Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: La peste identitaria in Europa

http://www.newint.org/features/2011/06/01/far-right-in-europe/
Eyes to the far right
Share this:   ISSUE 443
K Biswas charts the rise of ‘nativist’ populism in Europe.
A hard-line look: an English Defence League supporter wears contact 
lenses sporting the St George cross – a symbol for some of white 
supremacy. Paul Hackett / Reuters
‘If Sweden had a majority of Muslims who wanted Sharia Law, what do you 
think would happen?’
Posing the question is Kent Ekeroth, a newly elected member of 
parliament for the far-right Sweden Democrats (SD). In his neat little 
office inside the beautiful Riksdag (parliament) building, located on a 
tiny island in the centre of Stockholm, the party’s International 
Secretary becomes more animated when the issue of Muslim immigration is 
discussed. ‘I don’t want to see the chopping off of hands because 
somebody steals a loaf of bread,’ he says.
In last September’s general election SD managed to win representation 
for the first time in its history, controlling 20 seats and holding the 
balance of power – in a country renowned for its embrace of tolerance 
and cultural diversity. ‘We changed the debate,’ Ekeroth proudly claims. 
‘They can’t ignore us like they used to before.’
SD seeks to divide the electorate between ‘natives’ and ‘immigrants’ and 
says that ‘immigrants’ benefit from liberal social policies while 
‘natives’ suffer. The party focused its election campaign on the two 
southern-most counties – Skåne and Blekinge – where worries around 
welfare, long-term job prospects and integration loom largest.
Daniel Poohl, whose magazine Expo (founded by the author of The Girl 
with the Dragon Tattoo, the late Stieg Larsson) monitors the Swedish far 
right, observes: ‘SD was able to say to Swedes that the problems they 
see in society and the problems that they have personally are directly 
linked to immigration. And those who ended up voting for the Sweden 
Democrats believed in what the party was saying.’
The party released selective crime statistics showing that Africans and 
Arabs committed a high number of sexual assaults, and used every 
opportunity to rally against the ‘multicultural Swedish power-élite’ for 
not standing up for their own citizens. In the run-up to the election it 
broadcast a TV advert depicting a group of women in Islamic dress 
jostling past an elderly white woman to take money from the country’s 
budget. Sweden’s former Social Democrat chair, Mona Sahlin, called this 
‘an incitement to hatred’.
SD’s success is by no means unique. Extreme nationalists and ultra-right 
populists have found parliamentary footholds across Western Europe. 
Their anti-immigrant/anti-élite rhetoric chimes with a significant 
number of voters. Geert Wilders – who, in his own words, ‘hates Islam’ – 
and his Party for Freedom (PVV) prop up the Dutch government. The Front 
National’s new leader, Marine Le Pen, is outpolling Nicholas Sarkozy in 
the run-up to next year’s French presidential election. In Austria, 
Italy and Denmark, parties of the far right have been in partnership 
governments during the last decade. An insurgent radical rightwing 
strand pollutes representative politics in most nations across the 
continent.
Public debates on ‘national identity’ are blurring the lines between 
acceptable political discussion and divisive rhetoric that marginalizes 
minorities. These ‘conversations’ redefine what it means to be a 
citizen, and Europe’s non-white citizenry are largely left out of them. 
Disorganized parties that once garnered disparate, fluctuating support 
have honed their language, policies and organizational capabilities and 
been voted into parliaments across the continent.
How can this have happened?
Mainstream
‘My party and I are a threat to the political élite,’ said Geert Wilders 
in November 2010. ‘Take a look at German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who 
is now trying to create a copy.’
Political commentators often argue that the far right thrives because 
mainstream politicians have failed to discuss immigration, for fear of 
offending minority ethnic groups. But listen to the tough-talking 
statements made by Europe’s political leaders in recent years and you 
may question this logic. Angela Merkel has claimed that 
‘multiculturalism has utterly failed’ in Germany. Nicholas Sarkozy has 
said that France does not want immigration ‘inflicted’ on itself. Silvio 
Berlusconi has stated that Italy is not, and should never be, a 
‘multi-ethnic country’.
An insurgent radical rightwing strand pollutes representative politics 
in most nations across the continent
It is not just politicians on the conservative right who seek to make 
political capital from anti-immigrant sentiment. In Britain, Labour’s 
former Immigration Minister, Phil Woolas, looked to ‘make white folk 
angry’ by exploiting racial and religious divisions in his 2010 general 
election campaign. Dutch Labour chair Liliane Ploumen raised the 
‘self-designated victimization’ and disproportionate levels of 
‘criminality and trouble-making’ of immigrants in the Netherlands.
Kent Ekeroth has noticed the change. He joined SD five years ago, 
eschewing the opportunity to join the mainstream Liberal People’s Party 
for a party with roots in the ‘White Power’ neo-fascist movements of the 
1980s and 1990s. During that time, the party was ignored by politicians 
and ridiculed by the media due to its toxic agenda, accompanied by 
racist bombast and party members’ penchant for Nazi uniforms.
Now the SD boasts that mainstream parties across Europe are adopting 
sanitized versions of their policies. Figures like Ekeroth are taking 
heart. ‘What happened recently in Germany is astounding,’ he says. 
‘First, [Angela] Merkel talked about the failures of multiculturalism. 
Then the Interior Minister said that “Islam has no place here”. Then the 
Finance Minister said that third-generation immigrants are worse than 
the first generation.’ They were all referring to the history of Turkish 
Muslim integration in their country, which is seen as contributing to a 
loss of identity.
Nativism
Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right Front National, has her eyes on 
the French presidency. Pascal Rossignol / Reuters
‘The mainstream has shifted to a point where “national identity” has a 
big role,’ says Professor Cas Mudde, a Dutch academic who has studied 
the relationship between the radical right and established parties. He 
sees populist far-right parties as radicalized interpretations of the 
mainstream – a product of society’s fears. ‘Every country has a 
constituency that shares the values of the radical right. And its key 
values of nativism, authoritarianism and populism all link to mainstream 
understanding within Western democracies. For example, nativism is a 
radical interpretation of the “strong nation-state”. As a consequence, 
there is a rather large breeding ground for radical right parties that 
mainstream parties can also tap into.’
The argument that mainstream figures are in some way frightened of 
discussing immigration obscures the key reasons why the far right 
thrives: it opportunistically takes advantage of economic and social 
fears, a lack of trust in the political class, and the growing 
‘legitimization’ of Islamophobia in public discourse.
Across the continent, far-right populist parties have sought success 
around places of intense economic deprivation and social breakdown. 
Europe’s immigrants disproportionately live in urban areas where poverty 
and unemployment are highest, and it is here that xenophobic political 
parties have been successful. The global economic meltdown has given 
these parties a chance to attack ‘open door’ immigration policies as a 
drain on essential resources, arguing that their native countrymen and 
-women are being overlooked.
Last year alone, regional elections in France saw Front National leader 
Marine Le Pen and her predecessor father, Jean-Marie, take substantial 
votes in areas severely hit by recession. In northern Italy, with its 
high levels of poverty and significant non-white population, support for 
Lega Nord strengthened. The Party’s posters depicted a Native American 
next to the words: ‘They also underwent immigration – now they live in 
reservations.’ There was a strong showing for far-right parties in 
Vienna and Malmö, cities with a firm socialist heritage where industrial 
and demographic changes brought bitterness to decaying communities 
desperate for someone to blame.
The implications of accepting refugees from Africa and the Middle East 
are regularly cited by the far right, even though in Europe the right to 
seek asylum and freedom from persecution are guaranteed by international 
law.
‘Europe can’t welcome you,’ Marine Le Pen recently told two undocumented 
migrants who had fled to the small Italian island of Lampedusa from 
Tunisia following January’s uprising. ‘We don’t have the financial means.’
Inconvenient truth
Frida Metso, chair of voluntary organization FARR, works to support 
asylum seekers and refugees in Sweden, which like much of Europe has 
tightened its migration laws over recent years. She is passionate and 
articulate when explaining the anguish that many refugees go through – 
torn from their families, hiding or living on the streets, denied social 
security or the right to work. She is angry at parties like the Sweden 
Democrats for portraying most refugees as undeserving or bogus.
‘A lot of these people are totally desperate – fleeing from 
dictatorships or leaving a state that is trying to imprison them,’ she 
says. ‘Some die on the way here. Parties like SD try to convince people 
that those coming here are not threatened in their home countries, and 
that they could go back if they wanted to. Those who say that these are 
not really refugees, that these are all “illegal” immigrants coming here 
and taking our jobs. Well, it is not true. If they were to meet refugees 
face to face and speak with them, I have no doubt they would say: 
“Absolutely, these are people we cannot deport.”’
Hard work
Far-right populist parties try to pitch themselves as the authentic 
voice of the people; representatives of ‘the silent majority’ addressing 
issues they claim have long been ignored by politicians. They align 
themselves with public concerns as a way of extending their reach – 
championing popular initiatives such as defending social housing or 
tackling violent crime, or starting their own initiatives, for example, 
against the building of local mosques or asylum centres.
They mobilize the public by speaking not just about them but directly to 
them. Much of their success in recent years is down to hard work – their 
vote is won through vigorous campaigning on the doorstep and by 
independent net activism, rather than by relying on exposure in the 
mainstream media. It is in non-regulated public arenas that they hear 
the range of people’s material concerns – around jobs, pensions, 
housing, healthcare, welfare – and direct authentic anxieties into 
action against the political élite.
Politicians like Geert Wilders and the Danish People’s Party’s (DF) 
self-styled ‘housewife leader’ Pia Kjaersgaard play on their 
anti-establishment credentials, arguing that the public has been 
abandoned by privileged parliamentarians who care little for ordinary 
people’s concerns. Kjaersgaard – or ‘Mamma Pia’ as young party admirers 
refer to her – has been a support partner of Denmark’s government for 
the past 10 years, yet presents herself as in touch with people’s 
‘ordinary, commonplace attitudes’, unlike other élitist politicians.
Glory days
This anti-establishment, anti-politics thrust is mirrored across the 
continent, at a time when trust in the political class is at an all-time 
low. Existing groups of representatives are painted as feeble and 
corrupt – political pygmies compared to their predecessors. Far-right 
populists believe that, in the words of Kent Ekeroth, ‘the Western world 
has become weak as we are not willing to defend our own culture or 
society’. Only their parties, it is argued, can return European nations 
back to the glory days.
Party leaders invoke Eisenhower or Churchill in an attempt to shed the 
‘Nazi’ label often thrown at them – a tactic shared with the British 
National Party, which portrays Churchill beaming down at viewers of 
their election broadcasts. Front National’s election posters show 
General De Gaulle arguing that ‘France will no longer be France’ unless 
other races remain a minority. Steps have even been taken by ultra-right 
parties in Italy to rehabilitate the legacy of Mussolini. The 
implication is that the mantle of patriotic heroism has been passed on 
to their parties, as the current crop of politicians is powerless to 
save their countries from external threats.
‘The mix of anti-immigration policy and an 
anti-Europe/anti-establishment discourse is determining the public 
agenda,’ says Alfred Gusenbauer. He is the former Austrian Chancellor 
who was leader of the Social Democratic Party between 2000 and 2008 – a 
challenging period.
When Jorg Haider’s far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ) entered into a 
coalition government in 2000, it was greeted with alarm – Haider was 
considered a pariah by the international community, tainted as a 
xenophobic ultra-nationalist with a history of anti-semitism. The EU 
advocated sanctions against Austria, and leading statesmen including 
Gerhard Schroeder, Bill Clinton and Jacques Chirac publicly registered 
their consternation.
Haider’s successor and protégé, Heinz Christian Strache, is leading the 
FPÖ into the next election, when it may emerge as the largest 
parliamentary party. Gusenbauer, who stood against both Haider and 
Strache, is dismayed but not surprised. ‘Firstly, the FPÖ portrays 
Austrians as foreigners in their own country, due to immigration. 
Secondly, more and more sovereignty has been transferred to Europe, 
meaning that decisions taken by the national parliament are limited in 
scope. And thirdly, decisions at an economic level are taken far away 
from Austria in the globalized financial markets. The narrative is that 
the nation and the self-determination of the people is lost.’
Islam = threat
Parties like the FPÖ have been fortunate to break through at a time of 
heightened awareness of a new, globalized threat: Islam. The success of 
many far-right parties is predicated on a significant public distrust of 
Muslims. Over half of Danes believe that Islam hinders social harmony; 
three-quarters of citizens from the former East Germany want to 
‘seriously limit’ the practice of Islam; half of Britons associate Islam 
with terrorism; four in ten French people see Muslims living in their 
country as a ‘threat’ to their national identity; more than half of 
Austrians believe that ‘Islam poses a threat to the West and our 
familiar lifestyle’.
Even though Muslims in Europe originate from different parts of the 
globe – Turks in Germany, North Africans in France, Pakistanis in 
Britain – they are portrayed as a single monolithic block, unable to 
integrate into European society. The populist press has played its role 
in generating public fears of Muslims. In Britain, which has elected no 
far-right representatives into its national parliament, the Daily 
Express and Daily Star blare out hate-filled statements from their front 
pages on an almost daily basis, characterizing Muslims as a homogenous 
group hell-bent on undermining the British way of life. ‘Muslim Schools 
ban our culture,’ ‘Muslims get their own laws in Britain,’ ‘Sniffer dogs 
offend Muslims,’ ‘Muslims tell British – Go to Hell’.
‘The media have uncritically incorporated the idea that “Islam equals 
threat”, therefore Muslims are a threat,’ according to Liz Fekete, the 
Chair of Britain’s Institute of Race Relations. The media are 
‘constantly looking for the extreme voice within the Muslim community, 
because it’s an easy peg to hang a story on. So if a small extremist 
sect that doesn’t have any legitimacy within the Muslim community is 
organizing a protest, it becomes the major framework for any public 
discussion on Muslims.’
A ‘poppy-burning’ demonstration on Remembrance Day by the little-known 
group Muslims Against Crusades attracted a handful of extremists to 
Kensington in West London, yet made the front page of many national 
newspapers.
Eurabia
It is no surprise that arguments about the incompatibility of Islam with 
‘Western values’ have shifted from the fringes into mainstream 
discourse. In recent years, we have seen a growing ‘intellectualization’ 
of Islamophobia. Some prominent Western commentators (most of whom have 
historically displayed little or no interest in Islamic culture) have 
gone out of their way to add credibility to anti-Muslim hysteria.
Reputable publications regularly print scare stories around a supposed 
Islamic takeover of Europe, filled with overblown talk of demographic 
time-bombs caused by Muslim immigration and high fertility rates. The 
continent is forever depicted as being on the frontline of the West’s 
struggle with Islam, facing the real prospect of a ‘Eurabian’ state.
The US columnist Christopher Caldwell argues that Muslims are ‘patiently 
conquering Europe’s cities street by street’; the late Italian author 
Oriana Fallaci claimed that Muslims have been told to come here and 
‘breed like rats’. Canadian writer Mark Steyn paints a dystopian future 
with everyone under ‘40 – make it 60, if not 75’ destined to live in an 
‘Islamified Europe’.
Last summer, the Social Democrat Thilo Sarrazin caused a publishing 
sensation with his book Germany Does Away with Itself, in which he 
declares: ‘I don’t want the country of my grandchildren and 
great-grandchildren to be largely Muslim, or that Turkish or Arabic will 
be spoken in large areas, that women will wear headscarves and the daily 
rhythm is set by the call of the muezzin.’
Surefire
A candlelit vigil in opposition to Barbara Rosenkranz, presidential 
candidate in 2010 for Austria’s far-right Freedom Party. Leonhard Foeger 
/ Reuters
The implication is that the Islamic threat is real and urgent; being 
Muslim and being European is incompatible; Muslims can never be 
moderate. These writers and their disciples have their viewpoints 
endlessly repeated in public and reposted on internet message boards, 
gifting the far right a ‘legitimate’ scapegoat, as well as the arguments 
and language to spread its message successfully.
Extreme rightwing politicians exploit ‘respectable’ Islamophobia, 
knowing that a hard line against Europe’s Muslim communities is a 
surefire vote winner. Across the continent – in Denmark, the 
Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden, France, Austria, Switzerland – far-right 
political parties have won large numbers of votes by focusing on the 
‘Islamization’ of their countries.
‘I’ve had enough of Islam in the Netherlands; let not one more Muslim 
immigrate,’ Geert Wilders proclaims, and his fellow populists agree. The 
Danish People’s Party publishes posters depicting the Prophet Muhammad, 
with the Jyllands-Posten cartoons controversy fresh in the public mind. 
A branch of Austria’s FPÖ released the online computer game ‘Bye Bye 
Mosque’, in which players were encouraged to target a crude Muslim 
caricature erecting religious buildings.
Aligned with popular campaigns, such as banning the construction of 
mosques and minarets or legislating on which garments Muslim women can 
wear in public – in Wilders’ words, a tax on ‘head-rags’ – far-right 
voices have been successful in creating a cultural climate that is 
aggressively hostile to Europe’s Muslim communities.
Clash
This atmosphere inevitably leads to physical clashes. Across Europe, 
Muslim populations have become regular targets of violent attacks. 
Centres of worship are routinely vandalized – Berlin’s largest mosque, 
Sehitlik, was attacked four times in five months last year – and women 
wearing religious clothing are frequently abused and assaulted in public.
Often entire communities are intimidated by anti-Muslim protests that 
take to the streets. The English Defence League has held 40 marches 
across Britain in two years, all of which have ended in violence. In the 
city of Peterborough, supporters circumvented police cordons and 
attacked Muslim youths after a series of inflammatory speeches. Their 
actions, which have included daubing mosques with hate-speech and 
placing bacon and pigs’ heads on Muslim premises, are designed to 
promote community division and provoke a violent reaction, lending 
credence to a confused ‘clash of civilizations’ narrative.
Anti-immigrant politicians are channelling the energy of 
extra-parliamentary movements into their campaigns, organizing meetings 
with those able to mobilize people previously thought to be beyond the 
reach of representative politics.
Wilders, with his contacts both within parliaments and outside 
conventional political structures, is forming an International Freedom 
Alliance, which aims to ‘stop Islam’ and ‘defend freedom’. Attempts are 
being made by an opposing alliance to hold Wilders to account. Jeroen 
Bosch of Dutch anti-racist group Alert! says: ‘Everybody who is attacked 
by Wilders and his policies resists in their own way – artists make art, 
judges author opinion articles, others write free pamphlets. People make 
humorous posters and flyers on the internet, political parties give out 
research on the voting behaviour of his party and groups like ours 
monitor their publications and speeches.’
Accommodation
‘I want to replace the mainstream.’ Kent Ekeroth is clear about what he 
and other anti-immigrant populists believe they can achieve. ‘I hope we 
can replace the Social Democrats and all those other naïve parties. Look 
at Norway and Austria – we have the biggest party. The Front National is 
the second biggest party in France. In Finland, the second or first 
biggest.’
A decade after Austria was ostracized, Haider’s successors are being 
accepted, their agenda adopted by established parties they sit 
alongside. In the Netherlands and Denmark limits on immigration from 
Africa and the Middle East can be directly attributed to these parties 
acting as government ‘support partners’. They drive popular, often 
successful campaigns to restrict visible signs of Islam in Europe – 
against the mosque, the Qur’an, the face-veil – often supported by 
people who would never dream of actively endorsing the far right.
The mainstream, after years of denying these parties the ‘oxygen of 
publicity’, frequently goes out of its way to accommodate far-right 
views in order to reflect the diversity of political opinion. Geert 
Wilders writes for the Wall Street Journal; SD leader Jimmie Åkesson 
authors a pre-election op-ed for the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet; Marine 
Le Pen is winning support on her ‘detoxification’ tour of the globe, 
granting interviews to Britain’s Daily Telegraph, Israel’s Ha’aretz and 
the Associated Press – something completely denied to her father.
Unbound
As their influence grows across the continent, so must their ambitions. 
Their parties have successfully put ‘natives first’ policies, and even 
the voluntary repatriation of immigrants, back on to the political 
agenda, decades after they were last considered seriously by lawmakers.
The social reforms developed by the conservative and social democratic 
consensus over six decades were in part introduced to ensure that Europe 
never again saw extremists holding the levers of power. In 21st century 
Europe, a populist far right sees an opportunity to dismantle 
institutional, ethical and legislative structures that the continent has 
built upon since the Second World War. Agreed principles around 
non-discrimination, tolerance and diversity are under threat by 
opportunistic figures who care little for the livelihoods of Europe’s 
minority communities.
As Ekeroth declares: ‘We are not bound by someone else’s principles.’
K Biswas is a writer based in London
-- 
Namib
"I should never have switched from Scotch to Martinis"
(ultime parole di Humphrey Bogart)

 
http://www.newint.org/features/2011/06/01/far-right-in-europe/
Certo che namib è un comunista fuori dal comune.
Dovrebbe essere internazionalista ed è pappa e ciccia con un branchetto 
di ultranazionalisti; critica l'identitarismo europeo e fa comunella con 
identitaristi all'ennesima potenza; dovrebbe essere antifascista e da 
una mano a compiere azioni di squadrismo mediatico; protesta per i più 
disparati episodi di discriminazione ma non per la discriminazione 
quotidianamente inflitta ai palestinesi.
Che stia tentando di rifondare il comunismo mediando tra Marx, 
patristica e Jabotinsky?
-- 
Sostieni Rete ECO
http://rete-eco.it/it/sostienici.html

 Certo che namib è un comunista fuori dal comune.
Ora non mi adulare.


 Certo che namib è un comunista fuori dal comune.
Come si rode il pirla, nessuno.
-- 
Io non gufo l'Inter. Le spacco le corna.

 Certo che namib è un comunista fuori dal comune.
ma molto dentro la parrocchia...