Should we be worried about right-wing populism?

I don't think it's ironic at all. Lord Rothermere was anti-semitic and lumped Jews together with Communists as enemies of the state. The Daily Mail was an ardent supporter of Hitler and dismissed other media who criticised Hitler's 'racialism'. Some of the prejudice and ideology survives, although the 'baddies' have changed.

Yet people will insist on reading it! What's to be done...?

Indeed! Says a lot about the tastes of British newspaper readers - and it's only the second most read newspaper - behind the Sun.

No, you're behind the times I think dd - the report I read had The Sun down to fifth place (think the Guardian was fourth!).

Hmmmmm! I don't think so! The ABC circulation figures still have The Sun on top with the Daily Mail second. The Guardian is 23rd.

www.pressgazette.co.uk/national-newspaper-abcs-i-times-and-telegraph-titles-all-gain-print-sales-after-independent-closure

Yes, but that table only takes account of print sales, not online viewing. Anyway, the fact remains that you can't force members of the public to agree with your views (not you personally) by dissing the newspapers they choose to read.

Yes that's true ana

But we still have the puzzle of the rise of right wing populism.

I think it is a two way thing. People feel by their day to day experience alarm at what they consider to be a cultural threat from immigrants, but undoubtedly the right wing media has used a degree of propaganda in enforcing their agenda, which is wider than simply the level of immigration, just as the right wing parties do in other countries.

I seem to remember reading once that national political preferences tend to swing in cycles, from extremely rigid to extremely tolerant.
So which is the most to be feared, extreme liberalism, or extreme control (either fascist or communist.)
I think this only applies in western so-called democracies - places like China, India and the Arab nations seem to work differently.

Liberalism is never extreme

I'm struggling to think of an extremely liberal regime to test out this theory.

@Ana

I never wrote anything about forcing members of the public to read any newspaper.

They can read what they like, but their reading habits are a reflection what the public thinks about serious issues. People turn a blind eye to casual racism, because it reinforces their own prejudices.

Fortunately the far right did not win in Austria.
The final vote is between two people, and the far right lost.

"Alexander Van der Bellen is the first environmental activist to become Austrian president. He is a chain-smoker and left-leaning liberal committed to the EU.

He is the son of aristocratic refugees from Russia's 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. First they escaped from Pskov to Estonia, then in 1940 they fled the Soviet occupation - the communist takeover of the Baltic states.

The family settled in Austria's Tyrol region. Alexander grew up in Kaunertal and does not speak Russian. His surname harks back to Dutch ancestry.

He studied economics at the University of Innsbruck and was later appointed professor at Vienna University. He retired from academia in 2009.

He was elected to parliament for the Greens in 1994, and from 1997-2008 was the party's spokesman.

In a TV debate, one of the few things he agreed on with Mr Hofer was that neither would accept TTIP - the free trade deal the EU is negotiating with the US."

I find this very heartening - apart from the fact that he is a chain-smoker.

What happened in Austria was that the country decided it was fed up of the centrist policies of the two previous leading parties.

Why do you think they were fed up?

The first thing about the recent election in Austria is that it was for a president, which (in Austria) is a position as a head of state without much political power. Nevertheless, Hofer's success in the first round of voting shows the way the political wind is blowing in Austria. Support for the left in Austria is split between a number of parties, but when faced with a choice of two in the second round, they voted for the ex-Green Party indepenedent, whose views are broadly left wing.

Austria has had a coalition government of the two main centre parties. As with all coalitions, compromises have to be made and people blame the government if they really dislike the compromises. In the long run, consensus government leads to stability, but there are minority groups in Austria which have always held strong views, especially about ethnicity and nationalism. Austria (like Germany) had a de-Nazification programme after WW2, but there are still people who are nostalgic about the old days of the huge Austrian Empire and this is complicated by Orthodox Christian Serbs, who are historically anti-Islam. The recent influx of immigrants has fuelled some quite nasty hatred.

Depressing isn't it?

I think what the west lacks is strong leaders. Leaders who will recognise the potential problems regarding the influx of refugees and who set up solid sensible programmes to mitigate any issues that may arise as a result.
This does not include the mantra like being swamped, or overwhelmed, but takes a can do approach that recognises at the very least our hand in causing at least some of the problems and treats all refugees as human beings.

Those who want to close the borders are simply being wimps and not facing up to reality that this issue in the short term is not going away and may if we don't deal with it sensibly come back to bite us in the long term.

I was thinking of the changes under Harold Wilson's govt.:

"A number of liberalising social reforms were passed through parliament during Wilson's first period in government. These dealt with the death penalty, homosexual acts, abortion, censorship and the voting age. There were new restrictions on immigration. Wilson personally, coming culturally from a provincial non-conformist background, showed no particular enthusiasm for much of this agenda." From Wiki.
Then followed the Thatcher era .

I have a very good Austrian friend, who lived in the UK for a number of years, then went back to Austria with her British husband. Even her husband and children are seen as 'outsiders' by some of the people in the small town where she lives. I know she's quite worried about the rise of the right wing in Austria.

What is particulary worrying about the Austrian situation is that Norbert Hofer's Freedom Party has very similar views on nationalism as the Nazis did (sorry about Godwin's Law). Before WW1, Austria was a hotchpot of different nationalities, ethnicities, languages and religions and the minorities resented ethnic German dominance. Today Austria is predominantly German and Roman Catholic, but there are still vocal minorities. A trend towards equality for minorities is resented by the majority. Hofer himself has shown some sympathy with Nazi ideology, is anti-EU and anti-immigration. Austria's geographical location has meant that it has seen an influx of refugees. This is all quite worrying for Austrians, who are well aware of their nation's history.

I agree with you, ww. Politicians need to sit down as mature, rational adults and discuss the refugee issue without hysterical, emotive language. The EU can't let in millions of refugees to roam wherever they want, but equally the West does have a responsibility for the situation and I don't think many of us want to see people slaughtered, because they have nowhere to go.

whitewave, have you changed your mind about this issue?

I think that Merkel saw it as basically humanitarian when she said they could all come to Germany.
Considering the mess that British need for oil has made of the middle East, we should help, but we use our non-Shengen status to pretend to be moral.
It's a shame Cameron is not more like Merkel.

obieone no I haven't changed my mind, but not really sure what you mean

Unfortunately Merkel's liberal policy re refugees is likely to 'come back and bite her' in the long term. There is a strong and growing right wing within Germany and it is tapping into problems caused by this huge influx of refugees and using it to their advantage.

I think Merkel was to a degree thinking of the refugee problem through the prism of the Second World War - remember the kinder transport?

The way this was handled by Merkel shows her humanitarian side but also lack of understanding that the problem as large as the one the world is facing vis a vis the refuges needs much more than a "bring me your poor" attitude. We need plans and to give assistance to those countries on the front line like Italy and Greece.

The extremities, intolerance and intemperence of the left have created the right wing movements which are sweeping Europe, the UK and the USA. You can only poke a dog with a stick for so long before it bites back.

Can you give us some examples lily?

I find it all very sad. My parents who were Ukrainian came to this country as displaced persons after the second world war with my two older sisters. We did experience prejudice and resentment but on the whole people were welcoming. Now so many people seem to blame immigrants for everything.