They explained the collapse in terms of international forces and justified nationalism as a means for shielding the nation from those forces. Nationalist aggression was similarly justified in terms of increasing the scope of protection from international threats. Blocher's and Haider's movements differ in origin and intent. They are not a response to massive economic dysfunction. Any economic focus is a fear of future economic collapse, rooted in the fact that Switzerland and Austria are losing control of their national destiny to forces that are either indifferent to their fate or seeking to prosper from economic catastrophe.
Traditional fascism is a response to very real, immediate and catastrophic economic problems.
Today's right-wing movement is trying to avoid a perceived future calamity. The fact is, however, that Blocher and Haider are not about economic issues. Their strength is drawn from the persistent strength of nationalism. To a great extent this is a reaction against those who have directly benefited from the transfer of power from the nation to Brussels and to other multi-national organizations. In its purest form, it is a revolt against the multi-national financial institutions, from the International Monetary Fund to Citigroup, that benefit greatly from a world without borders, and whose success undermines national government.