• pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reagan is truly the worst. he fucked up the US so far beyond repair on so many fronts, they never reeled from the consequences. Straight up evil piece of shit.

  • solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Interesting though the article is from 2022. Germany has free education and a resurgent far right, so IDK what effect the educatioin there has had.

    • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even in Germany, far-right sentiments are pretty strongly related to people’s level of education and economic opportunities.

      • Fluffy Kitty Cat@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also the entire driver of the European far right is racism against immigrants. That’s the entire motivation, which is why they’re turning on their far right now that it’s clear they’re firmly are aligned with the Donald Trump-vladiator Putin axis of Evil. There are nationalists who want to be racist against Muslims they don’t want to be annexed by Russia

    • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      All of Europe has a resurgent far-right. And in many countries it’s currently at ~20%, compared to 50% in the US. So there’s one big difference.

      In other countries the far-right is already governing the country, fully (Italy, Hungary) or partly, unlike in Germany (dodged a bullet this time but let’s not get complacent).

      There’s also other aspects besides education that lead to far-right voting, like unemployment and general Strukturschwäche, i.e. lack of all kinds of infrastructure, prevalent in the Eastern part of Germany. Where most AfD voters come from.

      And - though by no means comparable to the US - many European countries do have a problem with education.

      • solrize@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think the US is anywhere near 50% far right, despite electing Trump They were sick of the existing establishment and threw it out. That is, they voted on rebel vs establishment lines, without much regard to left vs right, if that makes sense.

        • exploitedamerican@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The US elections(at very least the Presidential elections)are entirely rigged/ predetermined by corporate wall street influence. Corporations have been manipulating everything to their benefit for the last 6 decades. Every aspect of our political policy is already obviously corrupted by money its naive to believe this one thing isn’t because democracy is some sacred aspect of American exceptionalism. Both parties are fascist there is no left political party in the usa the democratic party by the standards of the rest of the developed world Is a right wing party. To varying degrees both parties blatantly exhibit 13 of the 14 traits of fascism. The only one trait that they can claim plausible deniability in regards to is fraudulent elections but if we are 13/14ths the way there it is highly unlikely the last trait hasn’t already come to pass. In germany their highest constitutional court ruled that electronic voting is unconstitutional because it is impossible to differentiate between fraudulent results and legitimate ones for laypeople / anyone who isnt a cybersecurity expert or IT professional.

          So really the idea that americans voted for this when its obvious the majority is very displeased about the state of our society and has been for years while conservatives tell us that social Media sites are left wing biased echo chambers but have to heavily moderate their conservative echo chambers to present the image that conservatism is popular in anyway its all just a ridiculous farce.

          Plus there is the Princeton study done in the last 2 decades or so that determined the amount of influence anyone has on political policy making is directly tied to the amount of wealth you have with regular working people having a statistically meaningless near zero effect on policy writing regardless of how popular or unpopular that policy may be

    • vin@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a result of growing inequality. Check out Gary’s economics on YouTube. We need to tax wealth, not work.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Whenever the ‘smother Hitler as a baby’ topic comes up, my first instinct is generally, ‘can we do Reagan too’?

    • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The problem wasn’t really Reagan, though, it was all the wormtongues whispering in his ear. If it wasn’t Reagan, they’d have found some other useful idiot.

      • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        No, the problem was very much Reagan.

        Look at the incredibly shitty job Bush I did, by contrast, with many of the same assholes chirping in his ar. We’d be in a much better position if he’d never been president.

        • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Reagan spent at least half of his administration suffering from alzhiemers. He was most definitely a puppet, though a charismatic one.

  • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a general rule, if you want long-term wealth inequality, make sure your people are about as dumb as they are poor.

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Trickle down was originally called the Horse and Sparrow theory, because the idea was that if you feed the horse more oats, they’ll be more grain for the sparrows to pick out of its shit.

    • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Almost as bad as the worst interpretation of “trickle down economics” I can think of.

      Though it’s interesting to note that the whole concept does not get better however you try to describe it.

  • Eugene V. Debs' Ghost@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.

    Uneducated minds are great for a country. They do the jobs they are told to do, they elect those the media tells them to, they fight the wars they are told to, and they obey the laws they are told to do.

    Education can bring critical thinking. It can make people question anything, from the shape of the universe, to complex math questions, to themselves. Questioning things is bad for governments, of all kinds and organizations. Questioning why you’re doing something is bad for the company. Questioning why you’re following orders is bad for the war effort. Questioning is bad.

    Keep the people uneducated, struggling to pay for rent, medical bills, groceries, the children they were told to have by decades of media and governments having population issues from lack of immigration, they don’t have time to question. They can only focus on putting in the hours to stay alive. It’s work or starve. Work or be cold. Work or your children go hungry. Work or go bankrupt from debt.

    If you give the workers enough meaningful distractions from their poverty, they won’t want an education because it’s too much of another burden. Debts, schooling, scheduling, studying, reading, taking tests and exams. It can often be worth it, just for socializing with your peers, even learning new interests, hobbies, even better carriers. But the workers who need the income the most barely have time for cooking and sleeping at home, living on money they haven’t made yet.

    By ensuring that only those with decent enough of an income can afford higher education, it ensure those with more money can think for those with less money. The people who went to school for media training can now use it to propagate the new person to hate this month to drive the votes for something batshit insane, never thought possible before.

    It’s a good thing for this system to have uneducated people, because they won’t ever question what they’re doing, they’re just following the orders their boss and government told them to do.

  • nonentity@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A society which charges its students to acquire knowledge values neither.

    A healthy and broadly educated population, which feels safe and secure, is incompatible with, and toxic to, conservative ideologies.

  • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh, look, another day, another thing Reagan fucked up. Sometimes I feel awake in the matrix when people are all “OMG REAGAN <3” in real life. It just doesn’t seem real how people can like him so much when, in hindsight, he irreversibly fucked our country and so many others.

    • uuldika@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      things I dislike Reagan for:

      • ignoring HIV because he was okay with it just killing the gays (until straight people started getting it.)
      • trickle-down economics (how we got the billionaire oligarchy)
      • Iran-Contra.
      • firing the striking air traffic controllers.
      • doubling down on the War on Drugs.

      things Reagan was kinda based for:

      • actually wanting to eliminate nuclear weapons. everyone remembers SDI as a ridiculously expensive boondoggle (which it would have been tbf) or as a trap to get USSR to spend itself into bankruptcy (it wasn’t imo, since the Russians realized they could build MIRVs), but I honestly think Reagan sincerely wanted a missile shield to have a missile shield. apparently he was hawkish on nuclear war until he watched The Day After, which terrified him and left him depressed for weeks and completely changed his thinking on nukes. he got so close to bilateral disarmament at the Reikjavik summit, but it fell apart because of his insistence on pursuing SDI.

      • not being a raging egotistical jerk like Trump. he was respectful towards Carter and Mondale. he even respected the Soviet Premiers he met with, despite his anti-Communism. he had actual principles and ideals, even if I disagree with some of them.

      when the USSR collapsed, Bush ignored Russia’s pleas to help it restructure and rebuild, to secure its nuclear weapons stockpiles, to integrate its economy. so we ended up with a country with starving nuclear weapons designers trying to grow potatoes in their back yards, and a Mafia takeover, and massive distrust and antipathy towards the West. I think Reagan would have actually lent them a helping hand, and Putin wouldn’t have happened.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s a really good take. I didn’t know about how close we came to bilateral disarmament, wow! And yeah, I always kinda knew we just let them fall apart on their own, but seeing it put that way is enormously frustrating. It’s wild how the late 80’s/ early 90’s had a chance to put us on track for a really great future for almost no cost, and instead we looked at it, did a line of blow, and said “nah lol, I got mine, idiot”

    • collapse_already@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      As someone who survived the Reagan administration, this comment really sums the sensation up well. Like did you MFers have the same Reagan, I did? The one that was open and shameless about trickle down economics? Yeah, the wealthy get everything amd a little bit will trickle down to the vast majority of you (don’t mind the urine smell of that trickle).

  • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It makes sense. They were dealing with lots of protests during the 1960’s and 70’s. They definitely don’t want more dissidents.

    • Fluffy Kitty Cat@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They also started designing college campuses to be socially inhospitable as possible so that it would be difficult to form protests

  • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    How many more reasons do I need to add to my list of reasons to hate Reagan? List has grown by 2 reasons today.

  • Captain_J@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Education leads to empowerment and the ability to see through the right’s tricks and false info to get votes. It’s obvious why Reagan and now Dump want less education.