Nice double standard there Nazi.

It's the nativism.

@WilyRickWiles yeah, I think that's a correct generalization. I just don't think it's useful.
Is nativism exclusive to the "far right"? Are the Sioux who are trying to preserve their sacred ground against a pipeline "far right"?

And that's not what Merkel said, anyway. She predictably tried to equate the nebulous "far right" with racism, which is literally baked-in to the group-identity politics that define the Left.
By pretending that racism is a "far right" thing... they never have to confront that in themselves or their policies. Theirs is the "good racism". Unfortunately, that's the mantra of every racist ever.

I have a whole diatribe on here somewhere about the terms Left and Right. They're arbitrary and useless, which just makes them impediments to any useful dialogue, unless we can all agree on an objective and consistent defining characteristic that differentiates the two.
Otherwise it's just meaningless name-calling, intended as a slight toward someone who doesn't even receive it that way; because they're using their own subjective definitions to begin with.

@rway I think the power dynamics matter. I'm less critical of black nationalism, for example, because black people have been racialized and oppressed by white people and white-dominated institutions who had more power. It's not racist to recognize that people have been racialized and oppressed despite the right's efforts to enforce such a "catch-22." Moreover, there is a history of groups like the Black Panthers who began as black nationalists but over time developed a more universal outlook of solidarity. And while it is not uncommon for centrists to use identity cynically, the left is very much committed to solidarity as well.

@WilyRickWiles solidarity with each other, exclusively.
That's just nativism.
Whether you define "your people" by geography, genetics or ideology makes no difference.

@rway No, it's universal, not exclusionary.

@rway Though I wouldn't blame them if they excluded nativists with power! Paradox of tolerance and all. [en.wikipedia.org]

@WilyRickWiles Universal? I see nothing but evidence to the contrary. What has led you to conclude that the Left feels solidarity with the Right?

I'm familiar with Popper's observation. It's misguided, and only useful as an excuse for closet intolerants.
Every single person is already "intolerant" of myriad things. And it's none of my business. The law restricts the ways in which they can act on those biases, not whether they may have them at all.
Those restrictions prevent Poppers "paradox".
When you begin to separate the good bigotry from the bad bigotry... based on your own bigotry... then you've headed full-throttle down the road of tyranny.
The entire concept of "tolerance" is elitist and condescending. It's not up to you to determine whether anybody else's opinions or sensitivities are acceptable; just their actions, by way of the Law and due process.
Any behavior that does not violate your natural rights, is literally none of your business.

Power is an incredibly complex topic. What kind of power?
Money? Influence? Prestige? Immunity from criticism? Implicit credibility? Un-earned "entitlement"?
In the West right now... who do you think has "the power?"
Michael Bloomberg has $60 Billion dollars or so... and he had to publicly grovel and apologize at the debate because some people think he unfairly targeted minorities in NYC with "stop & frisk"... a policy that saved thousands of minority-lives.
Who in that scenario, had "the power" position? The old white billionaire guy, or the "oppressed".

@rway The left has no problem with people's private hatreds. The problem is when they make those hatreds policy.

@rway Bloomberg threw 2,000 black and brown boys against the wall per day in order to find 2 guns. And look what a difference it made (/s)! Are you really denying that the mega billionaire has power when he's been able to buy his way into second place in a Presidential primary in short order?

@WilyRickWiles what I'm denying is that other people don't have power.

You didn't answer the question, what happened after he bought his way into the debate?
He was cowed effortlessly by the mere insinuation of racial bias, and may have been conclusively shut down because of it. So much for all that "power".
And the insinuation has nothing in the world to do with whether stop & frisk was effective.
Whether it was a good tactic or a bad tactic, you focus law enforcement resources where the crime is. Whose fault is it that the crime is primarily in those communities? The guy who's trying to reduce it... you're really blaming him? Because you didn't like his tactic?

The left goes off the rails at the slightest dissent. It's classic herd behavior. I can't imagine anybody actually denying that sincerely. You really don't see it?
Ask any black conservative how "universal" that solidarity is...

@rway It wasn't a mere insinuation. It's on the record. Have you seen the videos?

Have you seen @Chicago's posts lately?

@WilyRickWiles Nope, never heard of him.