to be a trend in a lot of places, to a greater or lesser extent. We are next door to delightful people like Erdogan and Orban, and Trump refers to the EU as “foe”.

Meanwhile Bannon is apparently in Europe, preaching his ideals.

What can we do about it?

Why does the opposition seem so weak, even though there is opposition.

That wasn't exactly one of the most prominent slogans or sentiments in the campaign.

A lot of this thread falls into the same trap as the Remain and Hillary Clinton campaign: wanting to tell those on the other side, especially white working class voters, they are poorly informed, irrational and should feel differently. That didn't help then, why should it now? It feels to those on the receiving end like more of the out-of-touch metropolitan liberalism LeahJack described in the contrast between two areas she knows. Like it or not politics is usually successful by tapping into the way significant sections of the electorate feel.

Wow, I’m amazed how quickly this turned to being solely about immigration and taken on quite a pointed, negative tone. High immigration and the perceived associated problems are just symptomatic of a political elite that don’t act on what the electorate want. They get voted in on one set of policies, then do whatever they want and no one holds them to account. If immigrants as a whole pay in more taxes than they take out in benefits and other costs then the financial argument isn’t really valid imo. It’s got more to do with this government (and many before) not reinvesting those taxes properly to make sure our services, housing and employment prospects keep up with the growing population. IMO people feel disenfranchised with politicians because they don’t act on a lot of what is important to the average person (like immigration) and then the papers (particularly the right wing press) stoke the fires of tensions even further. This pushes people into voting for more extreme right policies in the hope something will be done. I understand there are lots of reasons why people are against high levels of immigration, but personally think the problem is more that our politicians don’t listen and do as they please and that with immigration this is just something that it is more immediately obvious, especially in areas with a high concentration of immigrants. I wish we had a more centrist party and that politicians and their parties were actually held to account. Massive political and press reform is the only way I can see this country truly being sorted out.

Are we still peddling the "working class leavers" vs the "liberal elite". When did Farage, the Barclays Bros, Rothmere, Murdoch, Johnson become working class champions socking it to the billionaires? The leave campaign was mired in mistruths and disinformation you either accept that or keep your head in the sand.

I don't think anyone here in this thread is mistaken that Farage et al are working class. But plenty of statistical analyses have shown that level of qualifications held, along with age, was a major predictor of voting Leave. (But in any case the OP's issue now is about how the left could pick up more votes versus a far right resurgence.)

From a large statistical study on the 2016 referendum:
academic.oup.com/economicpolicy/article/32/92/601/4459491#100666116

"A larger flow of migrants from Eastern Europe reaching a local authority area with a larger share of unqualified people or a larger share of manufacturing workers is associated with a larger Vote Leave share, whereas the opposite is true when a large flow of migrants from Eastern Europe reaches an area with a large share of those working in finance, or an area with higher median hourly pay. In other words, initial conditions matter.

The pattern is less clear for migration flows from ‘old’ EU 15 countries and from non-EU countries. Here, point estimates on the interaction terms are generally smaller and often insignificant. This suggests that migration from Eastern Europe, which was distinct in nature by consisting of more lower-skilled migrants, had a different effect."

Sorry, Pennycarbonara, key paragraph here,

The arguments look set to intensify now UCL researchers have established that so-called “A10 migrants” from eastern European countries that joined the EU in 2004 contributed nearly £5bn to the UK in the decade to 2011. Those from the original 15 EU members brought a net gain of £15bn over the same period. By comparison, the UK-born population was a net cost.The analysis showed that “EU 15” migrants contributed 64 per cent more in taxes to the UK than they received in benefits, and the A10 group – comprising countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia and Lithuania – contributed 12 per cent more than they received

Researchers calculated that between 1995 and 2011, migrants from outside the EU were a net cost of £118bn compared with the net contribution of £4bn by EU migrants over the same period.This is partly because of the higher numbers of children and lower employment rate of non-EU migrants before points-based restrictions were imposed from 2008

The notion that immigration is an inherently 'good thing' due to the perceived economic benefits that derive from it is not only inherently Thatcherite in its emphasis upon the economic dimension ignoring the fact that while benefits are national, impacts are usually local, it's also possessed of an unsustainable logic. Namely that if 300,000 immigrants a year are of such benefit to our economy, then that benefit is presumably magnified, exponentially, if we increase that to 3 million a year. Indeed, why stop there? Economic nirvana will be reached when immigration tops 10 million a year. Except of course it won't? Because at some point immigration always outweighs the positives that it brings. And that's what we are seeing now. A natural level where a significant number of native inhabitants of European countries, having made significant accommodations on this issue in the past, perceive that this is something that they want no further part of. And they have an absolute right to voice those concerns and to vote accordingly.

Are we still peddling the "working class leavers" vs the "liberal elite". When did Farage, the Barclays Bros, Rothmere, Murdoch, Johnson become working class champions socking it to the billionaires? The leave campaign was mired in mistruths and disinformation you either accept that or keep your head in the sand.

The problem is, those behind Remain are also seen as the "liberal elite" and prominent figures and companies backing it can also be namedropped as in your post. It then comes down to which side can bullshit the most.. aka politics.

The remain campaign did not profess to be elite, working class or anything else. It was leave that used the doublespeak.

I'm a middle class leaver. Over the past decade the disconnect between the governed and the governing has increasingly widened. Out of this you get the election results you saw in Italy, the U.S., and Brexit. I fully expect that Trump will get a second term in office.

The problem it seems to me is the rise of the career politician who has never had to live in the real world and do a mundane job, so Corbyn, Cameron et al.

I have always made a point of voting as women died to get me that right; but I am at the point that there is currently no party for which I would vote, unless May goes. I am left with spoiling my ballot paper ( or getting my Mum to do it for me as she holds my postal proxy), not voting at all, or voting for Mebyon Kernow or the Monster Raving Loony Party if they stand in my constituency.

I wouldn't say the Remain campaign comes up smelling of roses either.....there were some interesting articles debunking the Treasury forecasts and how they were spun. If you think the Liberal Elites don't exist, you have your head in the sand. They do exist and I've met some of them. They seem to exist on a different planet to the rest of us though.

The remain campaign did not profess to be elite, working class or anything else.

The supporters did.

I strongly recommend that anyone who's interested in this subject read, The Road To Somewhere by David Goodheart. It's a great analysis of the real cleavages in our society that transcend class and race and sex. Education is really the key driver of attitudes to change.

The supporters did.

How?

If you think the Liberal Elites don't exist, you have your head in the sand.

Of course they exist, they got ordinary people to vote against their own interests with Brexit.

A natural level where a significant number of native inhabitants of European countries, having made significant accommodations on this issue in the past, perceive that this is something that they want no further part of. And they have an absolute right to voice those concerns and to vote accordingly.

And who are the native inhabitants? Do I count, with my foreign but white grandparents? Does my partner, with his foreign non white ones? Do my kids, born here but a bit brown? That’s very dangerous rhetoric.

How?

Erm, read your own (many) posts on the very topic? The arrogance and whiff of perceived superiority drip from them.

Erm, read your own (many) posts on the very topic? The arrogance and whiff of perceived superiority drip from them.

Pointing out the voter demographics after the referendum is a tad different to using the campaign to cause class division. Only one side did that.

Drip, drip, drip.

You sound like a robot. Are you employed to make these posts? I see users from all sides of the argument on other non political threads but only ever see you show up on Brexit or Politics threads. Which is fine, your choice, but you come across as very invested and robotic in your replies.

Someone complained that without immigration we'll have no one to care for our elderly and we'll have family members 'wiping their arses'.

Is it possible, that we'll just start paying and valuing carers (usually women) properly?

It's utterly idiotic and ahistorical to claim there's no such thing as an indigenous population. Of course there is; just as there is in most corners of the globe. That doesn't change the fact that we all ultimately originate in the Horn of Africa. Equally, there is an indigenous European culture. It varies locally and regionally, but there is, undeniably, a set of traditions, cultures and identities that belong here and originate from here. As uncomfortable as that might be for some revisionists.

Equally, there is an indigenous European culture

No. There’s Italian culture. There’s Scottish culture. There’s Turkish culture. There’s no European culture.

Would you say there’s an asian culture? No. There’s Indian, Thai, Japanese cultures.

Whole continents do not share a culture, culture is very regional and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

As I said, also regional and local. THe history of Christianity, the Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution and liberal democracy are almost exclusively European and are fundamental elements of European identity/ies. THat doesn't preclude different local cultures and traditions within that.

What similarities exist between Scottish culture and Lithuanian culture?

That are uniquely European, as well.

Whole continents do not share a culture, culture is very regional and to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

Are you missing this part of the post that the OP made?

It varies locally and regionally, but there is, undeniably, a set of traditions, cultures and identities that belong here and originate from here.

They didn't specifically state what you was suggesting, also European Culture can obviously not be defined as all-encompassing etc but there are core assets that are widely recognised upon as forming the cultural foundation of modern Europe.

They didn't specifically state what you was suggesting, also European Culture can obviously not be defined as all-encompassing etc but there are core assets that are widely recognised upon as forming the cultural foundation of modern Europe.

What are they? I cannot think of any single thing unique to Europe that is not found in another culture. Culture can only be defined on smaller scales.

What similarities exist between Scottish culture and Lithuanian culture?

Christianity? Beer (see grape vs grain), democracy, the enlightenment, philosophy, industrialisation, the weather, literature, women's rights etc etc etc