http://pratiquesciencessociales.net/exposes/S8.%20Globalization%20Welfare%20state%20and%20right-wing%20populism%20in%20Western%20Europe.pdf
We outline and test the argument that globalization contributes to the electoral success of the new far right in Western Europe. We also draw on the theory of embedded liberalism to advance and test the hypothesis that a comprehensive, generous and employment-orientated system of social protection lessens the economic insecurities attendant to internationalization and, in turn, weakens support for far-right parties. In empirical analysis of national elections in 16 European polities from 1981 to 1998, we find that the universal welfare state directly depresses the vote for radical right-wing populist parties and conditions the linkages between capital mobility, trade openness and foreign immigration on the one hand and electoral support for the new far right on the other. In conclusion, we consider our findings’ implications for understanding the domestic political effects of globalization and sources of right-wing populism as well as for policy reforms that promote political economic stability in an era of international integration.
This isn't for you guys so much as a search tag.
But would that result in other problems?
Sure, but it would have ended the depression in Germany sooner and possibly prevented Hitler from coming to power, those would be pretty good things in my opinion.
What now, Auto?
You know what. I don't think you're that dumb. Try again.
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
There's no point because 99% of your counterarguments are based on moral and epistemological nihilism. I might as well argue with Monty Python.
Perhaps you'd be so bold as to explain just what exactly you mean by "moral and epistemological nihilism".
"Public education is good because it saves kids from Jesus Camp!"
"Nuh-uh, you can't prove that letting kids be knocked up at 16 christian fundamentalists is a violation of individual liberty!"
"The anarchocapitalist private legal agency known as the "US federal government" does these things! And the empirical results are this!"
"Nuh-uh, you can't prove that knowledge can be gained through induction!"
I'm not going to try reading between the lines there. Instead, I'll just repeat what I said: Perhaps you'd be so bold as to explain just what exactly you mean by "moral and epistemological nihilism".
Along with that, I'm going to ask you again what you mean by "gotta tag myself again". I'm going to repeat these unanswered questions every so often until you answer them.
You're fun to to talk to, Autolykos.
I do plan on keeping my word. I wouldn't doubt that, if I were you.
What exactly makes me allegedly "fun to talk to"?
Mostly, your usually rigorous logical analysis and insistence on taking everything literally. Trying to take absurd things seriously is probably where humor comes from.
What's your definition of "absurd"? Regardless, what obligates me - prima facie or otherwise - to agree with that definition?
Iiii'll get back to you.
Sure you will...
I guess that's another question I'll repeat periodically.