Is anyone here from a country NOT called USA where they pile up a bunch of people in the background of a politician who then gets applause for everything?

I have literally never seen this in Europe. In Germany, we’d probably consider this “weird” in case our politicians did that. Feels a bit like clicking the thumbs-up button of my own social media post…

  • craftrabbit@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Swiss politics are generally way less people-focussed. Heck, I don’t even know who our president is currently. So this would be very ridiculous here.

    • Digestive_Biscuit@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 minutes ago

      Wow. Doesn’t comment on the person about to faint. Doesn’t make a sexist or otherwise rude comment. Doesn’t make him the centre of the situation. In fact the opposite drops a joke about himself being boring.

      Imagine how twat head Trump would deal with that.

  • Frettchen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 days ago

    Way more important. You treat your politician as celebrities. You need to see them guilty until proven otherwise!

    • Digestive_Biscuit@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      31 minutes ago

      People should never treat politicians as icons celebrities. They are there to work for us. Be please or angered by their policies and decision making, but charisma should not be a factor.

      Here in the UK I saw so much of this with Boris Johnson, and still with Farage. I knew a people people who liked Johnson because he’s a bit of a laugh, likeable, whatever. They did not go into reasons of what a politician should be doing. Only his character.

  • saimen@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    We consider this weird in Germany for good reasons. You know, historical precedent and stuff.

    • DrSoap@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      We used to consider it weird here too. There was this initiative called No Child Left Behind that was put into place by George W. Bush which pushed kids through school whether they had the grades to pass or not. Since then, the curriculum changed several times, each time, getting simpler than the last. They systematically dumbed down the American people and now we have a population with little to no critical thinking and a primary school reading level as the average. Also, out of all that, the loudest in the room is often the dumbest, so the bar is so low, you don’t even have to worry about tripping on it. I really hope this new trend to encourage reading takes.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Trump has always paid people to be in rallys. This goes back to his first suggestion of running for President and paying some losers to show up to Trump tower.

  • rmuk@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 days ago

    We had this with a couple of our recent PMs (and other cosplayers) who were desperate to turn the UK into the 51st State. Boris Johnson was repeatedly reprimanded for doing this using actual public servants - standing in front of a crown of police officers or nurses and delivering a political manifesto instead of the agreed government announcement.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    174
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    In Germany, we’d probably consider this “weird” in case our politicians did that.

    • Shindo66@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      This might be weird to say, but as I saw this picture, I realize I’ve never really learned what he actually said in these speeches. I know he was a great orator and we learn the basic evil stuff he stood for. There is no time I can ever remember, in the hours that I’ve learned about ww2 and Hitler, that I have ever been taught or shown what he really believed in. Somehow this guy got millions of people on board. I can tell you all about battles and weaponry, the holocaust, the different sides involved, but I really have no idea of the real why.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        People place too much emphasis on Hitler’s oratory skills because the idea of one guy hypnotizing everybody with speeches is a simple and appealing narrative. You can find his speeches on Youtube and they’re mostly just angry shouting, maybe it’s just that norms have shifted in response to him but it really doesn’t seem like anything special.

        To understand the real story you have to understand the broader history at the time. I started writing this comment and it just grew and grew so I apologise for the length.

        Socialism in Europe

        In the early 20th century, socialism was growing in popularity and labor movements were becoming more organized. Marx had predicted a simultaneous, worldwide revolution, with the working class uniting across every nation. During the Russian Revolution, countries across Europe sent troops to stop it but failed, and there was a fear that the USSR would sweep across Europe with the support of socialists in each country.

        The reality was that there were major differences between the social democrats in Germany, France, and Britain compared to the Marxist-Leninist USSR, one major point of contention being WWI. Lenin argued for “revolutionary defeatism” where socialists would openly call for the defeat of their own governments and take advantage of the state’s difficulties to overthrow it. Social democrats believed in gradually reforming the system and working within it, which included not making serious waves over the war, and only really criticizing it on principle, in the abstract.

        In Germany, the SDP voted in favor of selling war bonds at the start of the war, indicating their willingness to go along with it. However, towards the end of the war, once it was clear that Germany would be defeated, a revolution occurred.

        The German Revolution and The Spartacist Uprising

        In 1918, sailors at Kiel saw the writing on the wall and mutinied, defying orders to deploy against the British navy. This happened organically, without leadership or a clear political agenda beyond being unwilling to keep fighting. But it would soon become clear that the reich had fallen and that the war was lost.

        Two factions emerged that tried to steer things in different directions. One was the social democratic SDP, and the other was the communist Spartacist League, later the KPD. The Spartacists wanted to enact radical reforms and to set up a council republic similar to the Soviet system, while the SDP wanted a parliamentary system. The SDP won, and executed the Spartacist leadership, which led to an irreparable rift with the KPD.

        In order to form a governing coalition in the new parliamentary system, without any chance of working with the KPD, the SDP had no choice but to ally with center-right parties. And because they had no choice, that meant the center-right parties held all the cards.

        The Weimar Republic

        Having lost the war, the new government had no choice but to accept the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles, which included ceding territory, war reparations, and demilitarization. But there was roughly a decade, the 1920’s, when they were able to rebuild, recover, and make some social progress. The German film industry in particular thrived, with films like Nosferatu (1922) and Metropolis (1927) establishing Germany as the cultural center of this new medium (which would last until Hitler destroyed it, leading many talented filmmakers to flee to the US and lend their talents to Hollywood).

        But then the Great Depression hit. People all around the world were struggling, and the war reparations placed an additional strain on the Germany economy. To make matters worse, the governing coalition of the SDP and center-right parties enacted austerity measures, aimed at balancing the budget instead of economy recovery, and the reduced revenues meant cutting social spending at the time it was most needed. Unemployment skyrocketed. People were desperate, and furious at the government, labelling Chancellor Brüning “The Hunger Chancellor,” and the SDP lost credibility by association.

        People wanted change, and the wanted an explanation for how things went wrong.

        The Stabbed-in-the-Back Myth

        Enter, the Nazis. The Nazis provided a simple explanation for where things went wrong. Things went wrong when Germany was defeated. Germany was defeated, because the socialists had turned traitor and betrayed it.

        There were bits and pieces of truth in that narrative. Lenin had called for socialists to do that, as he did in Russia, but few in Germany had really listened to him. The SDP had fully supported the war, which caused Lenin to fiercely denounce them. There was eventually a revolution, but by the time it occurred it was already clear Germany was defeated. In that revolution, the faction that was more aligned with Lenin’s ideas had been crushed.

        But, by lumping both factions together in “the left,” and ignoring any facts that didn’t fit, they were able to weave together people’s frustration with the current government with their fears and animosity towards the communists into a simple narrative that played on people’s patriotism and the pain of having been defeated.

        Then, they took it a step further. Because it was somewhat hard to ignore some of these inconsistencies and the fact that the two factions on the left hated each other’s guts. But what if the connection was that they were both being manipulated into betraying Germany, on behalf of a sinister force behind the scenes?

        Antisemitism and Nazi race theory

        In mideval times, it often happened that kings wracked up tons of debt, often on pointless military adventures, and when the debts couldn’t be paid, they simply blamed it on the Jews, which also conveniently let them seize their assets when they expelled them from the country (a similar approach to what the Nazis did). There was a lot of preexisting racial prejudice and stereotypes, going back centuries if not millenia. Framing things in racial terms allowed the Nazis to take advantage of existing stereotypes and prejudices, and also allowed them to present an alternative to the class-based narratives of the left.

        Racial equality was a relatively new idea that was not broadly accepted, and the Nazis were able to frame the very idea of equality as another Jewish conspiracy.

        How did Jews end up in control of everything if white people are the superior race? In the Nazi view, the ideal is a balance between thought and action, in line with the image of a “self-made millionaire.” Some races, they claimed are inclined towards action, but not thought, and so their “natural place” is to be put to work in service to others. Jews, on the other hand, were too inclined to thought rather than action, they were uninterested in actually building anything and only interested in finding ways to take what others had built. In order to prevent white people from acting against them in a strong, decisive way, they promoted ideologies like communism, which called for racial tolerance and compassion. As the Weimar Republic had made early strides in trans healthcare, this was also called a Jewish conspiracy to weaken and soften white men.

        Hitler becomes chancellor

        As the economic conditions continued to decline, and as the far right grew stronger and gained more and more seats in parliament, neither the SDP nor the KPD showed any interest in reconciling. The SDP denounced the KPD and the Nazis as being equally bad and undemocratic and the KDP accused the SDP of being “the moderate wing of fascism.” The SDP saw the KDP as a liability that would alienate their other coalition partners, and the KDP did not want to associate themselves with the disasterous austerity policies the SDP’s coalition was enacting. Not only did they oppose each other in parliament, but they even fought each other in the streets, even as the Nazi brownshirts were pushing them both out.

        Eventually, the SDP/center-right coalition no longer had enough seats, and nobody was willing to form a coalition with the Nazis or the communists, which triggered a constitutional crisis. Most parliamentary systems have rules and contingencies for if a coalition can’t be formed (in part because of this), but the Weimar system lacked clear rules. Without a majority, the government simply couldn’t govern, and with riots and street-fighting breaking out everywhere, there was a fear of full on revolution.

        This finally brings us to the 1932 presidential election, between Adolf Hitler, Paul von Hindenburg (a center-right candidate backed by the SDP), and Ernst Thälmann of the KDP. Hindenburg won, and his chief concern was restoring stability and protecting business interests, and he appointed Hitler chancellor with those goals.

        With the ongoing constitutional crisis and unclear rules, Hitler found a legal argument that essentially gave the chancellor dictatorial power. The streets already belonged to the Nazis. When the first concentration camps were built, they were for the communist KPD, and the SDP raised no objections, not realizing that they would follow not long after.

        • pwalker@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          wtf, difficult to believe you actually took so much time to write this comment. Thx for the history seminar I guess 😅

      • DireTech@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        2 days ago

        Same kind of blaming everything on someone/something else like Trump rambles about, just much better spoken. You can find clips on YouTube and even if you don’t speak German you can tell he was good at delivering speeches.

        We really should show these things in school so people more people recognize it instead of falling for it again and again.

        • benjirenji@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, I’m surprised they don’t get to see videos of him. He really brought the energy to the room. As a leftist back then this was not a laughing matter. Today with Trump it’s an orange grandpa meandering along.

          Steve Miller may be a better example when it comes to fascist energy, but he doesn’t bring any charm.

  • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 days ago

    UK, prime minister speeches are usually done in the street in front of their house. Sometimes you might see Larry the cat in the background

  • thethrilloftime69@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s the logic of TV. It’s like when a sitcom has a laugh track in order to seem funnier. They have no sense of talent, no ideas, nothing, so they gotta use an advertising department to get people on board with their bullshit.

  • LGROOVE@lemy.nl
    link
    fedilink
    Nederlands
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    Top observation haha never thought about it but it is super weird

  • SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Probably from a local church. He’s been playing to very sparse audiences. Not as bad as the crowd for Melatonin’s crappy movie, but damn near.

  • thejml@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    ·
    2 days ago

    I know you asked for non-USA opinions, but as someone from the USA, I have always thought this was weird. Not only are they either fake or paid or self-centered extreme fans, but they got to sign away their “show up on TV and photos” rights, all for the privilege of looking at Trump’s ass while he speaks. Worst seat in the house.

    • Hackworth@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      2 days ago

      Regardless of who’s speaking, I always end up staring at the people sitting/standing behind them. Some part of me is waiting for them to break character, I think.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        i think some of the rallies, where people caught on to people acting strangly a couple times when he was signalling htem to cheer, i remember one video was a guy akwardly sitting there staring at people, while people were cheering.

    • BananaTrifleViolin@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah, we have this in the UK, and I’m sure it’s taken from the US originally.

      It is the worst seat in the house, but I get it’s to try and control the background on clips from speeches. Having people cheering and fawning over everything the candidate says is effective when most people will only see a 5 second clip of whatever event it was. It’s a product of modern social media and clip based news sadly.

      • mobyduck648@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The UK trying to copy things from US politics is always eye-watering levels of cringe, remember Boris’s briefing room and the bloody lecterns? FFS US-style brashness in British politics is almost always painful to watch in general, makes us look like a bunch of Ancient Greeks trying to convince everyone but particularly ourselves that the Romans aren’t entirely in control these days. The briefing room itself isn’t even used now thanks to Partygate starting from there and grinding what remained of public faith in the state into a fine and mildly carcinogenic dust.

        Our best post-war PM was clearly Clement Attlee and he was famously chill, his skill was managing a cabinet with a lot of the big personalities and managing consensus. Every PM since the man himself has wanted their Churchill moment, but the country would be far better if they all sought an Attlee legacy instead. Except the Town and Country Planning Act, that needs catapulting into hell with extreme prejudice; you can control US-style sprawl without giving NIMBYs a direct veto over everything.

  • Hueristic_Autistic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    They think showing support for their political side is the same as showing support for the sports team they like and what do people in the stands at a sports game do? Clap.

    It shows that a lot of people don’t know what the hell is going on and they’re just there to be there thinking that’ll show hyper support for their party and they’ll have something to talk about.

    It also shows that a lot of people view this as entertainment and forget about the ramifications of the outcomes of their choices with politics.

    I sorta view it like the, “stupid people notice shiny objects,” thing.