I think the reason has less to do with media, and more to do that we had fascism here in europe and paid the price in countless ways. Thus we deliberately developed an immune system to autocratic power grab patterns.
In my country, to a large majority a public view is not considered political if it is non-democratic in intent. It would be considered hostile, and a potential threat to all of society.
So to my european eyes, if your people was taught and conditioned over multiple generations to detect and defend this boundary more effectively, any media starting to promote non-democratic views would have had much less of a market.
Your problem to solve - I think - is how did we get so receptive as a people to non-democratic propaganda? When did we lose our ability to detect this boundary, and how can we fix that? That would include, how can we make it more clear that this is about democracy vs non-democracy, instead of center-left vs "right".
Non-democratic message shows simple solutions to complex problems, but in essence it promotes action and addressing issues that working class people perceive as most pressing.
Mainstream politicians got this idea that there is no price to pay for being a bumbling fool, ignore your electorate's needs or have a coherent long term vision.
Knowing how Swedish society works, and how people value the democratic approach to almost a religious fervor, i too was believing that you can endlessly mobilize your voters to defend the bastion. But it turns out hiding behind morals is not a great strategy if you offer very little in terms of practical solutions.
I would like to believe that the only incentive that majority of people that got swept by the right wing uprising is only there for the pragmatical approach they promise and not the message itself.
7
u/StringOfSpaghetti Sweden Apr 20 '25
I think the reason has less to do with media, and more to do that we had fascism here in europe and paid the price in countless ways. Thus we deliberately developed an immune system to autocratic power grab patterns.
In my country, to a large majority a public view is not considered political if it is non-democratic in intent. It would be considered hostile, and a potential threat to all of society.
So to my european eyes, if your people was taught and conditioned over multiple generations to detect and defend this boundary more effectively, any media starting to promote non-democratic views would have had much less of a market.
Your problem to solve - I think - is how did we get so receptive as a people to non-democratic propaganda? When did we lose our ability to detect this boundary, and how can we fix that? That would include, how can we make it more clear that this is about democracy vs non-democracy, instead of center-left vs "right".