• tintory@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Surprisingly Anti-Tory, usually other papers try to give Tories wiggle room. These guys don’t give Tories any quarter

      • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Given tory behavior over recent years.

        Its fair to say giving them quater is a fairly biased representation.

        Lets face it. If any non politician committed the crimes and allowed the fraud that tories have since the pandemic. Most would accuse a paper making excuses for them as dishonest?

        • tintory@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s frustrating that almost every paper I read besides the Star, gives them some benefit of the doubt

          • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Follow the money. % of advertisers not voting tory. In no way represents % of voters overall.

            When media depends on advertising it will never be unbiased.

      • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dunno, struck me as weird like those groups you stumble on.that turn out to be astroturf organisations. However, I can’t figure out quite how their angle benefits Big Business. However, as you suggest it could be those behind the pension Ponzi schemes.

        • merridew@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They have a bunch of stuff about “promoting fertility”, eg

          the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Israel offer lessons. These countries have managed to increase fertility rates by introducing pro-natal policies — a combination of cash incentives, subsidised childcare, and housing assistance

          which all sounds lovely and idyllic, but in reality the far-right government in Hungary has been throttling access to abortion with new legislation that is

          an extension of the government’s anti-abortion policies, aimed at boosting the birthrate

          meaning that

          legal abortions [have] become increasingly difficult as the compulsory counselling sessions were becoming more aggressive and difficult to schedule

          https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2022/sep/13/hungary-tightens-abortion-access-with-listen-to-foetal-heartbeat-rule

          I can’t definitely figure out the angle either. But they are a pro-fertility organisation praising a far-right regime that is implementing regressive “pro-life” policies at the expense of women’s rights, and they are very careful not to highlight the true nature of these policies on their website.

          They’re also headquartered in Texas. So… draw your own conclusions.

          • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, that was where my mind was going.

            To stop population decline you really need to go full Catholic on birth control and abortion.

            And to what end?

            Israel’s aim seems simple: they are fighting a demographic war with the Palestinians and the more people they have the quicker they can fill up the Occupied Territories.

            Beyond that rather specific case you can only extrapolate but population decline means you need more immigrants to fill the roles young people would do and that plays into ideas of the Great Replacement.

            That might be going too far and impugning their motivation but if you are praising Hungary’s reactionary policies then something is not right. Even if they are themselves doing this for the purest motives, they’ve rather quickly picked up some unsavoury fellow travellers.

            • tintory@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Israel offer lessons. These countries have managed to increase fertility rates by introducing pro-natal policies — a combination of cash incentives, subsidised childcare, and housing assistance

              On the other hand, they are explicity focusing on the increase in social benefits, not anything dealing with anti-choice elements, and praised American Democrats for expanding Paid Leave and Unemployment, not to mention you guys left out this quote

              Next, let’s talk about British millennials. Before we assign them the blame label, it’s worth diving into some history. The birth rate in the UK has declined since 2013, and this decline isn’t floating in a vacuum. Its roots trace back to the austerity measures implemented post-2008 financial crisis. These cuts have deeply affected social care, welfare, and local government. Between 2010 and 2017, private rents soared by 24%, while social housing options dwindled. Adults, particularly young ones, found themselves either stuck with rising rents or moving back in with their parents. Combine this with the growth of precarious employment, and you get a generation deeply impacted by retreating state support and a daunting economic landscape.

              If this was a right wing rag or an astroturfed group like pronatalist.org, then they would focus on culture or other nonsensical dogwhistles, but they are clearly hostile towards the right but willing to give praise to anyone who increase social spending

              • merridew@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You can increase social spending and still have contempt for women’s right to bodily autonomy. The two don’t go automatically hand in hand. In fact if your social spending is geared towards having more babies, it most likely won’t be.

                • tintory@lemm.eeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  “In fact if your social spending is geared towards having more babies, it most likely won’t be.”

                  Except most right wing states hate any and all social spending all together, especally in the US and the UK

          • tintory@lemm.eeOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Next, let’s talk about British millennials. Before we assign them the blame label, it’s worth diving into some history. The birth rate in the UK has declined since 2013, and this decline isn’t floating in a vacuum. Its roots trace back to the austerity measures implemented post-2008 financial crisis. These cuts have deeply affected social care, welfare, and local government. Between 2010 and 2017, private rents soared by 24%, while social housing options dwindled. Adults, particularly young ones, found themselves either stuck with rising rents or moving back in with their parents. Combine this with the growth of precarious employment, and you get a generation deeply impacted by retreating state support and a daunting economic landscape.

            You forget this part from the same article, which changes the context quite a bit

            • merridew@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not really. If your goal is to undo “retreating state support,” you can do that without praising far-right regimes aiming to restrict women’s rights to bodily autonomy.

              The fact that they gloss over that little aspect is suspicious.

              Their website is conspicuously opaque regarding its funding, and “stop population decline” is curiously close to (but notably more palatable than) the 14 Words, while still acting as an effective dog-whistle for people familiar with those words.

                • merridew@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Look, organisations with unpleasant views aren’t universally stupid. Turning Point states upfront that its mission is to “identify, educate, train, and organize students to promote freedom”, but dig down and you find fun stuff like this: https://www.tpusa.com/live/pro-choicers-are-sick-and-twisted

                  I’d also like to note that praising some historically left-wing policies, and criticising some loonies, should not mean that you stop looking critically at the other things a person says.

                  Authoritarian policies that deny women choice aren’t limited to right-wing governments. If you support women’s rights to choice, Hungary is not a country you would praise.

                  ‘Baby machines’: eastern Europe’s answer to depopulation The conference in Budapest opened with a sand animation video of migrants rushing towards Europe, and was laced with references to the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, which suggests that shadowy forces want to replace so-called “native” Europeans with outsiders. “There are political forces in Europe who want a replacement of population for ideological or other reasons,” Orbán told the conference. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/04/baby-bonuses-fit-the-nationalist-agenda-but-do-they-work

  • merridew@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You know, pretty much all of that website seems to be written by one guy. So I looked up some of his other work.

    the myth that women primarily work for reasons other than economics or family needs distorts reality https://medium.com/@daviddemos/women-under-siege-quick-notes-on-the-rights-assault-on-women-s-work-choices-and-family-formation-c3b27c6266e6

    It’s hard to draw conclusions. Who knows. But what I will say is that this guy clearly spends a lot of time thinking about how certain women can be coaxed into having more babies.

    Women in Europe, North America, and some countries in Asia.

    • tintory@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a common misconception that many women prioritize their careers over family relationships because they believe their self-worth comes from professional success. However, this myth is often perpetuated by right-wing extremists that seek to avoid addressing the need to improve material conditions for the majority.

      Maybe? But it seems his fundamental premises is right wingers screaming about culutre are bad

      From his Medium site, he apparently also thinks about food security in other countries

      https://medium.com/@daviddemos/slaying-starvation-borlaugs-green-revolution-and-global-food-production-1d4992ee5b8a

      It is hard to draw conclusions, but I fail to see smoke