Extreme right wing populism is rising in Europe... What can we do to stop it?

[Harke the Boeotarch]

And we say, look for it among the gypsies.

Half the population of Eastern Europe, you mean?

 

[Disturbance]

Half the population of Eastern Europe, you mean?

You. You are funny
They are a minority thankfully, but they always manage to get by without working and paying taxes...

 

[Nishin]

European Regulations, play a major part of our everyday life, ranging from EU laws regarding small shop-owners, to Courts in another Country "Voiding" rulings made by even our own Supreme Court.
As for immigration, you have to realise just how small we are as a nation, we are at "bursting" point with the amount of immigrants who come here, mainly because we are seen as a soft touch because of our "once" generous welfare state. I work in the local community, in the health field. I cannot get the funding for some of my most ill patients, this is mainly due to the strain placed on our NHS by "Health" immigrants. No, i do not feel that leaving the EU would stop immigration, though if we had control of our own borders again, it would be drastically reduced. I do wish to point out that i am not a proponent of leaving The EU, i do however believe that changes have to be made both in relation to free travel and border controls.

On what figures do you base your opinion that you reached bursting point in welcoming immigrants in the UK?
We hear the same arguments from the extreme right in my country (which welcomes more immigrants than the UK despite having a lower GDP (PPP)) but several studies actually prove that the fiscal impact of immigration here is positive.
A quick google search seems to indicate it is the same in the UK:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1113/051113-migration-report / http://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-institute/highlights/2013-14/immigration / http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9172b1f4-455d-11e3-b98b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz33CP38d3Q / http://niesr.ac.uk/blog/long-term-economic-impacts-reducing-migration#.U4hxWCgVeaU

I am English, i am British, I am European. I am all 3 of these and happy to be. Not all of those in the UK are anti-EU, it just seems that way on account that those who are, have the biggest gobs on them.

Thank you for the reminder, I tend to view British people as highly anti-EU and to forget the anti crowd is just much more vocal than the other ones... exactly the way it happens in my country...

Much the same as you (if I remember correctly) once said you were Breton - a region with its own local language and culture - much like Scotland. So we can both identify with our local regions, and also our country. I will still feel Scottish and British if independence goes through.

Absolutely, although I wasn't born there and do not speak the language.

Where we differ is, for some reason, you seem to feel much less affinity and connection and pride with France. If I were French, I'd feel just as much animosity to the E.U. and my wish would be for all decisions to be made by the French parliament and government.

I feel a lot of affinity with France for it's my main culture and the nationality that defines myself if asked.
Pride though? Not especially, being born there was non of my making/achievement... just chance. I don't understand the concept of pride for something one has no responsibility in...
I do not agree with part of the decisions made by the French parliament and government, the problem I have with these decisions really is their content, not who they come from... in life a lot of decisions are imposed on us by thirds (your parents, your boss, your government etc), as long as you have the ability to express the reason why you disagree with these decisions and debate I don't see a reason to contest legitimacy of the decisions maker.
These very same decisions you disagree with and refuse when they come from the EU, would you agree with them if (because) they were coming from your local government instead? I hope not... thus the problem is the decision, not who makes it... no?

I live in the geographic area that is the European continent.

Your definition of 'European' is probably 'citizen of the European Union'.

I guess my definition is a mix of both, something more general than just geography or politics... your culture is also European, you speak a language derived form mainland European languages, your religion comes from the south of Europe, most of your food as well, your share common grounds with the rest of Europe in terms of values (democracy, human rights, etc), artistic heritage (literature, architecture, etc), history (demographics, monarchies etc)... I really fail to understand how you don't feel connected to all these...

Petty little directives and legislation are constantly mandated by the E.U. in a crass attempt to PRETEND Europe is a single country. Products labelled formerly 'Made in U.K.' are now 'Made in E.U.' Then more directives for weights and measurements, directives for the E.U. flag to replace national flags on items.
I can see you identify with this notion, considering where you've said your 'Location' is under your avatar.

To be absolutely honest, these labels and flags examples seem really trivial to me, that changes nothing at all in my everyday life...
I can understand how directives for weights and measurements could be annoying to you as a UK citizen... but I don't believe the EU imposes to REPLACE them rather than ADD/MENTION the EU normative ones...
In France, most receipts still, in 2014, translate amounts from € to francs, and in some corporations they still use the franc as a standard currency for negotiations (ie. if you're buying cows to sell meat, you will negotiate the price by Fr/kg and only the final bill will be made and paid in €)

Oh and one last thing - just over a decade ago, I believe France had a referendum on one of the E.U. treaties. Along with I think either the Netherlands or Denmark, the French people voted 'No'.
Where have the referendums gone since? They WON'T listen. When the next treaty comes along, the E.U. bureaucrats in Brussels will do ALL in their power to make damn well sure no citizen in their oh-so-grand project gets a say. They don't know the meaning of the word 'NO'.
The arrogance of that fucking institution is beyond belief.
I DESPISE the European Union and I DO NOT WANT TO BE A PART OF IT.
I voted UKIP. Now give me, and every British citizen, a vote to get my country OUT.

The NO vote you're mentioning was about the European Constitution, and it wasn't overlooked by Brussels bureaucrats: it wasn't them but French president Nicolas Sarkozy who ensured that the remastered treaty derived from it (with similar content) wasn't made a referendum... let's put the blames where they belong.
It is also inaccurate to pretend that Brussels bureaucrats will make sure EU citizen have no say in the decision making process: your say on European matters is conveyed by the deputies you elect there to represent yourself.

This was the referendums over the European Union constitution(what is referred to as the Lisbon Treaty). Referendums are not legally binding and while a number of countries rejected it in its original form, it was later accepted by all the heads of state. A lot of the voting during it, was taken as an attempt to criticize their governments rather than actually interact with the issues they voted on (like most European election).
[...]

Absolutely, the french FN score in the last vote is a very good illustration of this point...

Interesting how a discussion of right-wing populism has become one concerning the merits of the EU.

Well it is (results of) the last round of votes for deputies at the EU parliament that allowed for the OP's assertion... as to the related question, I guess the only thing that will work is improving our economies since rise of the extreme right ideas is usually directly linkable to periods of crisis inducing fear for economic welfare...

 

[medic1]

On what figures do you base your opinion that you reached bursting point in welcoming immigrants in the UK?
We hear the same arguments from the extreme right in my country (which welcomes more immigrants than the UK despite having a lower GDP (PPP)) but several studies actually prove that the fiscal impact of immigration here is positive.
A quick google search seems to indicate it is the same in the UK:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1113/051113-migration-report / http://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-institute/highlights/2013-14/immigration / http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9172b1f4-455d-11e3-b98b- 00144feabdc0.html#axzz33CP38d3Q / http://niesr.ac.uk/blog/long-term-e...FACISTS..................:rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

[nyctopgam]

"It believes that the UK should withdraw from the EU"

Never understood why EU even bothers with the UK. Obviously it's divisive there and the debate been going on and on and on. Until a big part of the UK wants it and asks to join I think the EU should go ahead. It's a waste of time and energy. I also think EU should just be the wealthy democratic Western European countries like in the original EC and not try to include all in the continent. The fiscal and political hassles start when you try to include with countries like Greece that have very different economies and infrastructural institutions. It should be more a financial group and not be politically inclusive.

 

[medic1]

"It believes that the UK should withdraw from the EU"

Never understood why EU even bothers with the UK. Obviously it's divisive there and the debate been going on and on and on. Until a big part of the UK wants it and asks to join I think the EU should go ahead. It's a waste of time and energy. I also think EU should just be the wealthy democratic Western European countries like in the original EC and not try to include all in the continent. The fiscal and political hassles start when you try to include with countries like Greece that have very different economies and infrastructural institutions. It should be more a financial group and not be politically inclusive.

And which Paradise do you reside in? Why have you never "understood why the EU "bothers" with the UK? So your idea of a united Europe, is to kick out all the [STRIKE]peasants[/STRIKE], poorer economic countries?
My, are you a "Right wing extremist?", Lets all have a United Europe, but only the wealthier nations please reply. The EU, started out as an idealistic "notion" of harmony and prosperity between member states. I am a firm supporter of the EU, if you have bothered to read any of my earlier posts. You would SOON have realised this, and that includes, as you state, the "poorer" economic members. You singled out Greece specifically, may i ask why? One last wee tiny point, the major idea behind forming the EU, was precisely to keep ALL member states
as politically inclusive as possible.

 

[Kulindahr]

"It believes that the UK should withdraw from the EU"

Never understood why EU even bothers with the UK. Obviously it's divisive there and the debate been going on and on and on. Until a big part of the UK wants it and asks to join I think the EU should go ahead. It's a waste of time and energy. I also think EU should just be the wealthy democratic Western European countries like in the original EC and not try to include all in the continent. The fiscal and political hassles start when you try to include with countries like Greece that have very different economies and infrastructural institutions. It should be more a financial group and not be politically inclusive.

Can you say "Right wing elitism"?

Or at the least, "plutocracy"?

 

[nyctopgam]

And which Paradise do you reside in? Why have you never "understood why the EU "bothers" with the UK? So your idea of a united Europe, is to kick out all the [STRIKE]peasants[/STRIKE], poorer economic countries?
My, are you a "Right wing extremist?", Lets all have a United Europe, but only the wealthier nations please reply. The EU, started out as an idealistic "notion" of harmony and prosperity between member states. I am a firm supporter of the EU, if you have bothered to read any of my earlier posts. You would SOON have realised this, and that includes, as you state, the "poorer" economic members. You singled out Greece specifically, may i ask why? One last wee tiny point, the major idea behind forming the EU, was precisely to keep ALL member states
as politically inclusive as possible.

No, I am not a right wing extremist. Far from it actually. It is because I like the idea of an EU that I want it to succeed. I think it expanded too rapidly.

In my opinion, it needs to work financially first in order to achieve a political unity. Because of the history of European nations, say, over the last couple of centuries, it is an enormous challenge for the nations need to build the idea of a federal group. So I think it is better to leave alone those who are not that happy with the idea. The EU has bigger fish to fry.

By expanding it basically to contain Russia, like a quasi NATO, after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dismantling of the Soviet Union, it went prematurely into trying to be a political union. In doing so, it brought into its sphere a much more diverse range of economies, political histories, and institutions.

Nothing against Greece. The EU just needs to be more select in members' wealth and capacity in order to establish and grow. Otherwise, the resentment grows as the richer ones subsidize the poorer, as we have seen.

The resentment filters down to the population and translates into right-wing extremism and racist/anti-immigrant sentiment.

 

[Kulindahr]

No, I am not a right wing extremist. Far from it actually. It is because I like the idea of an EU that I want it to succeed. I think it expanded too rapidly.

In my opinion, it needs to work financially first in order to achieve a political unity. Because of the history of European nations, say, over the last couple of centuries, it is an enormous challenge for the nations need to build the idea of a federal group. So I think it is better to leave alone those who are not that happy with the idea. The EU has bigger fish to fry.

By expanding it basically to contain Russia, like a quasi NATO, after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dismantling of the Soviet Union, it went prematurely into trying to be a political union. In doing so, it brought into its sphere a much more diverse range of economies, political histories, and institutions.

Nothing against Greece. The EU just needs to be more select in members' wealth and capacity in order to establish and grow. Otherwise, the resentment grows as the richer ones subsidize the poorer, as we have seen.

The resentment filters down to the population and translates into right-wing extremism and racist/anti-immigrant sentiment.

And you don't think there would be resentment if the organization was only for rich nations?

 

[nyctopgam]

And you don't think there would be resentment if the organization was only for rich nations?

Sure, as much as there is resentment against exclusive groups like the G8 or G20 or whatever number we are up at right now. Or the Security Council. The level of resentment depends on the expectation. Call it Rich Euro Union for that matter. I think what is important is that nations move from the previous individual configuration to a decentralized union. That is worth working towards.

When Kosovo became independent, one comment was, So what? They will still want to belong to the EU, whatever flag they fly or whatever color their passport. The success of EU will help us think beyond nations, and nationalism, one of the building blocks of our wars.

My advocacy of a smaller group with more shared attributes is because I want the idea of the EU to succeed and that baby steps are necessary. This will help us explore alternatives beyond nationalism.

 

[Adrusek81]

An EXCELLENT article by Peter Schwarz analyzing the situation in Europe.

The European elections and the crisis of the EU
29 May 2014

The results of last week’s European elections represent a massive rejection of the European Union. Twenty-two years after the Maastricht Treaty and ten years after the incorporation of many Eastern European states, most people see the EU for what it is: the tool of powerful capitalist interests.

Ever since the financial crisis of 2008, the institutions in Brussels have played a central role in reshaping Europe in the interests of finance capital. They have shifted billions to the banks for the benefit of the rich, plundered the welfare state by means of drastic austerity measures, and seen to it that wages were forced down and exploitation and unemployment pushed up. Together with the US, the EU is pursuing an aggressive imperialist foreign policy, pushing Europe to the verge of a military confrontation with Russia in the weeks before the elections.

 

[JohnnyAnger]

^ Man I never thought I would see a link to a trotskyist website linked on here!!!

For once thought its a good criticism of the EU not based on immigration! Still it toes party lines a bit much and other uses pseudo-left as its only attack.

 

[Adrusek81]

^ Man I never thought I would see a link to a trotskyist website linked on here!!!

For once thought its a good criticism of the EU not based on immigration! Still it toes party lines a bit much and other uses pseudo-left as its only attack.

I'm glad that I am not the only one who reads (and values) sources of information that lie beyond "official" channels.

Still, I disagree with your assessment of the article's contents. It concentrates on the moral corruption of the pseudo-left for the very simple reason that the left has betrayed both its activist and ideological bases and has become an instrument for bourgeois exploitation and electoral manipulation. The proletarians of the world are trapped in a race to nowhere and they have been denied this knowledge for far too long, and this article aims to correct this by reminding them of the great treason of which they have been falling victims since the 1960s.

Regarding its toeing party lines, all I can say is that, unfortunately, we have reached a point when dogmatism in the wake of radical fascism and neoliberal savagery masked as democracy, has become the only viable answer for the left. In general I found it quite impartial, and it has assessed the situation both broadly and fairly, concentrating, as it should, on the social causes for this sharp shift to the right (which is a HUGE mistake for which everyone is going to pay dearly) and the potential effects that this will have on the daily lives of the citizenship.

Again, I am glad to find someone who is objective enough to read from all sources.

 

[JohnnyAnger]

It was more just the bit where he lashed out at some left wing groups, then listed a tiny splinter group in the UK as the proper one (and one that publishes all its stuff on the WSW) who can be a bit shouty and a bit too dogmatic and anti-intersectionality (they only care about the working class struggle, rather than fighting against racism, homophobia etc. because they think it will go away when the revolution comes).

Still I think there view is quite right on nearly everything in there, and it leaves me very unsure how to go on with the EU. As a body of cross boarder coordination I think its great, but the whole thing is super conservative and business aimed.

 

[nyctopgam]

Really? So presumably you also think that the US should take down its border and allow as many Mexicans as may wish to to move to Oregon no questions asked? And the state will find homes and jobs for them, treat them when they're sick, pay benefits when they're unemployed and educate their children. Is that all OK too?

Yes,actually. At least the first part about taking down borders. The rest seems xenophobic. The more the US helps Mexico, the less Mexicans will want to move. No one wants to leave their home. Except to seek a better life. The solution is to help provide the better life there.

 

[unloadonme]

Yes,actually. At least the first part about taking down borders. The rest seems xenophobic. The more the US helps Mexico, the less Mexicans will want to move. No one wants to leave their home. Except to seek a better life. The solution is to help provide the better life there.

I see. So the solution is for US taxpayers to pay higher taxes so that Mexicans can be paid to stay in their own country.

 

[nyctopgam]

I see. So the solution is for US taxpayers to pay higher taxes so that Mexicans can be paid to stay in their own country.

Actually the thought never crossed my mind. But I am intrigued. Why does helping Mexico mean paying them to stay there?

 

[unloadonme]

Actually the thought never crossed my mind. But I am intrigued. Why does helping Mexico mean paying them to stay there?

That seemed to be what you were suggesting. How else would you "help provide the better life there"?

 

[nyctopgam]

That seemed to be what you were suggesting. How else would you "help provide the better life there"?

I suggested nothing of the kind. It never occurred to me that to help a neighbor become stronger and prosperous means giving a handout. Why do you think this is the only way?

 

[unloadonme]

I suggested nothing of the kind. It never occurred to me that to help a neighbor become stronger and prosperous means giving a handout. Why do you think this is the only way?

That was what I assumed you were suggesting. I'd be interested to hear what alternative methods you have in mind.