What a wild time to be alive
Until we undo capitalism, we are going to have these 80 year cycles
Fascism is on the rise in Europe too so maybe go to Japan or something
still, EU countries have far superior electoral systems than the US to help mitigate the rise and influence of Fascism.
That is if the other parties aren’t largely complicit. Looking at you Germany, Denmark, France, Finland, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Poland, Hungary…
True, same is now happening with those awful US dems.
Already tone-deaf before the election, saying they just needed to accept the uncomfortable genocide support or get Trump.
Now they want to beat him by “embracing patriotism” “banning left wing voices” and other horrible Trump style measures.
A race to the bottom.Which is weird when you see the IRL support and hype around Bernie and AOC. The people want more left in the democratic party.
They are the imaginary left and selling the snake oil of curing the party from within.
That party is sponsored by most of the same oligarchs, companies, banks and the MIC.
It can never happen.
And especially now with Trump the people can be easily manipulated to funnel their anger towards him while keeping the Dems safe.
The far-right in Europe seems to have lost momentum a bit-- for now. The far-right parties in government in Sweden and Netherlands proved themselves incompetent and lost support. The support on German AfD stagnated. Meloni has shown to be more moderate than expected (well, not quite but that’s a long story). And Le Pen has been prosecuted, but I think this is not enough to actually kill the French far-right movement so long as the French government still practice neoliberal policies. But I think the major factor that made Europeans think twice now about gravitating towards fascism is after witnessing the shit show in America and Musk’s overt election interference in Europe. I should not be laughing, but what a laugh the three months of Trump administration has been!
Be real careful. We thought we were turning the corner a few years ago, too. Seems so long ago.
Because when you’re the one who “came up” with it, it’s usually a pretty sweet ride, provided you can weather the revolutions and stuff.
Tell that to the 10% of the German population that didn’t survive WW2.
/pedant the term would be “emigrating”
Specifically the second one.
immigrate from Europe
emigrate to Europe
Depends on your viewpoint.
Emigrate from Europe and immigrate to Europe is also a valid way to look at it.
It is, but that’s not the viewpoint they used in the meme
Just my two cents, not having a go at you:
This is why I’m a pragmatic prescriptivist, I want people to follow norms for ease of communication, unless their innovation fills a need/fixes something about the language.
Stupid english with its stupid verbs.
We’ve got “to” and “from” why do we need to have two differently spelt verbs for basically the same thing.
Sure, you could argue that you can just say “they are emigrating” to imply people are leaving the country permanently, but let’s be honest, not providing any other context it’s practically unheard of. You’ll at least be saying where they currently are, came from, or going to, unless you’re being very abstract. Even then, you couls say “the migrants were immigrating” to be very vague about it. Both immigrating and emigrating involve moving, wtf is the point?
I’m glad few people “properly” use “emigrate” these days. Let’s kill it, it’s redundant!
I may have even gotten the difference wrong, but I’m not gonna look it up since I don’t want to use it anyway haha
How about just ‘migrate’ and ‘migrating’?
In my view, “migrate” according to Etymonline originates from the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root *mei which means “to change, go, move”.
I don’t believe this term refers to moving in or out of something, or any other preposition.
As we’ve been discussing in this post, immigrate and emigrate represent inverses of each other. It makes sense to look for logical ways to combine those.
I think the best prefix for this would be trans- for, according to Etymonline, this means “across, beyond, through, on the other side of; go beyond”. Specifically, I would refer to trans- as meaning “out from and in to”, which gives us the word “transmigrate”. Etymonline has a dictionary entry for “transmigration”.
It looks like Merriam-Webster, Oxford, and American Heritage dictionaries support “transmigrate” as an entry.
From wiktionary: Verb migrate (third-person singular simple present migrates, present participle migrating, simple past and past participle migrated)
(intransitive) To change habitations across a border; to move from one country or political region to another. To escape persecution, they migrated to a neutral country.
This is already common usage and I don’t see the need for any prefixes to the word. The Etymonline definition is giving the definition of the root, not the current english word.
This is already common usage and I don’t see the need for any prefixes to the word.
As we’ve already seen in this thread, sometimes prefixes are needed to help establish the arrow of causation when people do migrate. Did they come to or leave from this or that country? Etc.
not the current english word.
Good thing language can change over time :)
The problem we’re addressing is that the prefixes are made redundant by the syntax of to and from. ‘immigrating to europe’ ‘emmigrating from europe’. Dropping the prefix in this context doesn’t change the meaning: ‘migrating to europe’ ‘migrating from europe’.
