Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.

For The Record  

FTR #951 Fascism: 2017 World Tour

Dave Emory’s entire life­time of work is avail­able on a flash dri­ve that can be obtained HERE. The new dri­ve is a 32-giga­byte dri­ve that is cur­rent as of the pro­grams and arti­cles post­ed by ear­ly win­ter of 2017. The new dri­ve (avail­able for a tax-deductible con­tri­bu­tion of $65.00 or more.) 

WFMU-FM is pod­cast­ing For The Record–You can sub­scribe to the pod­cast HERE.

You can sub­scribe to e‑mail alerts from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to RSS feed from Spitfirelist.com HERE.

You can sub­scribe to the com­ments made on pro­grams and posts–an excel­lent source of infor­ma­tion in, and of, itself HERE.

This broad­cast was record­ed in one, 60-minute seg­ment.

The Yamato DynastyIntro­duc­tion: The events over­tak­ing the Unit­ed States are echoes of events occur­ring world­wide. This “2017 World Tour” exam­ines aspects of ascen­dant glob­al fas­cism, includ­ing his­tor­i­cal and ide­o­log­i­cal trends stretch­ing back to the World War II peri­od.

Yet anoth­er of the fascist/Nazi/racist influ­ences on Steve Ban­non is French writer Charles Mau­r­ras. A doc­tri­naire anti-Semi­te, he was sen­tenced to life impris­on­ment for col­lab­o­rat­ing with the Third Reich.

Set­ting Mau­r­ras’s activ­i­ties in an his­tor­i­cal con­text, we recap an excerpt from FTR #372 (August of 2002) detail­ing the French Fifth Col­umn that sub­vert­ed the French mil­i­tary resis­tance to the armies of the Third Reich. Mau­r­ras’s L’Ac­tion Fran­caise was among the jour­nals influ­enc­ing French fas­cists, who saw the Ger­man inva­sion as a vehi­cle for elim­i­nat­ing democ­ra­cy and, at the same time, blam­ing the defeat on gov­ern­ment of Leon Blum, whose mur­der was advo­cat­ed by Mau­r­ras.

In Italy, Bepe Gril­lo’s Five Star Move­ment is lead­ing in the polls, and may come out ahead in the 2018 elec­tions. Observers have seen the par­ty as an heir to Mus­solin­i’s black­shirts. We note, in pass­ing, that the pop­ulist ide­al­ism offi­cial­ly endorsed by Five Star is sim­i­lar to aspects of many left-pop­ulist agen­das, while incor­po­rat­ing fea­tures of con­tem­po­rary fas­cist pol­i­tics.

Trav­el­ing north­ward, we observe the resus­ci­ta­tion of Slo­va­kian fas­cism and the cel­e­bra­tion of Nazi quis­ling Josef Tiso’s World War II col­lab­o­ra­tionist gov­ern­ment. Social media/Facebook are a key ele­ment of the suc­cess of the “neo-Tiso’s.”

An American/Swedish axis, of sorts, man­i­fests as a col­lab­o­ra­tive effort between Trumpenkampfver­bande sup­port­er Richard B. Spencer and Daniel Friberg, a key fig­ure in the Swedish fas­cist milieu of Carl Lund­strom.

Trav­el­ing to Asia, we note the re-emer­gence of Japan­ese fas­cism, insti­tut­ed in the Abe gov­ern­ment by orga­ni­za­tions like Nip­pon Kai­gi. In addi­tion to insti­tut­ing revi­sion­ist teach­ing in the Japan­ese edu­ca­tion­al sys­tem, the Abe gov­ern­ment is cur­tail­ing that coun­try’s free press.

Sev­er­al of Abe’s cab­i­net min­is­ters are sup­port­ive of Hitler’s elec­toral strat­e­gy, see­ing it as a blue­print for the imple­men­ta­tion of Japan­ese reaction–among them Tomo­mi Ina­da, the new defense min­is­ter.

The pro­gram con­cludes with a look at Naren­dra Mod­i’s Hin­du nationalist/fascist gov­ern­ment and it selec­tion of a hard-line anti-Mus­lim big­ot to gov­ern the state of Uttar Pradesh.

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

  • Review of Mod­i’s BJP as a cat’s paw for the Hin­du nationalist/fascist RSS.
  • Dis­cus­sion of the eco­nom­ic links between Ger­man and French indus­tri­al­ists that under­lay the devel­op­ment of the French Fifth Col­umn inspired, in part, by Charles Mau­r­ras.
  • Review of the links between Carl Lund­strom, Wik­iLeaks and Assange aide Joran Jer­mas, a doc­tri­naire Holo­caust denier.
  • Review of the “Naz­i­fied AI” at the heart of Cam­bridge Ana­lyt­i­ca’s data manip­u­la­tion engine.

1. Anoth­er of the fas­cist influ­ences on Steve Ban­non, Trump’s top strate­gist, is French anti-Semi­te and Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tor Charles Mau­r­ras.

“Stephen Ban­non Is a Fan of a French Philoso­pher . . . . Who Was an Anti-Semi­te and a Nazi Sup­port­er” by Pema Levy; Moth­er Jones; 3/16/2017.

Stephen Ban­non, Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump’s chief strate­gist, recent­ly spoke approv­ing­ly of the ideas of an anti-Semit­ic French intel­lec­tu­al who was sen­tenced to life in prison for coop­er­at­ing with the Nazis dur­ing World War II.

In an arti­cle on Ban­non’s inter­ac­tions with Euro­pean right-wing nation­al­ists who want to break apart the Euro­pean Union, Politi­co report­ed last week that Ban­non has “expressed admi­ra­tion for the reac­tionary French philoso­pher Charles Mau­r­ras, accord­ing to French media reports con­firmed by Politi­co.” Recent arti­cles in French media claim Ban­non favor­ably cit­ed Mau­r­ras to a French diplo­mat. . . .

. . . . But Mau­r­ras was more than a nation­al­ist. He was an infa­mous anti-Semi­te, whose anti-Jew­ish views were cen­tral to his out­look. From 1908 to 1944, Mau­r­ras edit­ed the anti-Semit­ic paper L’Ac­tion Fran­caise, the organ of an epony­mous move­ment that was anti-demo­c­ra­t­ic and pro-monar­chy. The move­ment was born out of the Drey­fus Affair, an inter­na­tion­al con­tro­ver­sy in which an inno­cent Jew­ish sol­dier was con­vict­ed in 1894 of pass­ing secrets to the Ger­mans, a crime for which he was lat­er exon­er­at­ed. The move­men­t’s “found­ing prej­u­dice” was that Drey­fus was in fact guilty and that those who sup­port­ed him were under­min­ing France, accord­ing to Fred­er­ick Brown’s The Embrace of Unrea­son: France, 1914–1940. Mau­r­ras spent years writ­ing anti-Semit­ic arti­cles. He referred to the French gov­ern­ment, known as the Third Repub­lic, as “the Jew State, the Mason­ic State, the immi­grant State.”

In 1936, Mau­r­ras served eight months in prison for incit­ing the attempt­ed assas­si­na­tion of Jew­ish politi­cian Léon Blum and oth­er French offi­cials. Accord­ing to Car­men Callil’s Bad Faith: A For­got­ten His­to­ry of Fam­i­ly, Father­land and Vichy France, Mau­r­ras penned numer­ous arti­cles call­ing for Blum to be lynched and shot in the back and have his throat slit.

Mau­r­ras blamed World War II on the Jews, fault­ing them for the Ger­man occu­pa­tion of France. “The bar­barous occu­pa­tion of 1940 would not have tak­en place with­out the Jews of 1939, with­out their filthy war, the war they under­took and they declared: our occu­piers were intro­duced by them, it was the Jews who launched us into cat­a­stro­phe,” he wrote, accord­ing to 2001 arti­cle by Callil in the New States­man. Callil also not­ed that Mau­r­ras’ news­pa­per sup­port­ed the Nazis and “named names, hunt­ed down ene­mies, and called for hostages, resis­tants, Jews and Gaullists to be shot.” In his polit­i­cal col­umn dur­ing the war, Mau­r­ras wrote that “if the death penal­ty is not suf­fi­cient to put a stop to the Gaullists, mem­bers of their fam­i­lies should be seized as hostages and exe­cut­ed.”
At the end of the war, Mau­r­ras was sen­tenced to life in prison for com­plic­i­ty with the Nazis. He report­ed­ly called his con­vic­tion “Drey­fus’ revenge.” Due to his fail­ing health, he was released from prison short­ly before his death in 1952.

Accord­ing to Politi­co, Ban­non approv­ing­ly cit­ed Mau­r­ras’ dis­tinc­tion between what the French philoso­pher called the “real coun­try” of the peo­ple and the “legal coun­try” led by gov­ern­ment offi­cials. Mau­r­ras put Jews in the lat­ter cat­e­go­ry, accord­ing to Brown, and referred to all Jews as for­eign­ers. . . .

2a. Next, we excerpt part of FTR #372, dis­cussing the French Fifth Col­umn to which Charles Mau­r­ras belonged.

The account of the actions of the French Fifth Col­umn relies heav­i­ly on the account pro­vid­ed by Pierre Cot, the French min­is­ter of avi­a­tion under the Leon Blum gov­ern­ment. In his 1944 book Tri­umph of Trea­son, Cot dis­cussed the sub­ver­sion of the French mil­i­tary resis­tance to the Ger­mans by mem­bers of the armed forces sym­pa­thet­ic to the fas­cist cause. The Vichy gov­ern­ment then under­took to pin the stun­ning mil­i­tary defeat on the Blum gov­ern­ment, instead of the con­spir­a­to­r­i­al activ­i­ties of some of its own sym­pa­thiz­ers.

Tri­umph of Trea­son; by Pierre Cot; Copy­right 1944 [HC]; Ziff-Davis; p. 14.

. . . First of all, it was nec­es­sary to ‘pre­serve the hon­or of the Army.’ Gen­er­al Wey­gand thun­dered these words like a com­mand. He used, uncon­scious­ly, the same terms that lead­ers of the French Army had invoked dur­ing the Drey­fus affair to pre­vent pub­lic opin­ion from dis­cov­er­ing their crit­i­cal mis­takes. ‘Pre­serve the hon­or of the Army,’ to French mil­i­tary men, is to secure by every means-includ­ing those out­lawed by moral law and the Penal Code-the defense of the mil­i­tary cor­po­ra­tion.

The ques­tion of the respon­si­bil­i­ty of mil­i­tary lead­ers in the mil­i­tary defeat of France either had to be evad­ed or posed in dis­tort­ed terms. To ‘pre­serve the hon­or of the Army,’ the scape­goats of the defeat had to be cho­sen from the polit­i­cal per­son­nel of the Third Repub­lic. . .

2b. The com­bi­na­tion of inep­ti­tude and delib­er­ate sub­ver­sion by ele­ments of the armed forces was rel­a­tive­ly well known at the time.

Ibid.; pp. 14–16.

. . . In truth, at the end of June, 1940, the ques­tion of who was respon­si­ble was in every­one’s mind. In the two weeks pre­ced­ing the armistice, I was in touch with the crowd of refugees that slow­ly and painful­ly fol­lowed the roads south­ward. In the offices of the pre­fects, in the town halls, restau­rants, and relief cen­ters, I lis­tened to many con­ver­sa­tions received many con­fi­dences, heard many opin­ions. Opin­ions dif­fered on gov­ern­men­tal pol­i­cy, but all agreed in denounc­ing the blun­ders of the French Gen­er­al Staff. The coun­try was unan­i­mous, not against Blum, Dal­adier, or me, nor even against Laval, Pierre-Eti­enne Flandin, Georges Bon­net, or Jacques Dori­ot, but against the gen­er­als who had been inca­pable of under­stand­ing the con­di­tions of mod­ern war­fare and who were guilty of not know­ing the rudi­ments of their pro­fes­sion. ‘Just as before 1914 they had pre­pared for the war of 1870,’ the peo­ple said, ‘before 1939 they pre­pared for the war of 1914.’ . . .

. . . .The sever­est con­dem­na­tion came from the sol­diers. Lost on the roads in pur­suit of dis­persed divi­sions and phan­tom reg­i­ments, thrown togeth­er with the refugees whose uncer­tain­ties and anx­i­eties they share, the men in uni­form cursed the con­duct of their lead­ers. They repeat­ed that they nev­er had been schooled in the tech­niques of mod­ern war­fare, espe­cial­ly in the com­bined use of tanks and avi­a­tion, and they were amazed at the inept­ness of their com­man­ders in the bat­tles of May and June. They asked why the Meuse and Seine bridges had not been blown up before the arrival of Ger­man motor­ized columns; why Paris had not been defend­ed street by street, as the Span­ish Repub­li­cans had defend­ed Madrid (and as the Rus­sians were to defend Stal­in­grad); and they want­ed to know why more than half of the tanks and air­planes had been left in the rear-in Orleans, Toulouse, Lyon, North Africa-instead of being massed for a coun­ter­at­tack that might have changed every­thing. They knew that the depots were burst­ing with the can­non, air­planes, and equip­ment they had need­ed. . . .

. . . . One began to hear quot­ed the dis­turb­ing remarks with which Gen­er­al Wey­gand had tried to per­suade the cab­i­net to ask for an armistice: that he need­ed his tanks to mas­ter the rev­o­lu­tion­ary ele­ments, if it should become nec­es­sary. That is to say, the Com­man­der-in-Chief of the French Army pre­ferred fight­ing French work­ers to throw­ing all his forces against the Ger­man troops. The sol­diers praised the brav­ery of cer­tain lead­ers-Giraud, Lestien, De Gaulle, Lucien, Delat­tre de Tas­signy, and many oth­ers-but they declared that most of the offi­cers had been the first to flee. ‘They left in auto­mo­biles and we left on foot,’ they said, talk­ing about those offi­cers, faith­ful fol­low­ers of l’Ac­tion Fran­caise, [Ban­non influ­ence Charles Mau­r­ras’s publication–D.E.] Je Suis Partout, Gringoire, and oth­er Fas­cist news­pa­pers which had said in var­i­ous forms, dur­ing the win­ter, that this was a demo­c­ra­t­ic war and con­se­quent­ly did not inter­est them. . . .

. . . Their anger was legit­i­mate. It was inex­plic­a­ble, after all, that the Gen­er­al Staff, after decid­ing to aban­don Paris and thus open­ing the east to the Ger­mans, had not ordered the troops which occu­pied the Mag­inot Line to fall back toward the south. More than a mil­lion men, the best of the French Army, were caught in the Ger­man trap, a dis­as­ter which could have been pre­vent­ed by an order from Gen­er­al Wey­gand. . .

. . . . By its com­po­si­tion, the gov­ern­ment of Vichy was rep­re­sen­ta­tive not of the French peo­ple but of the Gen­er­al Staff. Its first cab­i­nets were head­ed by Petain, the spir­i­tu­al leader of the French Army, the man who had played the most impor­tant part in the prepa­ra­tion of the war and in the for­ma­tion of the Gen­er­al Staff. And these cab­i­nets were com­posed large­ly of mem­bers of the Gen­er­al Staff-Gen­er­al Wey­gand, Gen­er­al Pujo, Admi­ral Dar­lan, Gen­er­al Huntzinger, Gen­er­al Berg­eret, and Admi­ral Pla­ton. As the French proverb says, ‘the wolves do not eat each oth­er’! . . .

2c. Cot dis­cuss­es in detail the appoint­ment of Cagoulard fas­cists to posi­tions of influ­ence with­in the Vichy gov­ern­ment, in addion to the use of Fifth Col­umn activ­i­ty by fas­cists in the 1930s and 1940s. (AFA 10 con­tains an account of the 1934 coup attempt in the Unit­ed States by pow­er­ful eco­nom­ic inter­ests who hat­ed Franklin Roo­sevelt’s New Deal.)

Ibid.; pp. 17–18.

. . . . To their aston­ish­ment the French peo­ple saw Petain slow­ly fill the most impor­tant posts of author­i­ty in local, depart­men­tal, and cen­tral admin­is­tra­tions with men who had tak­en part in the Cagoulard plot, with those who had repeat­ed the infa­mous refrain ‘rather Hitler than Leon Blum,’ and even with some of those who before or dur­ing the war had been arrest­ed for trea­son­able domes­tic and for­eign activ­i­ties. The peo­ple were apply­ing to the gov­ern­ment the old proverb, ‘tell me who your friends are and I’ll tell you who you are.’ They were alarmed to see Vichy employ for its most del­i­cate mis­sions Fer­di­nand de Brinon, Jean Mon­tigny, Jean Goy, Jean Luchaire, and Gas­ton Hen­ry-Haye-mem­bers of the Comite France-Alle­magne, an orga­ni­za­tion which, before the war, had been inspired and financed by Otto Abetz, after 1940 Hitler’s Ambas­sador in Paris.

They learned with fury that on the night of the armistice, when France was in mourn­ing, French­men and French­women of the aris­toc­ra­cy, high finance, and indus­try had drunk at Bor­deaux to the defeat which had rid them of the night­mare of democ­ra­cy and the Pop­u­lar Front. The peo­ple under­stood that the Fifth Col­umn in France, as in Spain, had opened the door to Hitler’s agents. And they watched with awe the agents of the Fifth Col­umn become mas­ters of France, the France of Petain, Wey­gand, and Laval.

The activ­i­ty of the Fifth Col­umn will not be con­sid­ered by his­to­ri­ans a spe­cial phe­nom­e­non of French pub­lic life, but as an inte­gral part of Fas­cism. The Fifth Col­umn has appeared wher­ev­er Fas­cism has tried to gain a foothold. It was at work in Spain, Aus­tria, and Czecho­slo­va­kia before it turned up in France, and there are Fifth Columns in the Unit­ed States, India, and Latin Amer­i­ca. By the Fifth Col­umn I do not mean only spies and licensed trai­tors. The Fifth Col­umn includes all who, by accept­ing fas­cist doc­trines or meth­ods, become the con­scious or uncon­scious accom­plices of a for­eign pow­er. Trea­son and com­plic­i­ty have their degrees and nuances. The Gen­er­al Staff of the Fifth col­umn con­sists prin­ci­pal­ly of ambi­tious men who try to seize pow­er by destroy­ing or par­a­lyz­ing the demo­c­ra­t­ic sys­tem.

The body of the Fifth Col­umn is com­posed of peo­ple who think they are sav­ing their coun­try from the ‘com­mu­nist men­ace’ or from ‘British impe­ri­al­ism,’ and who do not even know in whose favor their actions are oper­at­ing. Through hate of the Poplar Front, good French­men, or men who con­sid­ered them­selves such, served Hitler gra­tu­itous­ly by doing work to which they would nev­er have con­sent­ed, had they had been offered pay­ment. Why? Because they detest­ed the Repub­lic and democ­ra­cy more than they loved France.

They accept­ed the idea of the defeat as a nec­es­sary evil which per­mit­ted them to rid France of the demo­c­ra­t­ic sys­tem and to keep in pow­er, in the neigh­bor­ing coun­tries, the Fas­cist dic­ta­tors whom they con­sid­ered sole­ly capa­ble of main­tain­ing order in Europe. They then became uncon­scious col­lab­o­ra­tors of these dic­ta­tors. They thought they were doing their duty in let­ting Hitler free France from the ‘Judeo-Mason­ic’ influ­ence, and Europe from the Com­mu­nist per­il. . . .

. . . .They pre­ferred the risks of an entente with a vic­to­ri­ous Hitler to the risks of a demo­c­ra­t­ic vic­to­ry that would cause the col­lapse of the Fas­cist dic­ta­tors in Europe. Con­sid­er­ing Hitler in Ger­many, Mus­soli­ni in Italy, and Fran­co in Spain as knights of an anti-Bol­she­vist cru­sade, they became pre­cur­sors and lat­er par­ti­sans of ‘col­lab­o­ra­tion with Hitler’s New Order.’ . . .

2d. More about Cot’s account of the Fifth Col­umn:

Ibid.; pp. 62–64.

 . . . . Enough evi­dence has been pub­lished already to prove that France was stabbed in the back by those who saw in Hitler the new St. George who would slay the Com­mu­nist drag­on. When Pierre Lazareff, for­mer edi­tor-in-chief of Paris Soir (the French news­pa­per with the widest cir­cu­la­tion), reports roy­al­ists as say­ing: ‘We need the defeat to wipe out the Repub­lic;’ when Elie Bois, for­mer edi­tor of the Petit Parisien (the most influ­en­tial polit­i­cal news­pa­per), reports great indus­tri­al­ists ad admit­ting to him, dur­ing the win­ter of 1939–1940, that a plot had been orga­nized to replace the demo­c­ra­t­ic regime by a ‘gov­ern­ment of author­i­ty’ and that this plot pre­sup­posed a Nazi vic­to­ry. . .We have every rea­son to accept their affir­ma­tions, which tal­ly so per­fect­ly with the events. . . .

. . . . No, France received no excep­tion­al treat­ment from Hitler and Fas­cism. A gen­er­al plan coor­di­nat­ed the activ­i­ty of the Fifth Columns all over the world. All were recruit­ed from the same cir­cles and had the same social and polit­i­cal com­po­si­tion. The object was the same every­where: to divide and unnerve pub­lic opin­ion, weak­en the resis­tance of the regime, and pre­pare a gov­ern­men­tal group ready to exe­cute a Fas­cist coup d’e­tat at a moment of trou­ble or con­fu­sion. The meth­ods were the same every­where: cul­ti­va­tion of the seeds of dis­uni­ty which nor­mal­ly exist among free men and in free coun­tries, exag­ger­a­tion and inflam­ma­tion of all racial and reli­gious con­flicts, all class rival­ries, all polit­i­cal antag­o­nisms, grad­ual con­ver­sion of oppo­si­tion and dis­sent into hate, cre­ation of an atmos­phere of civ­il war. The means used were the same every­where: cam­paigns of calum­ny against the demo­c­ra­t­ic lead­ers capa­ble of oppos­ing Fas­cism (Blum in France, Roo­sevelt in the Unit­ed States), the devel­op­ment of anti-Semi­tism, because anti-Semi­tism is the first man­i­fes­ta­tion of racism and con­tains in pet­to the whole doc­trine of Hitler, use of the fear of Com­mu­nism among the mid­dle class­es, because anti-Com­mu­nism is the best way to pre­vent the union of all anti-Fas­cist forces. This last device has been the most effi­ca­cious; the fear of Com­mu­nism has become, in Euro­pean and Amer­i­can pol­i­tics of recent years, a much more impor­tant fac­tor than Com­mu­nism itself. . . .

3. Here’s a reminder that even if the EU makes it through 2017 with­out one of the nation­al elec­tions hand­ing the far-right a major vic­to­ry, there’s always 2018!

“Italy’s 5‑Star Builds Strong Lead over Renzi’s PD in Polls” by Crispi­an Balmer; Reuters3/21/2017.

Italy’s anti-estab­lish­ment 5‑Star Move­ment, ben­e­fit­ing from a split in the rul­ing Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty (PD) and divi­sions in the cen­ter-right, has built a strong lead over its rivals, an opin­ion poll showed on Tues­day.

The Ipsos poll in Cor­riere del­la Sera news­pa­per put the 5‑Star, which wants a ref­er­en­dum on Italy’s mem­ber­ship of the euro, on 32.3 per­cent – its high­est ever read­ing and 5.5 points ahead of the PD, which was on 26.8 per­cent.

The sur­vey sug­gests that the 5‑Star is like­ly to emerge as the largest group in nation­al elec­tions due by ear­ly 2018, although it might strug­gle to cre­ate a gov­ern­ment giv­en its stat­ed aver­sion to forg­ing coali­tions.

Such a sce­nario could spook finan­cial mar­kets wary of both the 5‑Star’s euroskep­ti­cism and the threat of pro­longed polit­i­cal insta­bil­i­ty in Italy, which has the heav­i­est pub­lic debt bur­den in Europe after Greece.

The PD appeared to be pay­ing the price for its inter­nal feuds, drop­ping more than three per­cent­age points in a month, as for­mer prime min­is­ter Mat­teo Ren­zi bat­tles to reassert his author­i­ty fol­low­ing a walk­out by a left-wing fac­tion.

“Polit­i­cal par­ties that pre­oc­cu­py them­selves with their inter­nal divi­sions are elec­toral­ly doomed,” said the British-based think tank Euroin­tel­li­gence in a note.

“We are now at the point where it becomes increas­ing­ly improb­a­ble for the PD to regain pow­er after the next elec­tions.”

The cen­ter-right is riv­en by its own divi­sions, with for­mer prime min­is­ter Sil­vio Berlus­coni look­ing to take charge of the bloc once more, but strug­gling to find com­mon ground with old ally the North­ern League, which has shunt­ed to the far right.

Tuesday’s poll of some 5,000 peo­ple put the anti-immi­grant North­ern League on 12.8 per­cent, with Berlusconi’s Forza Italia (Go Italy!) on 12.7 per­cent.

A small cen­ter-right par­ty, which is in the gov­ern­ment coali­tion and is led by For­eign Min­is­ter Angeli­no Alfano, has seen its sup­port grad­u­al­ly erode and was put at 2.8 per­cent, mean­ing it risks fail­ing to even enter the next par­lia­ment.

Alfano’s group, which rebrand­ed itself at the week­end as the Pop­u­lar Alter­na­tive (AP), is the only main­stream par­ty besides the PD and MDP, which open­ly touts a pro-EU agen­da, rais­ing the prospect of a euroskep­tic gov­ern­ment tak­ing pow­er in Italy.

Par­lia­men­tar­i­ans are still try­ing to draw up a new elec­toral law, with polit­i­cal ana­lysts expect­ing them to agree on some form of pro­por­tion­al rep­re­sen­ta­tion that might reward a sta­ble major­i­ty to any par­ty or group that wins 40 per­cent of the vote.

The Ipsos poll sug­gest­ed that both the tra­di­tion­al cen­ter-left and cen­ter-right blocs would fall well short of the 40 per­cent thresh­old, leav­ing the 5‑Star in the dri­ving seat.

How­ev­er, the par­ty, found­ed by com­ic Beppe Gril­lo, has repeat­ed­ly ruled out form­ing an alliance with oth­er groups, sug­gest­ing Italy could face months of polit­i­cal uncer­tain­ty fol­low­ing the next elec­tion, as hap­pened last year in Spain.

“The sur­vey sug­gests that the 5‑Star is like­ly to emerge as the largest group in nation­al elec­tions due by ear­ly 2018, although it might strug­gle to cre­ate a gov­ern­ment giv­en its stat­ed aver­sion to forg­ing coali­tions.”

4.  Is Italy in store for a 5‑Star revolt next year? Well, a lot can change between now and Italy’s ear­ly 2018 elec­tions but don’t for­get that one of the biggest changes over the next year could be some­thing like a far-right vic­to­ry else­where in Europe. But if cur­rent trends con­tin­ue it’s look­ing like the EU’s 2017 elec­toral scares aren’t going away any time soon. What that means for the EU as a whole if Italy decides to go down the ‘pop­ulist’ route remains to be seen. And, inter­est­ing­ly, what a 5‑Star vic­to­ry would mean for Ital­ians real­ly remains to be seen too in part because it’s unclear what exact­ly 5‑Star stands for although the dis­tinct Trumpian flare gives us an idea:

“Italy’s Five Star Move­ment May Be the Heir to Mussolini’s Fas­cists” by Fred­eri­ka Ran­dall; The Nation; 8/30/2016.

The par­ty harps on the mes­sian­ic theme of redemp­tion for the betrayed, is allied with Britain’s far-right UKIP, and is con­trolled with an iron hand by leader Beppe Gril­lo.

When 38-year-old Vir­ginia Rag­gi, a lawyer and rel­a­tive new­com­er to pol­i­tics, was elect­ed may­or of Rome in June, it was a stun­ning vic­to­ry for her par­ty, the Movi­men­to 5 Stelle (M5S), or Five Star Move­ment. Rag­gi beat her Par­ti­to Demo­c­ra­ti­co (PD) rival in the runoff vote by a crush­ing mar­gin of 67 per­cent to 33 per­cent, sym­bol­i­cal­ly slay­ing the gov­ern­ing PD, also the incum­bent in the city of Rome.

Though the M5S had pre­vi­ous­ly gained pow­er local­ly in a few places, Rome was much big­ger polit­i­cal prize, an inter­na­tion­al­ly vis­i­ble are­na where the three main post­war pow­er groups, the neo-Fas­cist far right, the Catholic cen­ter, and the Com­mu­nist left, had each fought for its piece of ground for decades. Now the M5S, dis­tin­guished main­ly for its fero­cious attacks on the polit­i­cal estab­lish­ment, was to have its place in the sun. In Turin, too, the M5S tri­umphed, when Chiara Appendi­no, 32, with a back­ground in busi­ness man­age­ment, won a sur­prise vic­to­ry over the incum­bent may­or Piero Fassi­no, a PD vet­er­an whose polit­i­cal career goes back to the Ital­ian Com­mu­nist Par­ty.

So the Movi­men­to 5 Stelle had final­ly stormed the Win­ter Palace… or should we say, car­ried out its March on Rome?

There­in lies the prob­lem. If only we knew what they stand for.

For the M5S is far more mys­te­ri­ous than it has appeared to some observers, to whom it seemed to resem­ble Spain’s Podemos or Syriza in Greece. The move­ment took off in 2007 with stand-up come­di­an Beppe Grillo’s suc­cess­ful Vaf­fa ral­lies, where crowds turned out to shout “Vaf­fan­cu­lo!” (“Get Screwed!”) at Italy’s cor­rupt politi­cians. Grillo’s huge­ly suc­cess­ful blog soon became a ral­ly­ing point for the dis­af­fect­ed. In 2009 he and the late Gian­rober­to Casa­leg­gio, an eccen­tric, sci-fi lov­ing web-mar­ket­ing guru in favor of both enlight­ened despo­tism and direct democ­ra­cy, found­ed the M5S­­. Today only a few acolytes seem to remem­ber what those five stars in the name and on the par­ty sym­bol sig­ni­fy.

The five stars were born, one jour­nal­ist mused recent­ly, because the pam­pered Gril­lo and Casa­leg­gio mea­sured well-being by hotel stan­dards. “We could have a five-star life!” the come­di­an used to scream at his ral­lies. That is, if those thiev­ing politi­cians didn’t steal all the mon­ey.

No, the five stars stand for “water, envi­ron­ment, trans­port, con­nec­tiv­i­ty, devel­op­ment” shot back one ardent Grilli­no in a tart com­ment. It’s true, those were the watch­words in the very ear­ly days, just after “vaf­fan­cu­lo” was dis­card­ed, although you do have to won­der what “five-star water” might be (mere­ly uncon­t­a­m­i­nat­ed, or pos­i­tive­ly deli­cious?), and why a rank­ing sys­tem for resource-guz­zling lux­u­ry hotels would make sense for the envi­ron­ment, which flour­ish­es where the hand of man is absent. A guar­an­teed “citizen’s income” for all whose earn­ings fall below a cer­tain lev­el is anoth­er long­time M5S pro­pos­al, warm­ly backed today by Turin’s Appendi­no.

Accord­ing to the most recent nation­al pro­gram, the M5S’s projects today are “state and cit­i­zen, ener­gy, infor­ma­tion, econ­o­my, trans­port, health, edu­ca­tion.” A look at the spe­cif­ic pol­i­cy promis­es turns up a hodge­podge of the pet­ty and the grand, a long wish list that seems to have been com­piled from the kind of web sur­vey dear to par­ty strate­gist Casa­leg­gio (he died in April this year, aged 61, of a brain tumor). Thus under “econ­o­my” the pro­gram calls both for “vig­or­ous debt reduc­tion” and “ceil­ings on exec­u­tive pay in pub­licly trad­ed and state-con­trolled com­pa­nies” and favors “local pro­duc­tion” and “non­prof­its” as well as guar­an­teed unem­ploy­ment ben­e­fits. Along­side all these good inten­tions, how­ev­er, there is no trace of the hard choic­es about how to stim­u­late a depressed econ­o­my that any gov­ern­ing par­ty would have to make. No men­tion of employ­ment, inequal­i­ty, or EU-imposed aus­ter­i­ty. Under “trans­port,” the pro­gram calls for more bike paths and an improved rail sys­tem to dis­cour­age auto­mo­bile use, but there is no men­tion of spend­ing on infra­struc­ture under “econ­o­my,” or of how to accom­plish all these good deeds and pay a min­i­mum income while slash­ing the debt. Nor does the pro­gram have any indi­ca­tions on for­eign pol­i­cy. The M5S is anti-Europe, and its Euro MPs are aligned with the far-right xeno­phobes of Britain’s UKIP in the EU par­lia­ment, at least until Britain final­ly leaves the union. It’s a pro­gram rich in mag­i­cal think­ing, in short.

Like many a charis­mat­ic leader who rides the wave of pub­lic dis­gust with estab­lished pol­i­tics today (Don­ald Trump and Sil­vio Berlus­coni come to mind, and so does UKIP’s Nigel Farage, who claimed vic­to­ry with Brex­it), Casa­leg­gio was a kind of businessman/aspiring wheel­er-deal­er. Grillo’s suc­cess­ful blog was one of his ven­tures, and Casa­leg­gio expert­ly milked the adver­tis­ing on it. And Gril­lo, a wealthy show­man, shares much of his out­look. They are men who believe that pol­i­tics is intrin­si­cal­ly sil­ly and cor­rupt and that any entre­pre­neur can do it bet­ter. Their pro­found scorn for the polit­i­cal class springs from a per­son­al dis­like of gov­ern­ment reg­u­la­tions and tax­es they con­sid­er pun­ish­ing, and not sur­pris­ing­ly, they are firm­ly pro-cap­i­tal.

In recent years, prod­ded by Casa­leg­gio, the M5S has embraced anti-immi­grant and anti-reg­u­la­to­ry posi­tions dear to the small-busi­ness own­ers they hope to draw into the move­ment. When the gov­ern­ment of Mat­teo Ren­zi was final­ly poised to pass a law on civ­il unions, giv­ing gays long-need­ed rights (a mea­sure hot­ly con­test­ed in a coun­try occu­pied by the Vat­i­can), the M5S sud­den­ly with­drew sup­port and mem­bers were told to vote their con­sciences, thus doom­ing the most con­tro­ver­sial plank, the one allow­ing gay cou­ples to adopt. The promised “direct democ­ra­cy” of online voting—candidates and major M5S deci­sions are decid­ed by a vote on the Gril­lo blog site—has time and again brought accu­sa­tions of fraud­u­lent vote-count­ing. By many accounts, the par­ty is frag­ment­ed, held togeth­er by dra­con­ian mea­sures from the top, like the penal­ty of 150,000 euros that local rep­re­sen­ta­tives, includ­ing May­or Rag­gi, are con­trac­tu­al­ly oblig­ed to pay the par­ty should they stray from the agreed-upon pol­i­cy line. Nei­ther of the two young MPs spo­ken of as suc­ces­sors to Gril­lo is any­where near as pre­pos­sess­ing as the leader.

Accu­sa­tions of fas­cism are quick to fly here, in the coun­try that invent­ed the phe­nom­e­non; Prime Min­is­ter Ren­zi is rou­tine­ly called a fas­cist by the dis­si­dent left of his par­ty. But in truth, if any par­ty resem­bles the one Ben­i­to Mus­soli­ni was build­ing with the sup­port of bit­ter World War I vet­er­ans in 1919–20, it is the M5S. There is the same mes­sian­ic theme of redemp­tion for the betrayed—in today’s case, cit­i­zens betrayed by their cor­rupt and spend­thrift gov­er­nors. The same mix­ture of ideas hasti­ly bor­rowed from right and left (lest we for­get, Mus­soli­ni was a Social­ist before he was a Fas­cist). The same dic­ta­to­r­i­al grip at the top, applied to keep a sprawl­ing move­ment togeth­er.

For the only issue that real­ly unites the M5S is scorn for pol­i­tics and politi­cians. That whole­sale “plague on all their hous­es” con­dem­na­tion of the polit­i­cal class is rather dif­fi­cult to rec­on­cile with pub­lic office, as some M5S mem­bers elect­ed to local gov­ern­ment or to par­lia­ment in Rome have learned to their dis­may. Sev­er­al have been expelled from the par­ty for mak­ing alliances or not obey­ing orders. Anoth­er became embroiled in an orga­nized-crime scan­dal when a fel­low M5S city coun­cilor was inves­ti­gat­ed for con­nec­tions with the Camor­ra, Campania’s local mafia.

The first moves of both new­ly elect­ed may­ors Rag­gi of Rome and Appendi­no of Turin have met with intense scruti­ny and a bar­rage of crit­i­cism. Rag­gi, who is up against a hos­tile pub­lic bureau­cra­cy in a city where basic ser­vices like garbage col­lec­tion and bus and metro ser­vice are con­stant­ly on the verge of col­lapse, a city in which wide­spread cor­rup­tion was unveiled in 2014–15 in the Mafia Cap­i­tale scan­dal, does seem to lack the need­ed polit­i­cal expe­ri­ence. Mul­ti­ple urban brush­fires burned across Rome this hot, dry August, and she seemed unable to react. The city utter­ly defeat­ed her pre­de­ces­sor, Ignazio Mari­no, a sur­geon who was elect­ed with the PD but was even­tu­al­ly forced out by his own par­ty. Raggi’s can­di­dates to super­vise the envi­ron­ment and san­i­ta­tion have been hot­ly con­test­ed on the basis of their past expe­ri­ence, for if expe­ri­ence is nec­es­sary, it is also taint­ing in the mind of M5S purists. In Turin, oppo­nents of a much-con­test­ed high-speed rail line through the Val di Susa to the west lashed out at May­or Appendi­no for express­ing her sup­port for the police guard­ing the build­ing site; the M5S has strong­ly defend­ed the pro­test­ers.

Still, one doesn’t need to be a fan of the M5S to think two months in office is too lit­tle to eval­u­ate the per­for­mance of their new may­ors. In Raggi’s case, the attacks are con­stant. Beppe Gril­lo, who last year was report­ed to have drift­ed away from his cre­ation, fatigued and bored, has appar­ent­ly decid­ed to occu­py him­self with mak­ing Raggi’s gov­ern­ment a suc­cess as a show­case for the next elec­tions.

Just what the Movi­men­to 5 Stelle would do if elect­ed to nation­al gov­ern­ment remains a mys­tery. The mes­sian­ic “throw the bums out” ral­ly­ing cry wins votes but offers no pro­gram. It’s been called pop­ulism, but it’s not even clear that Gril­lo is speak­ing to the “lit­tle man”; his is a howl of pure rage. We need to ask our­selves why it is so attrac­tive today.

One rea­son is that the estab­lished par­ties are dis­cred­it­ed every­where. They are in Britain, which vot­ed for Brex­it despite Con­ser­v­a­tive and (weak) Labour sup­port for EU mem­ber­ship. And in Spain, where two elec­tions in a six-month peri­od still have not pro­duced a gov­ern­ing coali­tion. Not to men­tion France, where the Front Nation­al of Marine Le Pen threat­ens to over­whelm the Social­ists and the right. The estab­lished par­ties strug­gle to con­vince nation­al vot­ers they are look­ing after their inter­ests because the pow­ers they need to do so are sim­ply not avail­able at the nation­al lev­el. Neolib­er­al cap­i­tal­ism, tru­ly glob­al in scope, can no longer be reg­u­lat­ed by nation­al gov­ern­ments; it can only be con­trolled at a supra­na­tion­al lev­el. If Italy wants more jobs and growth, it can only get them through Euro­pean eco­nom­ic pol­i­cy, although cer­tain­ly not the hege­mon­ic pol­i­cy of the moment, the aus­ter­i­ty imposed by Ger­man finan­cial author­i­ties. What­ev­er Mat­teo Renzi’s defects, he has cer­tain­ly tried to push Ger­many and France toward a more Key­ne­sian Euro­pean con­sen­sus.

Does the M5S under­stand these mat­ters? Does Beppe Gril­lo, who has made no polit­i­cal alliances in Italy and no inter­na­tion­al alliances except with Nigel Farage, even care? Like Mus­soli­ni, he seems to believe Italy can live in autarky, by impos­ing nation­al eco­nom­ic self-suf­fi­cien­cy. It’s not just a crazy idea (where will he get his new iPhone?) but reveals a pro­found naïveté about prob­lems that don’t real­ly inter­est him.

You would think that Italy, after almost twen­ty years of a soi-dis­ant anti-estab­lish­ment fig­ure like Sil­vio Berlus­coni, would have learned the les­son. In 1994 the rogue TV tycoon’s Forza Italia par­ty was that era’s equiv­a­lent: an upstart “anti-polit­i­cal” polit­i­cal move­ment that swept away the rul­ing par­ties after the Mani Pulite (“Clean Hands”) cor­rup­tion inves­ti­ga­tions of 1992.

But per­haps cyn­i­cism breeds more of the same. It was the Berlus­coni government’s hun­gry, light-fin­gered approach to pub­lic office that opened a space for Gril­lo and his Vaf­fa ral­lies in 2007. Now Gril­lo hopes that same anger will bring down a cen­ter-left only mar­gin­al­ly impli­cat­ed in cor­rup­tion, but deeply divid­ed and defeat­ed.

5. In Slo­va­kia, the heirs to fas­cist dic­ta­tor and Nazi quis­ling Rev­erend Josef Tiso are com­ing back above ground.

“Once in the Shad­ows, Europe’s Neo-Fas­cists Are Re-Emerg­ing” by Rick Lyman; The New York Times; 3/19/2017.

Head bowed in rev­er­ence, Robert Svec gen­tly placed a bou­quet of blood-red flow­ers at the foot of the only known stat­ue of Jozef Tiso, Slo­va­kia’s wartime fas­cist leader, in a weedy mon­u­ment park known as the Pan­theon of Slo­vak His­tor­i­cal Fig­ures.

For years, Mr. Svec’s neo-fas­cist cul­tur­al orga­ni­za­tion, the Slo­vak Revival Move­ment, was a tiny fringe group. But now his crowds are grow­ing, as 200 peo­ple recent­ly gath­ered with him to cel­e­brate the country’s fas­cist past and call fas­cist-era greet­ings — “Na Straz!” or “On the guard!” Mr. Svec is so embold­ened that he is trans­form­ing his move­ment into a polit­i­cal par­ty, with plans to run for Par­lia­ment.

“You are ours, and we will for­ev­er be yours,” Mr. Svec said at the foot of the stat­ue, hav­ing declared this as the Year of Jozef Tiso, ded­i­cat­ed to reha­bil­i­tat­ing the image of the for­mer priest and Nazi col­lab­o­ra­tor, who was hanged as a war crim­i­nal in 1947.

Once in the shad­ows, Europe’s neo-fas­cists are step­ping back out, more than three-quar­ters of a cen­tu­ry after Nazi boots stormed through Cen­tral Europe, and two decades since a neo-Nazi resur­gence of skin­heads and white suprema­cists unset­tled the tran­si­tion to democ­ra­cy. In Slo­va­kia, neo-fas­cists are win­ning region­al offices and tak­ing seats in the mul­ti­par­ty Par­lia­ment they hope to replace with strong­man rule. . . .

. . . . “Before, pro-fas­cist sen­ti­ments were kept hid­den,” said Gabriel Sipos, direc­tor of Trans­paren­cy Inter­na­tion­al Slo­va­kia. “Par­ents would tell their chil­dren, ‘You can­not say this at school.’ Now, you can say things in the pub­lic space that you couldn’t say before.” . . . .

. . . . “Now, extrem­ists and fas­cists are part of the sys­tem,” said Grig­orij Meseznikov, pres­i­dent of the Insti­tute for Pub­lic Affairs, a lib­er­al research group. . . .

. . . . Mr. Kotle­ba, 39, who recent­ly renamed his par­ty Kotle­ba — People’s Par­ty Our Slo­va­kia, used to appear in uni­forms rem­i­nis­cent of those worn dur­ing the wartime Slo­vak State. Once he and his par­ty got into Par­lia­ment, the uni­forms dis­ap­peared and he shift­ed his attacks from Jews to immi­grants and the country’s Roma minor­i­ty.

. . . . But the under­ly­ing mes­sage of groups like Mr. Kotleba’s and Mr. Svec’s has not shift­ed — Slo­va­kia was bet­ter off under a fas­cist gov­ern­ment.

“Some­thing very dark and very trou­bling from the past is com­ing back,” Mr. Havran said. “They feel they are fight­ing for some­thing very pure, some­thing very old and sacred. A few years ago, they were ashamed to talk about it. Now, they are proud.” . . .

. . . . Mr. Kotleba’s par­ty has been espe­cial­ly effec­tive on social media, with more than 140 inter­con­nect­ed Face­book pages. When a local retiree, Jan Ben­cik, 68, began blog­ging to expose the country’s neo-fas­cists, his name appeared on a list of “oppo­nents of the state.”

“They called me a Jew, said that I should die, die, die,” Mr. Ben­cik said. “They said that peo­ple like me would be dealt with in the future.” . . .

6a. Trump backer and “Alt-Right” main­stay Richard Spencer has launched a new web­site with Daniel Friberg, part of the Swedish fas­cist milieu to which Carl Lund­strom belongs.

“Richard Spencer and His Alt-Right Bud­dies Launch a New Web­site” by Osi­ta Nwavenu; Slate; 1/17/2017.

On Mon­day, Richard Spencer, New Jer­sey Insti­tute of Tech­nol­o­gy lec­tur­er Jason Jor­jani, and Swedish New Right fig­ure Daniel Friberg launched altright.com, a site aimed at bring­ing togeth­er “the best writ­ers and ana­lysts from Alt Right, in North Amer­i­ca, Europe, and around the world.” . . .

. . . . As of now, most of the site’s con­tent is recy­cled mate­r­i­al from Friberg’s Ark­tos pub­lish­ing house, Spencer’s oth­er pub­li­ca­tion, Radix Jour­nal, the alt-right online media net­work Red Ice, and Occi­den­tal Dis­sent, a white nation­al­ist blog run by altright.com’s news edi­tor Hunter Wal­lace. . . .

…. Still, Spencer’s intel­lec­tu­al­ism does lit­tle to hide the cen­tral­i­ty of big­otry to his own world­view and the views of those he pub­lish­es. His pre­vi­ous site, Alter­na­tive Right, once ran an essay called, ‘Is Black Geno­cide Right?’” “Instead of ask­ing how we can make repa­ra­tions for slav­ery, colo­nial­ism, and Apartheid or how we can equal­ize aca­d­e­m­ic scores and incomes,” Col­in Lid­dell wrote, “we should instead be ask­ing ques­tions like, ‘Does human civ­i­liza­tion actu­al­ly need the Black race?’ ‘Is Black geno­cide right?’ and, if it is, ‘What would be the best and eas­i­est way to dis­pose of them?’” It remains to be seen whether altright.com will employ sim­i­lar­ly can­did writ­ers. . . .

6b. Pirate Bay sug­ar dad­dy Lund­strom has dis­cussed his polit­i­cal sym­pa­thies. [The excerpt below is from Google trans­la­tions. The Swedish sen­tence is fol­lowed by the Eng­lish trans­la­tion.] Note that he appears on the user/subscriber list for Nordic Pub­lish­ers, the Nazi pub­lish­ing out­fit that han­dles the efforts pro­duced by one of Jer­mas’s [aka “Shamir’s”] pub­lish­ers.

“The Goal: Take over all Pira­cy” by Peter Karls­son; realtid.se; 3/10/2006.

. . . Lund­ström har inte gjort någon hem­lighet av sina sym­pa­ti­er för främ­lings­fientli­ga grup­per, och för­ra året fanns hans namn med på kun­dreg­istret hos det nazis­tiska bok­för­laget Nordiska För­laget. Lund­strom has made no secret of his sym­pa­thy for the xeno­pho­bic groups, and last year was his name with the cus­tomer code of the Nazi pub­lish­ing house Nordic Pub­lish­ers.

– Jag stöder dem genom att köpa böck­er och musik. — I sup­port them by buy­ing books and music. Ni i media vill bara spri­da mis­sak­t­ning om oli­ka per­son­er. You in the media just want to spread con­tempt for dif­fer­ent peo­ple. Ni i media är fyll­da av hat till Pirate Bay, avs­lu­tar en myck­et upprörd Carl Lund­ström. You in the media is full of hatred to the Pirate Bay, fin­ish­ing a very upset Carl Lund­ström.

Nordiska För­laget säl­jer vit makt musik och böck­er som hyl­lar rasis­tiska våld­shan­dlin­gar. Nordic pub­lish­ing com­pa­ny sells white pow­er music and books that cel­e­brates the racist vio­lence. För­laget stöder nazis­ter­nas demon­stra­tion i Salem och bjöd in Ku Klux Klan ledaren till en före­drag­turné i Sverige. Pub­lish­er sup­ports the Nazi demon­stra­tion in Salem and invit­ed the Ku Klux Klan leader [David Duke] for a lec­ture tour in Swe­den. . . .

6c. Expo–found­ed by the late Stieg Larsson–revealed that Friberg’s Nordic Pub­lish­ers has mor­phed into Ark­tos, one of the out­fits asso­ci­at­ed with Spencer, et al.

Right Wing Pub­lic Edu­ca­tion” by Maria-Pia Cabero [Google Trans­la­tion]; Expo; Jan­u­ary of 2014.

. . . . When NF were dis­con­tin­ued in 2010 found­ed the pub­lish­er Ark­tos by basi­cal­ly the same peo­ple. Ark­tos pub­lish­es New Right-inspired lit­er­a­ture and CEO Daniel Friberg, who was dri­ving in the NF, has played a key role in the estab­lish­ment of ideas. . . .

The Yamato Dynasty7. Turn­ing our atten­tion to Japan, we note the rise of fas­cism in a “process guid­ed from above.”

“Part­ners at the Pacif­ic;” german-foreign-policy.com; 3/20/2017.

“Right-Wing Pop­ulism from Above”

. . . . Japan, with which Ger­many is seek­ing clos­er eco­nom­ic and mil­i­tary coop­er­a­tion, has tak­en a sharp nation­al­ist course. This course is gen­er­al­ly asso­ci­at­ed with Abe becom­ing Prime Min­is­ter. Abe, who arrived in Hanover yes­ter­day, “is antic­i­pat­ing in Japan, (…) what right-wing pop­ulists dream of in Europe,”[6] a lead­ing Ger­man dai­ly recent­ly not­ed. With his vis­it at the Yasaku­ni Shrine, which is also hon­or­ing some WW II war crim­i­nals, he is pro­mot­ing a nation­al­ist trans­for­ma­tion of the state, he is per­mit­ting the grow­ing fal­si­fi­ca­tion of his­to­ry and he is respon­si­ble for the increased patron­iz­ing of the media. As a result, Japan slipped from 22nd down to 72nd on the world press free­dom index issued by “Reporters With­out Bor­ders.” Observers note that with the Nip­pon Kai­gi (“Japan Con­fer­ence”), a nation­al­ist lob­by orga­ni­za­tion has gained sig­nif­i­cant influ­ence. Of the 722 par­lia­men­tar­i­ans, 289 are mem­bers and 13 of the 19 min­is­ters and the Prime Min­ster Abe are in close con­tact with Nip­pon Kai­gi. Nip­pon Kai­gi says of itself that it is striv­ing to strength­en the empire, loosen the sep­a­ra­tion of state and reli­gion, upgrade the tra­di­tion­al fam­i­ly and gen­der roles, pro­mote the coun­try’s mil­i­ta­riza­tion and end crit­i­cal con­sid­er­a­tion of Japan’s crimes dur­ing WW II. “Right-Wing pop­ulism in Japan” is a “process guid­ed from above,” par­tic­u­lar­ly pushed by the coun­try’s elite, accord­ing to Gabriele Vogt, japa­nol­o­gist at the Ham­burg University.[7] The new nation­al­ism is push­ing the coun­try ever deep­er into a con­fronta­tion with Chi­na. . . .

8. Abe is turn­ing back the Japan­ese his­tor­i­cal and polit­i­cal clock. Japan­ese gov­ern­ment offi­cials are open­ly sanc­tion­ing anti-Kore­an racism and net­work­ing with orga­ni­za­tions that pro­mote that doc­trine. Sev­er­al mem­bers of Abe’s gov­ern­ment net­work with Japan­ese neo-Nazis, some of whom advo­cate using the Nazi method for seiz­ing pow­er in Japan. Is Abe’s gov­ern­ment doing just that?

 “For Top Pols In Japan Crime Doesn’t Pay, But Hate Crime Does” by Jake Adel­stein and Angela Eri­ka Kubo; The Dai­ly Beast; 9/26/2014.

 . . . . Accord­ing to the mag­a­zine Sun­day Mainichi, Ms. Tomo­mi Ina­da, Min­is­ter Of The “Cool Japan” Strat­egy, also received dona­tions from Masa­ki and oth­er Zaitokukai asso­ciates.

Appar­ently, racism is cool in Japan.

Ina­da made news ear­lier this month after pho­tos cir­cu­lated of her and anoth­er female in the new cab­i­net pos­ing with a neo-Nazi par­ty leader. Both denied know­ing the neo-Nazi well but lat­er were revealed to have con­tributed blurbs for an adver­tise­ment prais­ing the out-of-print book Hitler’s Elec­tion Strategy. Coin­ci­den­tally, Vice-Prime Minister,Taro Aso, is also a long-time admir­er of Nazi polit­i­cal strat­egy, and has sug­gested Japan fol­low the Nazi Par­ty tem­plate to sneak con­sti­tu­tional change past the pub­lic. . . .

. . . In August, Japan’s rul­ing par­ty, which put Abe into pow­er orga­nized a work­ing group to dis­cuss laws that would restrict hate-crimealthough the new laws will prob­a­bly also be used to clamp down on anti-nuclear protests out­side the Diet build­ing.

Of course, it is a lit­tle wor­ri­some that Sanae Takaichi, who was sup­posed to over­see the project, is the oth­er female min­is­ter who was pho­tographed with a neo-Nazi leader and is a fan of Hitler. . .

9. Devo­tee of Hitler’s polit­i­cal strat­e­gy Tomo­mi Ina­da is now the defense min­is­ter of Japan.

“Japan’s PM Picks Hawk­ish Defense Min­is­ter for New Cab­i­net, Vows Eco­nom­ic Recov­ery” by Elaine Lies and Kiyoshi Tak­e­na­ka; Reuters; 8/3/2016. 

Japan­ese Prime Min­is­ter Shin­zo Abe appoint­ed a con­ser­v­a­tive ally as defense min­is­ter in a cab­i­net reshuf­fle on Wednes­day that left most key posts unchanged, and he promised to has­ten the economy’s escape from defla­tion and boost region­al ties.

New defense min­is­ter Tomo­mi Ina­da, pre­vi­ous­ly the rul­ing par­ty pol­i­cy chief, shares Abe’s goal of revis­ing the post-war, paci­fist con­sti­tu­tion, which some con­ser­v­a­tives con­sid­er a humil­i­at­ing sym­bol of Japan’s World War Two defeat.

She also reg­u­lar­ly vis­its Tokyo’s Yasuku­ni Shrine for war dead, which Chi­na and South Korea see as a sym­bol of Japan’s past mil­i­tarism. Japan’s ties with Chi­na and South Korea have been frayed by the lega­cy of its mil­i­tary aggres­sion before and dur­ing World War Two. . . .

10. We have spo­ken of Naren­dra Mod­i’s BJP, a cat’s paw for the Hin­du nationalist/fascist RSS. Mod­i’s anti-Mus­lim agen­da is now com­ing into the open.

Steve Ban­non is a fan of Modi and his BJP par­ty.

“Mr. Mod­i’s Embrace of Hin­du Extrem­ists;” The New York Times; 3/23/2017.

Since he was elect­ed in 2014, Prime Min­is­ter Naren­dra Modi of India has played a cagey game, appeas­ing his party’s hard-line Hin­du base while pro­mot­ing sec­u­lar goals of devel­op­ment and eco­nom­ic growth. Despite wor­ry­ing signs that he was will­ing to humor Hin­du extrem­ists, Mr. Modi refrained from overt­ly approv­ing vio­lence against the nation’s Mus­lim minor­i­ty.

On Sun­day, Mr. Modi revealed his hand. Embold­ened by a land­slide vic­to­ry in recent elec­tions in India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, his par­ty named a fire­brand Hin­du cler­ic, Yogi Adityanath, as the state’s leader. The move is a shock­ing rebuke to reli­gious minori­ties, and a sign that cold polit­i­cal cal­cu­la­tions ahead of nation­al elec­tions in 2019 have led Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Jana­ta Par­ty to believe that noth­ing stands in the way of real­iz­ing its long-held dream of trans­form­ing a sec­u­lar repub­lic into a Hin­du state.

Mr. Adityanath has made a polit­i­cal career of demo­niz­ing Mus­lims, thun­der­ing against such imag­i­nary plots as “love jihad”: the notion that Mus­lim men con­nive to water down the over­whelm­ing Hin­du major­i­ty by seduc­ing Hin­du women. He defend­ed a Hin­du mob that mur­dered a Mus­lim man in 2015 on the sus­pi­cion that his fam­i­ly was eat­ing beef, and said Mus­lims who balked at per­form­ing a yoga salu­ta­tion to the sun should “drown them­selves in the sea.”

Uttar Pradesh, home to more than 200 mil­lion peo­ple, bad­ly needs devel­op­ment, not ide­o­log­i­cal show­man­ship. The state has the high­est infant mor­tal­i­ty rate in the coun­try. Near­ly half of its chil­dren are stunt­ed. Edu­ca­tion­al out­comes are dis­mal. Youth unem­ploy­ment is high. . . .

. . . . India needs to gen­er­ate a mil­lion new jobs every month to meet employ­ment demand. Should Mr. Adityanath fail to deliv­er, there is every fear that he — and Mr. Modi’s par­ty — will resort to dead­ly Mus­lim-bait­ing to stay in pow­er, turn­ing Mr. Modi’s dream­land into a night­mare for India’s minori­ties . . . .

 

 

 

Discussion

11 comments for “FTR #951 Fascism: 2017 World Tour”

  1. Ctrl-rigt, Alt-right, Del-right. I think “alt-nazis” is a much more ade­quate and polit­i­cal­ly cor­rect term.
    A new wave of sym­pa­thy towards the extreme right is surg­ing through­out East-Euro­pean coun­tries such as Roma­nia and Bul­gar­ia. I leave in Roma­nia for the time being, and I can sense a grow­ing pas­sion for fas­cism ris­ing here and there. Most­ly polit­i­cal­ly indif­fer­ent and eco­nom­i­cal­ly poor peo­ple who are so eas­i­ly manip­u­lat­ed towards the far right, even if only for cer­tain moments and actions. They are not devout nation­al­ists, they don’t care much for what is going on and are with­out a polit­i­cal opin­ion of their own most of the time. A lot of “oppor­tunis­tic fas­cism” more than con­vic­tion. The nation­al ortho­dox church has stepped in with its own agen­da (pow­er and mon­ey accu­mu­la­tion main­ly), and with­out being open­ly for the nation­al­is­tic move­ments is using them and the pas­sions they stir for its own pur­pos­es (one being the erec­tion of the tallest, most expen­sive ortho­dox cathe­dral in the world). The (crim­i­nal­ly con­vict­ed) lead­ers of the main social­ist par­ty went to the US to kiss the runes encrust­ed ring of Trump on his coro­na­tion day. No one left to blow the whis­tle.

    Posted by malvin | March 27, 2017, 12:50 am
  2. Check out Nigel Farage’s lat­est ‘Exit’-ish project: It’s not quite ‘CalEx­it’. More like ‘Cal­Divorce’. And, or course, it’s being fin­canced by a pair of Repub­li­can oper­a­tives:

    Salon

    Brex­it engi­neer Nigel Farage hired to pro­mote effort to break Cal­i­for­nia in two
    For­mer leader of UK’s pro-Brex­it par­ty joins cam­paign to split Cal­i­for­nia, cre­at­ing new GOP strong­hold

    Matthew Sheffield
    Mon­day, Mar 27, 2017 08:25 PM CST

    Nigel Farage, the British politi­cian known for his suc­cess­ful cam­paign to get the Unit­ed King­dom to leave the Euro­pean Union, has teamed up with the back­ers of a cam­paign to split Cal­i­for­nia into two sep­a­rate states: a coastal state that would be dom­i­nat­ed by lib­er­al-dom­i­nat­ed por­tion and an inland state that would be far more con­ser­v­a­tive.

    This effort is one of sev­er­al “CalEx­it” pro­pos­als that have been float­ed since the 2016 pres­i­den­tial elec­tion, in which Demo­c­rat Hillary Clin­ton won the nation­al pop­u­lar vote by near­ly 3 mil­lion votes but still man­aged to lose by a lop­sided mar­gin in the Elec­toral Col­lege.

    Farage and his finance part­ner Arron Banks have report­ed­ly been recruit­ed by Repub­li­can oper­a­tives Scott Baugh and Ger­ry Gun­ster to help raise mon­ey to fund the dri­ve to get more than 500,000 sig­na­tures from around the state in order to put the pro­pos­al before vot­ers on California’s 2018 bal­lot.

    Accord­ing to UK Dai­ly Mail, the British duo raised around $1 mil­lion on a recent trip to Cal­i­for­nia, pri­mar­i­ly from tech­nol­o­gy entre­pre­neurs and agri­cul­ture.

    Banks told the paper the cam­paign would use the same impulse that pro­pelled the Brex­it cam­paign to vic­to­ry: “It would be por­trayed as the Hol­ly­wood elites ver­sus the peo­ple, break­ing up the bad gov­ern­ment. Sev­en­ty-eight per cent of peo­ple in Cal­i­for­nia are unhap­py with their gov­ern­ment. It’s the world’s sixth-largest econ­o­my and it’s very bad­ly run.”

    There have been sev­er­al unsuc­cess­ful efforts to sub­di­vide Cal­i­for­nia into dif­fer­ent states. Anoth­er one, which is actu­al­ly backed by the gov­ern­ment of Rus­sia, is try­ing to appeal to lib­er­al Gold­en Staters to get them to secede from the Unit­ed States entire­ly.

    “This has been done before with West Vir­ginia and Vir­ginia and North and South Dako­ta, so it can work,” a Farage spokesman told the Dai­ly Mail.

    ...

    Full state­hood for D.C. would almost cer­tain­ly mean two new Demo­c­ra­t­ic sen­a­tors, but those could hypo­thet­i­cal­ly be bal­anced out by two new Repub­li­cans from the con­ser­v­a­tive-lean­ing state carved out of inland Cal­i­for­nia.

    “Banks told the paper the cam­paign would use the same impulse that pro­pelled the Brex­it cam­paign to vic­to­ry: “It would be por­trayed as the Hol­ly­wood elites ver­sus the peo­ple, break­ing up the bad gov­ern­ment. Sev­en­ty-eight per cent of peo­ple in Cal­i­for­nia are unhap­py with their gov­ern­ment. It’s the world’s sixth-largest econ­o­my and it’s very bad­ly run.””

    That cer­tain­ly sounds like some­thing Farage has expe­ri­ence with. And, again, note the financiers for this project:

    ...
    Farage and his finance part­ner Arron Banks have report­ed­ly been recruit­ed by Repub­li­can oper­a­tives Scott Baugh and Ger­ry Gun­ster to help raise mon­ey to fund the dri­ve to get more than 500,000 sig­na­tures from around the state in order to put the pro­pos­al before vot­ers on California’s 2018 bal­lot.
    ...

    You have to won­der if this is anoth­er Tim Drap­er project. If so, it’s not going to end with a sin­gle split.

    So that’s kind of dis­turb­ing. But at least Farage isn’t get­ting hired to push a full on ‘Calex­it’ cam­paign to get Cal­i­for­nia to secede for the US entire­ly, although it seems like this cam­paign to split Cal­i­for­nia could eas­i­ly morph into an ‘Exit’ cam­paign. And if this does turn into a ‘Calex­it’ move­ment it sounds like the move­ment could get some unex­pect­ed help from else­where in Europe: the EU Com­mis­sion:

    CNN

    I’ll back Texas inde­pen­dence, EU’s Junck­er warns Trump

    By Donie O’Sul­li­van,

    Updat­ed 3:33 PM ET, Thu March 30, 2017

    (CNN)The pres­i­dent of the exec­u­tive arm of the Euro­pean Union had a mes­sage for US Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump on Thurs­day: mind your own busi­ness.

    “The new­ly elect­ed US pres­i­dent was hap­py that the Brex­it was tak­ing place and has asked oth­er coun­tries to do the same,” Euro­pean Com­mis­sion pres­i­dent Jean-Claude Junck­er said. How­ev­er, he warned, “if he goes on like that I am going to pro­mote the inde­pen­dence of Ohio and Austin, Texas, in the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca.”

    Junck­er, a Lux­em­bourg politi­cian who has been pres­i­dent of the Euro­pean Com­mis­sion since 2014, was speak­ing at the con­fer­ence of the cen­ter-right Euro­pean Peo­ple’s Par­ty (EPP) in Mal­ta.

    In Feb­ru­ary, Junck­er said he was under the impres­sion that the Trump admin­is­tra­tion did not know the Euro­pean Union “in detail,” adding, “But in Europe, details mat­ter.”

    .@JunckerEU “We must con­tin­ue, we must forge ahead” #EPP­Mal­ta #WeAre­Fam­i­ly pic.twitter.com/AXkldl6woM— EPP (@EPP) March 30, 2017

    On Brex­it, the UK’s plan to leave the Euro­pean Union, Junck­er said it should not be con­sid­ered the end of every­thing but “a new begin­ning.”

    “It’s busi­ness as usu­al in Europe,” he said.

    ...

    ““The new­ly elect­ed US pres­i­dent was hap­py that the Brex­it was tak­ing place and has asked oth­er coun­tries to do the same,” Euro­pean Com­mis­sion pres­i­dent Jean-Claude Junck­er said. How­ev­er, he warned, “if he goes on like that I am going to pro­mote the inde­pen­dence of Ohio and Austin, Texas, in the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca.”

    Is talk of the glo­ries of the Unit­ed State of Ohio going to start ema­nat­ing from EU lead­ers? The Sov­er­eign Weird State of Austin? And will the EU hire Farage to pro­mote it? He’s appar­ent­ly avail­able for such projects so you nev­er know.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | March 30, 2017, 3:00 pm
  3. Malvin- they say “alt-right” but I hear ALT-REICH.

    Posted by Aunti_jen | April 5, 2017, 12:43 am
  4. Here’s a sto­ry about one of the under­ly­ing dynam­ics fuels the rise of Marine Le Pen and the Nation­al Front that does­n’t bode well for France. Both in the short-run since this dynam­ic could pro­pel Le Pen to the pres­i­den­cy. But also in the long-run since that under­ly­ing dynam­ic is the shock­ing amount of Nation­al Front sup­port from French youths:

    The Wash­ing­ton Post

    A youth revolt in France boosts the far right
    Marine Le Pen’s hopes of win­ning the pres­i­den­cy may rest on her appeal among the young

    Sto­ry by Griff Witte, James McAuley
    Pub­lished on April 19, 2017

    LA BAZOCHE-GOUET, France

    Song­birds flit­ted among the red­bud trees. The wind tick­led yel­low flow­ers in fields of rape­seed. The medieval church clock clanged on the hour.

    Oth­er­wise all was still in this one-boulan­gerie town in the French coun­try­side when Marine Le Pen strode to the lectern and, with the unwa­ver­ing force of a freight train, vowed to save the coun­try on behalf of its for­got­ten young.

    “Our youth are in despair,” the 48-year-old thun­dered. “I will be the voice of the voice­less.”

    Two-thirds of the way back in an over­flow crowd, Adrien Vergnaud knew instant­ly that the leader of France’s far-right Nation­al Front was speak­ing for him. The job­less­ness, the migrants, the ter­ror­ism. She was the only one who cared.

    With­out her, said the taut­ly mus­cled 25-year-old con­struc­tion work­er, his trou­bled coun­try has “no future.”

    But with the back­ing of young vot­ers like Vergnaud, Le Pen may become the next pres­i­dent of France.

    As the coun­try hur­tles toward the elec­tion this spring that could alter the course of Euro­pean his­to­ry — the first round is Sun­day — Le Pen’s once-long­shot and now unde­ni­ably viable bid to lead France rests heav­i­ly on an unlike­ly source of sup­port.

    Pop­ulist tri­umphs in Britain and the Unit­ed States came last year despite young vot­ers, not because of them. Mil­len­ni­als — gen­er­al­ly at ease with immi­gra­tion, trade and mul­ti­cul­tur­al­ism — lined up against both Brex­it and Don­ald Trump. It was old­er vot­ers who sought to over­turn the exist­ing order with nation­al­ist answers to the prob­lems of a glob­al­ized world.

    But France is a land of youth­ful revolts, from the 18th cen­tu­ry bar­ri­cades to the fevered uni­ver­si­ty cam­pus­es of May 1968. And with youth unem­ploy­ment stuck at 25 per­cent, Le Pen’s reac­tionary call to return the coun­try to an era of lost glo­ry by clos­ing bor­ders, exit­ing the Euro­pean Union and restor­ing the nation­al cur­ren­cy has fired the pas­sions of young vot­ers crav­ing rad­i­cal change.

    “We’ve been told our whole lives that every­thing is set. Free trade. For­get­ting our bor­ders. One cur­ren­cy for all of Europe. Noth­ing can change,” said Gaë­tan Dus­sausaye, the mild-man­nered 23-year-old leader of the Nation­al Front’s youth wing. “But young peo­ple don’t like this sys­tem. This sys­tem is a fail­ure.”

    The Nation­al Front’s strength among mil­len­ni­als sug­gests the pop­ulist wave that’s unset­tled the West may be more durable than many may assume. Far from the last gasp of closed-soci­ety old­er vot­ers who are demo­graph­i­cal­ly des­tined to be out­num­bered by a ris­ing tide of cos­mopoli­tan youth, the pop­ulist insur­gency could con­tin­ue to build over years and decades if enough dis­en­chant­ed young vot­ers can be lured by the promise of some­thing new.

    And across Europe, that’s exact­ly what far-right move­ments are attempt­ing. In Ger­many — a coun­try where the two main par­ties are led by polit­i­cal vet­er­ans in their 60s — the anti-Mus­lim Alter­na­tive for Ger­many par­ty is run by a fresh-faced 41-year-old. Scan­di­na­vian par­lia­ments, mean­while, are stocked with politi­cians in their 20s hail­ing from par­ties that just a decade ago were con­signed to the extrem­ist fringe.

    The Nation­al Front was, until rel­a­tive­ly recent­ly, a fringe move­ment itself, seen by crit­ics as a neo-fas­cist front filled with racists, anti-Semi­tes and xeno­phobes and led by the con­vict­ed Holo­caust denier Jean-Marie Le Pen.

    To many old­er or mid­dle-aged vot­ers, the party’s essen­tial DNA remains unal­tered, even as it has furi­ous­ly tried to refash­ion its image.

    “The Nation­al Front is try­ing to make us think they’ve changed,” said Marie-Thérèse Forten­bach, a 50-year-old who said her half-Con­golese her­itage has made her a vic­tim of the sort of dis­crim­i­na­to­ry prac­tices the par­ty long preached. “I don’t believe it.”

    But the young — who have only known the par­ty since Jean-Marie Le Pen’s gen­er­al­ly more cal­cu­lat­ing and cau­tious daugh­ter Marine took over in 2011 — have been eas­i­er to con­vince that the Nation­al Front’s rep­u­ta­tion for extrem­ism is overblown.

    The par­ty now boasts the youngest mem­ber in both the Nation­al Assem­bly and the Sen­ate. Its stu­dent activists can be seen on posh Paris street cor­ners, hand­ing out fliers, and Le Pen has sur­round­ed her­self with a coterie of 20- and 30-some­thing advis­ers. This month she deliv­ered a speech in Bor­deaux focused exclu­sive­ly on youth issues, com­plete with a plea to her cheer­ing young sup­port­ers to “go against the cur­rents of his­to­ry.”

    There are signs they are doing just that.

    If Le Pen wins, Euro­pean lead­ers fear the dis­in­te­gra­tion of the E.U. after decades spent try­ing to bind the con­ti­nent more close­ly togeth­er. And although she’s down in hypo­thet­i­cal sec­ond-round con­tests, Le Pen enjoys a com­mand­ing lead among France’s youngest vot­ers in the 11-can­di­date first round, polls show. One sur­vey has her win­ning near­ly 40 per­cent of the vote among those 18 to 24, near­ly dou­ble the total of her near­est com­peti­tor, Emmanuel Macron.

    That’s all the more sur­pris­ing because Macron, at 39, is vying to become the youngest pres­i­dent in French his­to­ry.

    But it’s con­sis­tent with recent results: The last two times vot­ers across France went to the polls — in Euro­pean elec­tions in 2014, and in region­al vot­ing a year lat­er — the Nation­al Front tri­umphed among the young.

    “It’s a para­dox,” said Rémy Oudghiri, a soci­ol­o­gist with Socio­vi­sion, a firm that con­ducts major sur­veys of French atti­tudes. “The young over­all are open to cul­tur­al diver­si­ty, open to immi­gra­tion. But among the youth, there’s a por­tion that is rad­i­cal­ized, that believes the more we open to the out­side world, the more we decline.”

    The dif­fer­ence between the two groups, Oudghiri said, is that one hasn’t both­ered late­ly to cast bal­lots.

    “Since only the rad­i­cal­ized youth goes to vote, the FN wins,” he said.

    That dynam­ic could be espe­cial­ly pro­nounced this year. Polls show that sup­port for Macron is shal­low, with even those who say they back him unsure whether they will actu­al­ly turn out for a can­di­date with no for­mal par­ty affil­i­a­tion and a plat­form that seeks to please both the left and right.

    As a for­mer econ­o­my min­is­ter and invest­ment banker, the pro‑E.U. Macron also strug­gles with young vot­ers who don’t fit the pro­file of the suc­cess­ful urban cos­mopoli­tan.

    “In France, you have a lot of young peo­ple who don’t live in the big cities, who didn’t go to col­lege, who left the edu­ca­tion sys­tem,” said Jérémie Patri­er-Lei­tus, the 28-year-old leader of one of Macron’s sev­er­al youth fac­tions. “You have young peo­ple who are unem­ployed, and it’s easy to tell them that’s because an immi­grant took their job.”

    Macron has tak­en the oppo­site tack, try­ing to con­vince France’s dis­grun­tled youth that immi­gra­tion is good for the coun­try and that the E.U. is worth sav­ing. It’s a pitch, Patri­er-Lei­tus acknowl­edged, that doesn’t always bring crowds to their feet — or vot­ers to the polls.

    “Europe has strong oppo­nents, but very weak sup­port­ers,” said Patri­er-Lei­tus, who reg­u­lar­ly trav­els between Paris and his job at a French cul­tur­al cen­ter in New York. “We didn’t real­ize how frag­ile Europe real­ly was.”

    If Europe’s young defend­ers have been tough to rouse, its oppo­nents are filled with pas­sion­ate inten­si­ty.

    ...

    After Marine Le Pen — a husky-voiced, twice-divorced Gen­er­a­tion Xer — the party’s most promi­nent face is that of a mil­len­ni­al — the leader’s niece, 27-year-old Mar­i­on Maréchal-Le Pen.

    To crit­ics, she is the unbri­dled id to her aunt’s dis­ci­plined ego. To sup­port­ers, she is a mod­ern-day Joan of Arc, defend­ing a coun­try yet again in the midst of a for­eign inva­sion.

    Hav­ing become in 2012 the youngest per­son ever elect­ed to the French par­lia­ment, her unapolo­get­i­cal­ly hard-line stances have earned her a cer­tain celebri­ty sta­tus in right-wing cir­cles the world over: Sarah Palin con­fessed a “polit­i­cal crush” on Maréchal-Le Pen, while Trump advis­er Stephen K. Ban­non anoint­ed her a “ris­ing star.”

    In an inter­view at her Paris office, Maréchal-Le Pen dis­missed the notion that younger French vot­ers — suf­fer­ing from an unem­ploy­ment rate more than twice the nation­al aver­age — are grav­i­tat­ing to the par­ty her grand­fa­ther found­ed pri­mar­i­ly because of its eco­nom­ic pro­tec­tion­ism. Their motives, she insist­ed, were more cul­tur­al than pock­et­book.

    “The main con­cern for the youth is the ques­tion of immi­gra­tion,” she said. “They have the feel­ing that they are being deprived of their own iden­ti­ty. The mul­ti­cul­tur­al mod­el defend­ed by our elite is a mod­el that doesn’t work.”

    The Nation­al Front’s solu­tion — a dra­mat­ic cut in immi­gra­tion and an end to French par­tic­i­pa­tion in Europe’s bor­der-free trav­el area — has found some unlike­ly adher­ents.

    Davy Rodriguez, 23, is deputy leader of the party’s youth wing and a stu­dent at Paris’s Sci­ences Po, one of the most pres­ti­gious uni­ver­si­ties in France.

    He’s also the son of immi­grants. His moth­er is Por­tuguese, his father is Span­ish.

    Davy Rodriguez — whose Twit­ter page fea­tures a tableau of sol­diers charg­ing into bat­tle behind a tat­tered French tri-col­or — now spends his days and nights cam­paign­ing to dra­mat­i­cal­ly tight­en, if not close, the bor­ders his par­ents crossed decades ago to begin their lives in France.

    To Rodriguez, there’s no con­tra­dic­tion between his life sto­ry and his pol­i­tics: When his par­ents came to France, the coun­try need­ed more work­ers. Today, he said, it doesn’t, but it’s being inun­dat­ed nonethe­less.

    “We can’t accept what [Ger­man Chan­cel­lor Angela] Merkel is doing to our coun­try — to our nation­al iden­ti­ty — by putting migrants all over the coun­try­side,” he said while sit­ting at an out­door cafe in St. Ger­main, the famous­ly book­ish quar­ter of Paris’s Left Bank. “The E.U. is destroy­ing Europe with mass immi­gra­tion.”

    In fact, France has received far few­er migrants per capi­ta in recent years than many Euro­pean nations. The for­eign-born share of France’s over­all pop­u­la­tion has risen rel­a­tive­ly slow­ly, amount­ing to about 12 per­cent of the coun­try last year — com­pared with 10 per­cent in 2000.

    Econ­o­mists also cast doubt on the idea that immi­grants under­cut the abil­i­ty of the French to find work, not­ing that new arrivals often do the jobs that native-born work­ers refuse.

    But the per­cep­tion of an influx that is harm­ing French work­ers — espe­cial­ly the young as they try to get their foot­ing in an econ­o­my still bad­ly bruised from the Great Reces­sion — has per­sist­ed and is a key com­po­nent of the Nation­al Front’s rhetoric.

    At her ral­ly in the French coun­try­side town of La Bazoche-Gou­et, Le Pen denounced the E.U. for man­dat­ing that every coun­try do its part to reset­tle refugees.

    “Where will we put them all?” she asked, prompt­ing a furi­ous round of boos from the 600-strong crowd that had gath­ered in the town’s wood­en-beam, open-air cen­tral hall.

    Vergnaud, the 25-year-old con­struc­tion work­er, joined in lusti­ly.

    “France’s prob­lem is that it’s too gen­er­ous,” he said after Le Pen had sent her faith­ful off with an emphat­ic ren­di­tion of “La Mar­seil­laise,” the French nation­al anthem. “We give to the peo­ple who are com­ing into the coun­try, but not to the French.”

    His arms swathed in elab­o­rate tat­toos, Vergnaud said he’s not nor­mal­ly the type to attend polit­i­cal ral­lies. But he and four friends, all in their 20s, had dri­ven a half-hour from their own small town because they see Le Pen as the last hope for a coun­try at risk of col­lapse.

    The prob­lems are every­where Vergnaud looks: The com­pa­nies that are leav­ing. The farms that are fail­ing. The peo­ple who are dying in mass-casu­al­ty ter­ror­ist attacks. The mosque that’s gone up in his town, right next to the church.

    “I live near the Mus­lims. They don’t work. They just take what they’re giv­en by the gov­ern­ment,” he said.

    But they’re also tak­ing French jobs, he argued min­utes lat­er. “I work most­ly with for­eign­ers — peo­ple from Turkey,” he said.

    Among the five friends, there was no doubt that Le Pen is their sav­ior — the only one who would both­er com­ing to their pic­turesque but decay­ing slice of coun­try­side, the only one will­ing to fight back against the immi­grants who they say are jeop­ar­diz­ing France’s future — and their own.

    The old folks may not under­stand. But to the young, it was all very clear.

    “My grand­par­ents are afraid of Le Pen. They say she’s extreme, and that if she’s elect­ed, we might have a war,” said Manon Coudray, a 23-year-old sec­re­tary. “I say maybe that’s a good thing.”

    “The Nation­al Front’s strength among mil­len­ni­als sug­gests the pop­ulist wave that’s unset­tled the West may be more durable than many may assume. Far from the last gasp of closed-soci­ety old­er vot­ers who are demo­graph­i­cal­ly des­tined to be out­num­bered by a ris­ing tide of cos­mopoli­tan youth, the pop­ulist insur­gency could con­tin­ue to build over years and decades if enough dis­en­chant­ed young vot­ers can be lured by the promise of some­thing new.”

    Yep, as bad is the rise of the Nation­al Front seems now, it’s not incon­ceiv­able that this is mere­ly the begin­ning of a decades-long French love affair with the far-right. Thanks in part to the effec­tive scape­goat­ing of immi­grants as the pri­ma­ry source of France’s woes, but let’s not for­get the years of aus­ter­i­ty EU-imposed poli­cies that pre­dictably led to a sus­tained spike in youth unem­ploy­ment and a sense of despair. And sure, giv­en the real issue of extrem­ist ide­olo­gies with­in Mus­lim immi­grant com­mu­ni­ties it is like­ly that par­ties like the Nation­al Front even with­out a 25 per­cent youth unem­ploy­ment rate. But when you con­sid­er this:

    ...
    In fact, France has received far few­er migrants per capi­ta in recent years than many Euro­pean nations. The for­eign-born share of France’s over­all pop­u­la­tion has risen rel­a­tive­ly slow­ly, amount­ing to about 12 per­cent of the coun­try last year — com­pared with 10 per­cent in 2000.
    ...

    it’s pret­ty clear that the aus­ter­i­ty-induced mass youth unem­ploy­ment has played a sig­nif­i­cant role in these grow­ing anti-immi­grant atti­tudes. So it looks like we can add “the rad­i­cal­iza­tion of France’s youth” to the list of aus­ter­i­ty’s accom­plish­ments. Thanks aus­ter­i­ty.

    But let’s also not for­get that France’s aus­ter­i­ty poli­cies haven’t just con­tributed to the rad­i­cal­iza­tion of France’s white Chris­t­ian youths. Aus­ter­i­ty has been play­ing a big role in the rad­i­cal­iza­tion of France’s Mus­lim youth’s too. The de fac­to aus­ter­i­ty that comes from grow­ing up in a mar­gin­al­ized com­mu­ni­ty with lim­it­ed job prospects and a per­sis­tent social stig­ma sim­ply from being part of that mar­gin­al­ized com­mu­ni­ty:

    Time

    Mus­lims in Neglect­ed Paris Sub­urbs Wor­ry Con­di­tions Could Pro­duce More Ter­ror­ists

    Vivi­enne Walt and Naina Bajekal/Paris
    Jan 10, 2015

    Just past the grandeur of post­card Paris, with its boule­vards and old palaces, lies what seems like a dif­fer­ent world: The ban­lieues, or sub­urbs, vast stretch­es of small brick shops and mosques, and crum­bling high-rise apart­ment blocks, which were thrown up hur­ried­ly 50 years to house the huge influx of immi­grants from the French-speak­ing coun­tries of North and West Africa, and now are home to hun­dreds of thou­sands of French-born Mus­lims.

    Five decades on – and not for the first time – vio­lent events are forc­ing the French and their gov­ern­ment to grap­ple with the seem­ing­ly intractable prob­lem of how to bridge the divide between two very dif­fer­ent stra­ta of French soci­ety: The pow­er­ful and the periph­er­al. France has about five mil­lion Mus­lims, Europe’s biggest Islam­ic popou­la­tion. And it is with­in these low-income cités, or hous­ing projects, out­side Paris, where youth unem­ploy­ment rates hov­er around 25%, that the Char­lie Heb­do attack­ers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, 34 and 32 respec­tive­ly, spent years of their young adult lives before dying in a blaze of police gun­fire on Fri­day. Ame­dy Coulibaly, 32, the gun­man who fatal­ly shot a police­woman on Wednes­day and then seized con­trol of a kosher super­mar­ket on Fri­day before police killed him at sun­down, also most recent­ly lived in a Paris ban­lieue. In all, 17 peo­ple died at the hands of these three attack­ers, includ­ing eight jour­nal­ists and three police offi­cers.

    As Parisians absorb the enor­mi­ty of this week’s killings, res­i­dents in some of these ban­lieues say their areas need urgent changes – bet­ter edu­ca­tion and more job oppor­tu­ni­ties – to reverse the grow­ing drift of young Mus­lims like the Kouachi broth­ers toward rad­i­cal groups bent on advanc­ing their beliefs through vio­lence. “These ter­ror­ists car­ry­ing out such attacks in the name of Islam tend to have lives marked by frus­tra­tion and fail­ure,” says Dje­moui Ben­naceur, 53, an Alger­ian-born res­i­dent in the sub­urb of La Courneuve, a low-income dis­trict sit­u­at­ed just five miles from afflu­ent cen­tral Paris.

    With French youth now wired and online, says Ben­naceur, who emi­grat­ed to France in 1989 and is active in local pol­i­tics, there are now plen­ty more oppor­tu­ni­ties for ter­ror­ist groups to recruit those stuck in dead-end sub­ur­ban lives. “They are eas­i­ly manip­u­lat­ed, par­tic­u­lar­ly in a world where ter­ror­ists are experts in social media,” says Ben­naceur, who runs a small shut­tle ser­vice. That might part­ly explain the Kouachi broth­ers’ path to rad­i­cal jihad, from a life of rel­a­tive aim­less­ness. After the two became the prime sus­pects in last Wednes­day’s mas­sacre, dur­ing which they killed 12 peo­ple, Chérif’s for­mer lawyer Vin­cent Ollivi­er described him to a French reporter as “part of a group of young peo­ple who were a lit­tle lost, con­fused, not real­ly fanat­ics in the prop­er sense of the word.”

    Both broth­ers worked occa­sion­al menial jobs and strug­gled to find steady work dur­ing their years liv­ing in low-income areas around Paris and else­where, accord­ing to French media reports this week. Chérif, who spent 18 months in jail in 2008 and 2009 for his jihadist activies, worked for a while deliv­er­ing piz­zas and in a super­mar­ket in a Paris sub­urb. Orphaned at a young age, the broth­ers grew up part­ly in an orphan­age in the west­ern city of Rennes.

    Old­er immi­grants say they have wit­nessed a steady dwin­dling in young peo­ple’s prospects. “Things were not this way when I first came here 25 years ago,” Ben­naceur says. “There were more oppor­tu­ni­ties to work and study. Since the finan­cial cri­sis, that has changed and ten­sions have risen.”

    When the Paris sub­urbs explod­ed in weeks of vio­lent protests in Novem­ber 2005, then-pres­i­dent Jacques Chirac vowed to pour bil­lions into the ban­lieues with new hous­ing, infra­struc­ture and jobs. While there are some signs of that, invest­ment has dried up since the reces­sion hit in 2008, and as France has strug­gled with a bal­loon­ing pub­lic deficit. “After the riots the state did noth­ing,” says Farid Rebaa Jaa­far, 52, vice pres­i­dent of the Mosque of Dran­cy, a sub­urb adjoin­ing La Courneuve. “It became worse and worse.”

    At least as urgent is anti-Mus­lim racism and what res­i­dents say is the per­sis­tent stigma­ti­za­tion of their neigh­bor­hoods. “The ban­lieues are still seen as shad­ow zones in France,” says stu­dent Sofi­ane Bouarif, 18, who was born and raised in La Courneuve, of Alger­ian immi­grant par­ents.

    Sev­er­al French sur­veys have shown that many ban­lieue youth strug­gle to land job inter­views — let alone jobs — sole­ly because they have Mus­lim or African names, or because their address­es have zip codes sig­nal­ing that they live in the poor­er sub­urbs of Paris. Anti-racism orga­ni­za­tions such as France’s SOS Racisme have long argued that job appli­ca­tions should be anony­mous as a way of redress­ing the racial imbal­ances, and that the com­mon French prac­tice of includ­ing pho­tographs on resumés rein­forces racial stereo­typ­ing with­in com­pa­nies look­ing to hire staff.

    Many sec­ond and third-gen­er­a­tion French from North or West African par­ents feel social­ly exclud­ed from main­stream French soci­ety, despite being born with­in a half-hour’s train ride from the cen­ter of Paris. “They feel nei­ther North African nor French,” says Jaa­far, who arrived in Paris from Tunisia in 1979.

    ...

    “Old­er immi­grants say they have wit­nessed a steady dwin­dling in young peo­ple’s prospects. “Things were not this way when I first came here 25 years ago,” Ben­naceur says. “There were more oppor­tu­ni­ties to work and study. Since the finan­cial cri­sis, that has changed and ten­sions have risen.””

    While the rad­i­cal strains of Islam export­ed from places like the Sau­di King­dom is obvi­ous­ly a major fac­tor in the rad­i­cal­iza­tion of France’s Mus­lim youths (and across the world), you clear­ly can’t sep­a­rate that sit­u­a­tion from the socioe­co­nom­ic dis­lo­ca­tion France’s Mus­lims expe­ri­ence on a dai­ly basis. And it’s sim­ply got­ten much, much worse since the 2008 finan­cial cri­sis and the EU’s trag­ic embrace of aus­ter­i­ty eco­nom­ics.

    So France’s non-Mus­lim youth who are flock­ing to Marine Le Pen are doing so over fears about the Mus­lim youths tak­ing their jobs. And the Mus­lim youths flock­ing to rad­i­cal Islam are doing so, in part, do to a lack a jobs and any mean­ing­ful prospects for eco­nom­ic secu­ri­ty. With xeno­pho­bic ide­olo­gies fuel­ing the fire on both side.

    So, yeah, thanks aus­ter­i­ty. And hate. Way to go.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | April 19, 2017, 2:57 pm
  5. Ger­many’s far-right AfD par­ty just held elec­tions and select­ed a new pair of co-lead­ers. And in what is seen as a major blow to Frauke Petry, who was appar­ent­ly try­ing to push the par­ty towards a more prag­mat­ic polit­i­cal path (e.g. not defend­ing the par­ty’s open Holo­caust deniers like Björn Höcke as much), one of the new co-lead­ers is a vocal defend­er Höcke. So, yeah, sur­prise, far-right AfD is now the even-fur­ther-to-the-right AfD:

    The Inde­pen­dent

    Ger­many’s AfD par­ty elects Alexan­der Gauland and Alice Wei­del as gen­er­al elec­tion can­di­dates

    The elec­tion fol­lows the party’s co-leader step­ping aside last week

    KIRSTEN GRIESHABER
    Sun­day 23 April, 2017 17:15 BST

    Berlin

    Germany’s nation­al­ist par­ty, Alter­na­tive für Deutsch­land, has elect­ed two new top can­di­dates for the Sep­tem­ber gen­er­al elec­tion after the party’s best-known politi­cian, Frauke Petry, said last week she would no longer be avail­able.

    Mem­bers of the far-right par­ty, known by its acronym AfD, elect­ed Alexan­der Gauland and Alice Wei­del at their week­end par­ty con­ven­tion in Cologne.

    Divi­sions erupt­ed among the dif­fer­ent fac­tions of the Ger­man nation­al­ists as del­e­gates from the AfD reject­ed an appeal on Sat­ur­day by Ms Petry to seek a more prag­mat­ic polit­i­cal path instead of turn­ing into a “fun­da­men­tal oppo­si­tion” par­ty. The defeat was a sig­nif­i­cant blow for AfD co-leader Ms Petry, whose posi­tion in the par­ty is now sub­stan­tial­ly weak­ened.

    Mr Gauland, 76, is one of the party’s most promi­nent mem­bers and one of Ms Petry’s main rivals.

    “We want to keep our home coun­try, keep our iden­ti­ty, and we are proud to be Ger­man,” he said in his accep­tance speech.

    Ms Wei­del, 38, is a con­sul­tant from south­west­ern Ger­many who has not stood in the spot­light of the four-year-old par­ty so far.

    “If we now stick togeth­er and fight togeth­er, then final­ly a true oppo­si­tion par­ty will be get­ting into Ger­man Par­lia­ment,” she told cheer­ing del­e­gates.

    The par­ty mem­bers also vot­ed for an elec­tion man­i­festo that is harsh on immi­gra­tion and Mus­lims and reit­er­ates calls for leav­ing the Euro­pean Union’s euro cur­ren­cy.

    The head of the Cen­tral Coun­cil of Jews in Ger­many con­demned the AfD’s fur­ther move to the far right, say­ing the par­ty is try­ing to make “a chau­vin­ist-nation­al­ist way of think­ing social­ly accept­able in Ger­many again”.

    Josef Schus­ter warned that the par­ty is “threat­en­ing Jew­ish and Mus­lim life in Ger­many.”

    The con­fer­ence in Cologne was over­shad­owed by mas­sive protests on Sat­ur­day, when tens of thou­sands ral­lied against the pop­ulist par­ty and blocked access to the hotel where the con­ven­tion took place. The city remained rel­a­tive­ly calm on Sun­day and police report­ed only a few small demon­stra­tions.

    About 68 per cent vot­ed for the duo, with 28 per cent vot­ing against, the Ger­man news agency DPA report­ed.

    AfD’s poll rat­ings soared amid the influx of migrants to Ger­many in late 2015 and ear­ly 2016. How­ev­er, they have sagged in recent months as the issue fad­ed from head­lines and the par­ty became increas­ing­ly mired in infight­ing, with Ms Petry and her hus­band Mar­cus Pret­zell against oth­er senior fig­ures like Mr Gauland even fur­ther on the right.

    Ms Petry, 41, announced on Wednes­day that she would no longer be her party’s top can­di­date. She also irked some rivals by lead­ing an effort to expel Björn Höcke, AfD’s region­al leader in the east­ern Thuringia state, after he sug­gest­ed that Ger­many stops acknowl­edg­ing and aton­ing for its Nazi past. Mr Gauland has repeat­ed­ly pro­tect­ed Mr Höcke, even after his remarks cre­at­ed an out­rage in Ger­many.

    Ger­man polit­i­cal par­ties choose lead can­di­dates for elec­tions who gen­er­al­ly dom­i­nate their cam­paigns and, in the case of big­ger par­ties, com­pete to become chan­cel­lor.

    ...

    “Ms Petry, 41, announced on Wednes­day that she would no longer be her party’s top can­di­date. She also irked some rivals by lead­ing an effort to expel Björn Höcke, AfD’s region­al leader in the east­ern Thuringia state, after he sug­gest­ed that Ger­many stops acknowl­edg­ing and aton­ing for its Nazi past. Mr Gauland has repeat­ed­ly pro­tect­ed Mr Höcke, even after his remarks cre­at­ed an out­rage in Ger­many.”

    Frauke Petry is the face of mod­er­ate far-right eth­no-nation­al­ism is seems. Mod­er­ate in the sense that she thought the par­ty should hide its true stripes more effec­tive­ly. So now we’ll get to see if tak­ing a more open­ly Hitler-cod­dling pub­lic face helps or hurts the AfD in the upcom­ing elec­tions. It seems like this is over­all great news for Angela Merkel and the CDU, assum­ing going fur­ther-right ends up hurt­ing the AfD at the bal­lot box. Of course, if this actu­al­ly helps the AfD that’s clear­ly not good news for the AfD. Or any­one else. But odds are this is prob­a­bly good news for the Ger­many’s con­ser­v­a­tive par­ties since it does­n’t sound like the AfD’s inter­nal bick­er­ing over whether or not to clamp down on its Holo­caust deniers was help­ing the par­ty’s image. Yes, that bick­er­ing is resolved now, but in the worst way it could have been resolved.

    At the same time, it’s worth not­ing one rather sig­nif­i­cant, and bizarre, new pub­lic face of mod­er­a­tion that emerged from the AfD’s elec­tion of these new co-lead­ers: Alice Wei­del is an open les­bian. In a par­ty that gen­er­al­ly demo­nizes gays. So how does Ms Wei­del explain her lead­er­ship post in a par­ty that appears to hate peo­ple like her? She just responds that she keeps her per­son­al life and her pub­lic life sep­a­rate. As if that’s a coher­ent expla­na­tion.

    So while Wei­del may not be a strong pub­lic backer as her new co-leader Alexan­der Gauland is of Holo­caust deniers like Björn Höcke, she’s still clear­ly a fan of absur­dist pub­lic denials:

    LGBTQ Nation

    Les­bian named leader of Germany’s fas­cist par­ty

    By Alex Bollinger
    Tues­day, April 25, 2017

    In elec­tions held over the week­end, Alexan­der Gauland and Alice Wei­del were named co-lead­ers of the Ger­man Alter­na­tive für Deutsch­land (AfD) par­ty.

    The AfD was found­ed in 2013 and is known for its euro-skep­ti­cism, extreme xeno­pho­bia, and oppo­si­tion to women’s and LGBTQ rights.

    Alice Wei­del, 38, lives with her part­ner and their two kids and is open­ly gay. A for­mer Gold­man Sachs banker, she seems an unlike­ly leader for a par­ty found­ed on a rejec­tion of glob­al­ism and tol­er­ance.

    But her pol­i­tics appear in-line with the AfD’s.

    In her accep­tance speech, Wei­del called for the AfD to “stick togeth­er and fight togeth­er,” and specif­i­cal­ly named “polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness” a prob­lem. “We don’t want any import­ed civ­il wars on Ger­man streets. Polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness belongs on the garbage heap of his­to­ry.”

    When inter­view­ers inevitably ask her how she could be part of a par­ty that oppos­es same-sex mar­riage, com­pares LGBTQ peo­ple adopt­ing to mak­ing a child a “play­thing for the sex­u­al incli­na­tions of a loud minor­i­ty,” oppos­es sex edu­ca­tion in schools, and advo­cates for “tra­di­tion­al gen­der roles” for women, she just responds that she keeps her per­son­al life and her pub­lic life sep­a­rate.

    The elec­tions for a new leader were held because the for­mer leader, Frauke Petry, stepped down. Petry pre­vi­ous­ly called for bor­der patrol agents to shoot refugees and oth­er migrants attempt­ing to cross into Ger­many and com­pared eth­nic minori­ties to garbage. “What should we make of the cam­paign ‘Ger­many is Col­or­ful’? A com­post heap is col­or­ful, too.”

    Two months ago, Petry was instru­men­tal in remov­ing a racist even more extreme than her­self from the AfD. Björn Uwe Höcke, the speak­er of the AfD’s par­lia­men­tary group, said in a speech that Berlin’s Holo­caust Memo­r­i­al was a “memo­r­i­al of shame” and that Ger­mans should “make a 180 degree change in their pol­i­tics of com­mem­o­ra­tion.”

    While Wei­del has avoid­ed mak­ing many of the more extreme state­ments that mem­bers of her par­ty have made, her co-leader has open­ly defend­ed them. Gauland pre­vi­ous­ly defend­ed Höcke’s com­ments by say­ing that Ger­many has a “cult of guilt” around the Holo­caust. “We want our home­land, our iden­ti­ty and we are proud to be Ger­mans,” Gauland said in his accep­tance speech.

    ...

    “When inter­view­ers inevitably ask her how she could be part of a par­ty that oppos­es same-sex mar­riage, com­pares LGBTQ peo­ple adopt­ing to mak­ing a child a “play­thing for the sex­u­al incli­na­tions of a loud minor­i­ty,” oppos­es sex edu­ca­tion in schools, and advo­cates for “tra­di­tion­al gen­der roles” for women, she just responds that she keeps her per­son­al life and her pub­lic life sep­a­rate.”

    Yes, the anti-LGBTQ AfD par­ty man­aged to score itself an open­ly gay co-leader. An open­ly gay co-leader who thinks “polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness” is a big prob­lem and who tries to resolve this con­tra­dic­tion by ‘keep­ing her per­son­al life and pub­lic life sep­a­rate.’ So she’s in ‘the clos­et’ and out of ‘the clos­et’. Simul­ta­ne­ous­ly.

    So that’s the new face of the AfD: a guy who thinks the par­ty is too hard on its Holo­caust deniers and an open­ly gay woman who has some­how achieved a state of quan­tum super­po­si­tion with ‘the clos­et’, which is a pret­ty apt anal­o­gy for what the AfD in gen­er­al: a par­ty that’s in the ‘Nazi clos­et’ and out of the ‘Nazi clos­et’ simul­ta­ne­ous­ly. At least, that’s what the par­ty appeared to be try­ing to do before it elect­ed its new lead­er­ship. It’s pret­ty clear­ly out of the ‘Nazi clos­et’ at this point.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | April 26, 2017, 7:59 pm
  6. Here’s the kind of sto­ry that must put a big smile on the face of Steve Ban­non and oth­er The Camp of the Saints/Charles Mau­r­ras fans: a group of “Iden­ti­tar­i­ans” (basi­cal­ly the Euro­pean ver­sion of the ‘Alt-Right’ neo-Nazis) has suc­cess­ful­ly crowd fund­ed enough mon­ey to pur­chase a boat and crew. For what pur­pose? To stop search-and-res­cue oper­a­tions of NGOs look­ing for refugees head­ing towards Europe:

    The Guardian
    The Observ­er

    Far right rais­es £50,000 to tar­get boats on refugee res­cue mis­sions in Med
    Aid char­i­ties have saved more than 6,000 from drown­ing this year. Now anti-Islam ‘Iden­ti­tar­i­ans’ are crowd­fund­ing to pay for ves­sels to chase them down

    Mark Townsend

    Sat­ur­day 3 June 2017 19.01 EDT
    Last mod­i­fied on Sun­day 4 June 2017 10.21 EDT

    Far-right activists are plan­ning a sea cam­paign this sum­mer to dis­rupt ves­sels sav­ing refugees in the Mediter­ranean, after suc­cess­ful­ly inter­cept­ing a res­cue mis­sion last month.

    Mem­bers of the anti-Islam and anti-immi­grant “Iden­ti­tar­i­an” move­ment – large­ly twen­tysome­things often described as Europe’s answer to the Amer­i­can alt-right – have raised £56,489 in less than three weeks to enable them to tar­get boats run by aid char­i­ties help­ing to res­cue refugees.

    The mon­ey was raised through an anony­mous crowd­fund­ing cam­paign with an ini­tial goal of €50,000 (about £44,000) to pay for ships, trav­el costs and film equip­ment. On Sat­ur­day the group con­firmed they had reached their tar­get but were still accept­ing dona­tions. A French far-right group hired a boat for a tri­al run last month, dis­rupt­ing a search-and-res­cue ves­sel as it left the Sicil­ian port of Cata­nia. They claimed they had slowed the NGO ship until the Ital­ian coast­guard inter­vened.

    Fig­ures from the UN’s migra­tion agency, the IOM, reveal that 1,650 refugees have died cross­ing the Mediter­ranean so far this year with a fur­ther 6,453 migrants res­cued off Libya and 228 bod­ies pulled from the waters. Human­i­tar­i­an char­i­ties oper­at­ing in the Mediter­ranean have helped save the lives of thou­sands of refugees, with women and chil­dren mak­ing up almost half of those mak­ing the cross­ing.

    The threat from the far right infu­ri­ates char­i­ties oper­at­ing in the Mediter­ranean. One senior offi­cial, who request­ed anonymi­ty, said politi­cians had helped cre­ate a cli­mate where sup­port­ers of the far right felt embold­ened to act in such a way. “When the British gov­ern­ment and its Euro­pean coun­ter­parts talk about ‘swarms’ of migrants, or per­pet­u­ate the myth that res­cue oper­a­tions are a ‘pull fac­tor’ or a ‘taxi ser­vice’, that gives fuel to extreme groups such as this. The sim­ple real­i­ty is that with­out res­cue oper­a­tions many more would drown, but peo­ple would still attempt the cross­ing,” the offi­cial said.

    Simon Mur­doch, a researcher at the Lon­don-based anti-racist organ­i­sa­tion Hope not Hate, which is mon­i­tor­ing the Iden­ti­tar­i­an move­ment, said: “While these actions are appalling, unfor­tu­nate­ly they don’t shock us. The fact that these far-right activists are seek­ing to pre­vent a human­i­tar­i­an mis­sion, help­ing some of the most vul­ner­a­ble peo­ple in the world today – includ­ing women and chil­dren at risk of drown­ing – speaks vol­umes about them and where their com­pas­sion lies.”

    The crowd­fund­ing cam­paign began in the mid­dle of last month when a French fac­tion, Généra­tion Iden­ti­taire, set up a “defend Europe” web­site to tar­get refugee res­cue boats, mim­ic­k­ing the direct action tac­tics of groups such as Green­peace. Its mis­sion state­ment says: “Ships packed with ille­gal immi­grants are flood­ing the Euro­pean bor­ders. An inva­sion is tak­ing place. This mas­sive immi­gra­tion is chang­ing the face of our con­ti­nent. We are los­ing our safe­ty, our way of life, and there is a dan­ger we Euro­peans will become a minor­i­ty in our own Euro­pean home­lands.”

    An accom­pa­ny­ing video, filmed on the Sicil­ian coast­line, fea­tures a far-right activist say­ing: “We want to get a crew, equip a boat and set sail to the Mediter­ranean ocean to chase down the ene­mies of Europe.”

    Along­side rais­ing funds for ships, it also requests funds for “research” above the logo of the favourite alt-right mes­sage board, 4chan. One recent 4chan thread encour­ages users to track NGO ships in the Mediter­ranean, then report them to the navy and police to inves­ti­gate, par­tic­u­lar­ly “ships idling near the coast of north Africa”. Although not spec­i­fied, the oper­a­tion will almost cer­tain­ly be based in Sici­ly, most like­ly oper­at­ing from the island’s ports of Poz­za­l­lo or Cata­nia.

    Pow­er­ful rigid inflat­able boats able to trav­el faster than 20 knots can sell for less than £10,000 and would be suf­fi­cient to slow down and obstruct ships leav­ing port. An Ital­ian far-right group claims it has been offered ships and sup­port from peo­ple with boat dri­ving licences.

    Last month three young mem­bers of a French Iden­ti­tar­i­an group tar­get­ed a search-and-res­cue ves­sel belong­ing to the char­i­ty SOS Méditer­ranée as it left Cata­nia. Ital­ian coast­guards inter­cept­ed the far-right sup­port­ers and briefly detained them. The SOS Méditer­ranée web­site says that the char­i­ty was cre­at­ed because of the “dra­mat­ic increase of boats in dis­tress and the insuf­fi­cien­cy of exist­ing mea­sures” to the Mediter­ranean cri­sis.

    The efforts of human­i­tar­i­an organ­i­sa­tions have been cred­it­ed with sav­ing huge num­bers of refugees. Médecins Sans Fron­tières began oper­a­tions in the Med in May 2015 and res­cued more than 22,500 peo­ple, many off the Libyan coast, over the next sev­en months.

    Dur­ing the first five months of 2015, no Euro­pean or NGO search-and-res­cue oper­a­tions took place with 1,800 peo­ple drown­ing try­ing to make the cross­ing. In April alone 1,000 lives were lost. All search-and-res­cue oper­a­tions in the Mediter­ranean are coor­di­nat­ed by the offi­cial Mar­itime Res­cue Coor­di­na­tion Cen­tre in Rome in accor­dance with inter­na­tion­al mar­itime law.

    Yet the Euro­pean far-right groups have accused NGOs of work­ing with traf­fick­ers to bring migrants to Europe and claim that search-and-res­cue boats are not car­ry­ing out a human­i­tar­i­an inter­ven­tion. The cen­tral aim of the new wave of far-right groups is pre­serv­ing nation­al dif­fer­ences in the belief that white Euro­peans will be replaced by immi­grants, a stance that is artic­u­lat­ed with anti-migrant, anti-Mus­lim, anti-media sen­ti­ments but repack­aged for a younger audi­ence.

    The num­ber of far-right groups is dif­fi­cult to estab­lish, but Généra­tion Iden­ti­taire has held demon­stra­tions in France that drew around 500 peo­ple, while its Face­book page has 122,662 likes. Its Aus­tri­an coun­ter­part, Iden­titäre Bewe­gung Öster­re­ich, has 37,628 likes on Face­book, although crit­ics warn of increas­ing links with the US alt-right which helped to pro­pel Don­ald Trump to the White House.

    Also on the boat that attempt­ed to obstruct SOS Méditerranée’s ves­sel last month was the Cana­di­an alt-right jour­nal­ist Lau­ren South­ern, who has 278,000 Twit­ter fol­low­ers and whose pres­ence con­firms a transat­lantic con­ver­gence. Bre­it­bart, the favourite web­site of the US alt-right, fre­quent­ly prais­es Europe’s pro-Trump Iden­ti­tar­i­an move­ment.

    “The whole project is emblem­at­ic of an increas­ing­ly con­fi­dent inter­na­tion­al far right which is will­ing to hin­der life­sav­ing efforts to advance their xeno­pho­bic pol­i­tics,” said Mur­doch.

    ...

    ———-

    “Far right rais­es £50,000 to tar­get boats on refugee res­cue mis­sions in Med” by Mark Townsend; The Guardian; 06/03/2017

    “The mon­ey was raised through an anony­mous crowd­fund­ing cam­paign with an ini­tial goal of €50,000 (about £44,000) to pay for ships, trav­el costs and film equip­ment. On Sat­ur­day the group con­firmed they had reached their tar­get but were still accept­ing dona­tions. A French far-right group hired a boat for a tri­al run last month, dis­rupt­ing a search-and-res­cue ves­sel as it left the Sicil­ian port of Cata­nia. They claimed they had slowed the NGO ship until the Ital­ian coast­guard inter­vened.

    That’s the Iden­ti­tar­i­an move­ment for you: pro­tect­ing far-right ‘us vs them’ total­i­tar­i­an iden­ti­ties (that peo­ple with iden­ti­ty issues tend to grav­i­tate towards) by doing things like dis­rupt­ing search-and-res­cue mis­sions so more of ‘them’ drown at sea. Yes, Steve Ban­non must be oh so pleased.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | June 6, 2017, 2:45 pm
  7. With Angela Merkel’s CDU on track to trounce the SPD in the upcom­ing Ger­man fed­er­al elec­tions, it’s unfor­tu­nate­ly impor­tant to note the oth­er big win­ner as Ger­many con­tin­ues its right­ward shift: the AfD, set to be the third most pop­u­lar par­ty in Ger­many:

    The Wash­ing­ton Post

    Germany’s far right will soon join Par­lia­ment, and Par­lia­ment is angry

    By Bethany Allen-Ebrahimi­an
    Sep­tem­ber 16, 2017

    BERLIN — For the first time since the defeat of the Nazis in 1945, a far-right par­ty will soon have del­e­gates in the Ger­man Par­lia­ment.

    Found­ed in 2013, the Alter­na­tive for Ger­many par­ty, or AfD, rode a wave of anti-immi­grant sen­ti­ment to become the third-high­est-polling par­ty in the coun­try. Poll­sters say the par­ty should get more than enough votes in Germany’s par­lia­men­tary elec­tions this month to pass the 5 per­cent thresh­old required to send rep­re­sen­ta­tives to the Bun­destag, Germany’s low­er house.

    That has caused tremen­dous hand-wring­ing in a coun­try that takes the bur­den of its Nazi his­to­ry seri­ous­ly. Stick­ers that read “FCK AFD” are plas­tered to street signs and apart­ment build­ings across Berlin, and media cov­er­age hails cit­i­zens who take it upon them­selves to remove swastikas etched onto grimy walls.

    In the Bun­destag itself, the mood is much the same. There’s a strong feel­ing among law­mak­ers that peo­ple with even ten­u­ous ties to the Nazi Par­ty that gut­ted democ­ra­cy 85 years ago sim­ply don’t belong there.

    “I don’t know any­one in the Bun­destag among the staffers and the MPs who does not feel angry,” said one staff mem­ber from Chan­cel­lor Angela Merkel’s Chris­t­ian Demo­c­ra­t­ic Union, or CDU, who spoke on the con­di­tion of anonymi­ty because he was not autho­rized to speak to the press. The sen­ti­ment was unan­i­mous among the half-dozen staff mem­bers who spoke to The Wash­ing­ton Post, rep­re­sent­ing every par­ty cur­rent­ly seat­ed in Par­lia­ment.

    Law­mak­ers and their staffs have spent the past few months fig­ur­ing out how they might side­line the AfD once its mem­bers arrive, but doing so will be dif­fi­cult. Ger­man gov­er­nance is far too for­mal­ized — and rule-fol­low­ing per­haps far too ingrained — for such an effort to make much of a dent. But the search for even mar­gin­al ways to lim­it the AfD’s influ­ence shows the extent to which Par­lia­ment sees the new par­ty as a wor­ry, and even a poten­tial threat to Germany’s democ­ra­cy itself.

    “Nazis were elect­ed to the Reich­stag, too,” said the CDU staffer, refer­ring to the par­lia­ment of the Weimar Repub­lic. “They were treat­ed like a nor­mal par­ty until they under­mined any demo­c­ra­t­ic ideas in Ger­many.”

    Timo Lochoc­ki, an expert on right-wing pop­ulism at the Ger­man Mar­shall Fund, a Berlin-based think tank, believes those con­cerns are jus­ti­fied. Win­ning seats in Par­lia­ment will give the AfD an enor­mous plat­form to pro­mote and nor­mal­ize its mes­sage, along with access to mas­sive new resources and staff, which should help beef up its orga­ni­za­tion.

    “Europe should be con­cerned,” said Lochoc­ki. “The world should be con­cerned.”

    The most sig­nif­i­cant attempt so far to pre­emp­tive­ly block the AfD took place months ago. Par­lia­men­tary tra­di­tion grants the body’s old­est mem­ber the right to give the first speech of a new ses­sion. After the Sept. 24 elec­tions, that hon­or could fall to Wil­helm von Got­tberg, a 77-year-old AfD can­di­date who has pre­vi­ous­ly described the Holo­caust as an “effec­tive instru­ment for the crim­i­nal­iza­tion of Ger­mans and their his­to­ry.”

    The thought of von Got­tberg giv­ing one of the most-watched speech­es of the year sent a col­lec­tive shud­der through the Bun­destag, and Merkel’s gov­ern­ment pro­posed offer­ing the first speech to the longest-serv­ing mem­ber rather than the old­est. While she nev­er explic­it­ly stat­ed that the AfD was the tar­get of the rule change, the pur­pose was clear to AfD co-founder Alexan­der Gauland, who denounced the move as “trick­ery.”

    Oth­er strug­gles are tak­ing place fur­ther out of pub­lic view. The chair­man­ship of the Bundestag’s bud­get com­mit­tee, the most pow­er­ful in the cham­ber, tra­di­tion­al­ly goes to the leader of the oppo­si­tion — which could be the AfD this year. Accord­ing to Bild, the Ger­man tabloid, com­mit­tee mem­bers are con­tem­plat­ing reject­ing any AfD mem­ber for the chair­man­ship.

    And even the ques­tion of the party’s phys­i­cal loca­tion in Par­lia­ment has been con­tro­ver­sial. Par­ties sit in the Bun­destag cham­ber ordered from left to right accord­ing to where they fall on the polit­i­cal spec­trum. Fol­low­ing that tra­di­tion would place the AfD next to the ris­ers where Merkel’s min­is­ters sit, a promi­nent posi­tion in the cham­ber that cur­rent mem­bers don’t want the par­ty to occu­py. And, as child­ish as it may seem, no cur­rent sit­ting par­ty wants to sit next to the AfD, accord­ing to Bild.

    Ger­man think tanks, too, are won­der­ing how to respond to an influx of per­haps dozens of AfD politi­cians. “It is a tough ques­tion. We some­how have to find a way to deal with them and include them in our work,” said an employ­ee at the lead­ing think tank in Berlin, sigh­ing and look­ing weary. “But we wor­ry that that would legit­imize their plat­form even fur­ther.”

    ...
    ———-

    “Germany’s far right will soon join Par­lia­ment, and Par­lia­ment is angry” by Bethany Allen-Ebrahimi­an; The Wash­ing­ton Post; 09/16/2017

    “Timo Lochoc­ki, an expert on right-wing pop­ulism at the Ger­man Mar­shall Fund, a Berlin-based think tank, believes those con­cerns are jus­ti­fied. Win­ning seats in Par­lia­ment will give the AfD an enor­mous plat­form to pro­mote and nor­mal­ize its mes­sage, along with access to mas­sive new resources and staff, which should help beef up its orga­ni­za­tion.”

    But note how it’s not sim­ply seats in the Par­lia­ment that the AfD might win. If the CDU and SPD form a coali­tion gov­ern­ment that would make the AfD the lead­ing oppo­si­tion par­ty, with all sorts of perks:

    ...
    Oth­er strug­gles are tak­ing place fur­ther out of pub­lic view. The chair­man­ship of the Bundestag’s bud­get com­mit­tee, the most pow­er­ful in the cham­ber, tra­di­tion­al­ly goes to the leader of the oppo­si­tion — which could be the AfD this year. Accord­ing to Bild, the Ger­man tabloid, com­mit­tee mem­bers are con­tem­plat­ing reject­ing any AfD mem­ber for the chair­man­ship.
    ...

    And that’s not all. Thanks to a Par­lia­men­tary tra­di­tion that grants the body’s old­est mem­ber the right to give the first speech of a new ses­sion, that hon­or could go to a 77-year-old AfD can­di­date.

    ...
    The most sig­nif­i­cant attempt so far to pre­emp­tive­ly block the AfD took place months ago. Par­lia­men­tary tra­di­tion grants the body’s old­est mem­ber the right to give the first speech of a new ses­sion. After the Sept. 24 elec­tions, that hon­or could fall to Wil­helm von Got­tberg, a 77-year-old AfD can­di­date who has pre­vi­ous­ly described the Holo­caust as an “effec­tive instru­ment for the crim­i­nal­iza­tion of Ger­mans and their his­to­ry.”

    The thought of von Got­tberg giv­ing one of the most-watched speech­es of the year sent a col­lec­tive shud­der through the Bun­destag, and Merkel’s gov­ern­ment pro­posed offer­ing the first speech to the longest-serv­ing mem­ber rather than the old­est. While she nev­er explic­it­ly stat­ed that the AfD was the tar­get of the rule change, the pur­pose was clear to AfD co-founder Alexan­der Gauland, who denounced the move as “trick­ery.”
    ...

    And keep in mind that when AfD co-founder Alexan­der Gauland denounced the Par­lia­men­tary move to deny 77-year old AfD can­di­date Wil­helm von Got­tberg his right to the first speech, Gauland, at 76 years old, is pret­ty close to earn­ing that prize too. So Gauland is prob­a­bly extra sen­si­tive about the mat­ter. If von Got­tberg does­n’t win it’ll be Gouland the Par­lia­ment refus­es to allow to speak first, thanks to Gauland pub­licly say­ing things like how Ger­many should stop being ashamed of WWII and instead be proud of the Nazis’ mil­i­tary accom­plish­ments:

    Reuters

    Far-right par­ty likened to Nazis to shake up Ger­man par­lia­ment

    Michelle Mar­tin
    Sep­tem­ber 17, 2017 / 7:50 AM / Updat­ed

    FRANKFURT AN DER ODER, Ger­many (Reuters) — The first far-right par­ty set to enter Germany’s par­lia­ment for more than a half a cen­tu­ry says it will press for Chan­cel­lor Angela Merkel to be “severe­ly pun­ished” for open­ing the door to refugees and migrants.

    The Alter­na­tive for Ger­many (AfD), which has also called for Germany’s immi­gra­tion min­is­ter to be “dis­posed of” in Turkey where her par­ents come from, could become the third largest par­ty with up to 12 per­cent of the vote on Sept. 24, polls show.

    That is far less than sim­i­lar move­ments in oth­er Euro­pean coun­tries — in France far-right leader Marine Le Pen won 34 per­cent of the vote in May and in the Nether­lands far-right­ist Geert Wilders scored 13 per­cent in a March elec­tion.

    But the prospect of a par­ty that the for­eign min­is­ter has com­pared with the Nazis enter­ing the heart of Ger­man democ­ra­cy is unnerv­ing the oth­er par­ties. They all refuse to work with the AfD and no one wants to sit next to them in par­lia­ment.

    Lead­ing AfD can­di­date Alexan­der Gauland denies they are Nazis, say­ing oth­ers only use the term because of the party’s pop­u­lar­i­ty. It has won sup­port with calls for Ger­many to shut its bor­ders imme­di­ate­ly, intro­duce a min­i­mum quo­ta for depor­ta­tions and stop refugees bring­ing their fam­i­lies here.

    “We’re grad­u­al­ly becom­ing for­eign­ers in our own coun­try,” Gauland told an elec­tion ral­ly in the Pol­ish bor­der city of Frank­furt an der Oder.

    A song with the lyrics “we’ll bring hap­pi­ness back to your home­land” blared out of a blue cam­paign bus and the 76-year-old lawyer said Ger­many belonged to the Ger­mans, Islam had no place here and the migrant influx would make every­one worse off.

    Gauland pro­voked out­rage for say­ing at anoth­er event that Ger­mans should no longer be reproached with the Nazi past and they should take pride in what their sol­diers achieved dur­ing World War One and Two.

    The Nazis ruled Ger­many from 1933 to 1945, dur­ing which time they killed 6 mil­lion Jews in the Holo­caust and invad­ed coun­tries across Europe.

    The AfD could end up as the biggest oppo­si­tion force in the nation­al assem­bly if there is a re-run of the cur­rent coali­tion of Merkel’s con­ser­v­a­tives and Social Democ­rats (SPD) — one of the most like­ly sce­nar­ios.

    That would mean it would chair the pow­er­ful bud­get com­mit­tee and open the gen­er­al debate dur­ing bud­get con­sul­ta­tions, giv­ing promi­nence to its alter­na­tives to gov­ern­ment poli­cies.

    Georg Pazder­s­ki, a mem­ber of the AfD’s exec­u­tive board, told Reuters his par­ty would use par­lia­men­tary speech­es to draw atten­tion to the cost of the migrant cri­sis, trou­bles in the euro zone — which the AfD wants Ger­many to leave — and prob­lems relat­ed to the Euro­pean Union.

    “We’ll have a voice when we’re in par­lia­ment,” he said. “We won’t be an easy oppo­si­tion.”

    He expects oth­er par­ties will shun the AfD for a year or two but ulti­mate­ly work with it, point­ing to the region­al assem­bly in the east­ern state of Sax­ony-Anhalt, where the AfD and Merkel’s Chris­t­ian Democ­rats vot­ed to set up a com­mit­tee to inves­ti­gate left-wing extrem­ism.

    Gauland told Reuters the AfD would call for a com­mit­tee to inves­ti­gate the chan­cel­lor after enter­ing par­lia­ment: “We want Ms Merkel’s pol­i­cy of bring­ing 1 mil­lion peo­ple into this coun­try to be inves­ti­gat­ed and we want her to be severe­ly pun­ished for that.”

    (For an inter­ac­tive graph­ic on Ger­man elec­tions, click tmsnrt.rs/2h0NqCT)

    SUITS, NOT SKINHEADS

    MPs have already changed the qual­i­fi­ca­tion for the cer­e­mo­ni­al post of doyen of par­lia­ment to the longest-serv­ing MP rather than the old­est, like­ly to have been an AfD mem­ber.

    Sahra Wagenknecht, top can­di­date of the rad­i­cal Left par­ty, told Reuters it was impor­tant to look at indi­vid­u­als for com­mit­tees but added: “I won’t elect any AfD mem­ber who belongs to Bjo­ern Hoecke’s wing and who real­ly rep­re­sents Nazi views into any posi­tion of respon­si­bil­i­ty.”

    Hoecke has denied that Adolf Hitler was “absolute­ly evil”, described Berlin’s Holo­caust Memo­r­i­al as a “mon­u­ment of shame” and demand­ed a “180 degree turn­around” in the way Ger­many seeks to atone for Nazi crimes.

    The jus­tice min­is­ter said some of the AfD’s pro­gram like its demand to ban minarets is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al.

    Alexan­der Hensel, who stud­ied the AfD’s role in region­al par­lia­ments for the Otto Bren­ner Foun­da­tion, said debates in state assem­blies had become more polar­ized since the AfD arrived and some oth­er MPs would not shake hands with the new­com­ers.

    “The AfD’s aggres­sive right-wing posi­tions have inten­si­fied the debates while the tone and way peo­ple deal with each oth­er in par­lia­ment has become notice­ably rougher due to the AfD’s tough rhetoric and tar­get­ed provo­ca­tions,” he said.

    Unlike pre­vi­ous right-wing move­ments in Ger­many the AfD — found­ed in 2013 by an anti-euro group of aca­d­e­mics — has become social­ly accept­able so rad­i­cal­ized peo­ple from the mid­dle class feel able to vote for it along­side clas­sic rad­i­cal right-wing vot­ers, said Man­fred Guell­ner, head of For­sa polling insti­tute.

    “You don’t vote for skin­heads but you can vote for pro­fes­sors in suits,” said Guell­ner, refer­ring to the likes of Gauland, who tends to wear tweed jack­ets.

    ...

    ———-

    “Far-right par­ty likened to Nazis to shake up Ger­man par­lia­ment” by Michelle Mar­tin; Reuters; 09/17/2017

    “Gauland pro­voked out­rage for say­ing at anoth­er event that Ger­mans should no longer be reproached with the Nazi past and they should take pride in what their sol­diers achieved dur­ing World War One and Two.”

    Less shame and more pride in the Nazi war machine and its mil­i­tary con­quests. Those are the views of the 76 year old AfD co-founder Alexan­der Gauland who denounced the move to pre­vent 77 year old AfD can­di­date, Wil­helm von Got­tberg, from giv­ing the hon­orary first speech. So it’s look­ing like those hon­orary first speech­es are going to be an issue in the Bun­destag for the forsee­able future.

    But that does­n’t mean the ten­sions won’t even­tu­al­ly recede, accord­ing to AfD exec­u­tive board mem­ber Georg Pazder­s­ki. Just look as Sax­ony-Anhalt, where the AfD and CDU found some com­mon ground: inves­ti­gat­ing left-wing extrem­ism:

    ...
    Georg Pazder­s­ki, a mem­ber of the AfD’s exec­u­tive board, told Reuters his par­ty would use par­lia­men­tary speech­es to draw atten­tion to the cost of the migrant cri­sis, trou­bles in the euro zone — which the AfD wants Ger­many to leave — and prob­lems relat­ed to the Euro­pean Union.

    “We’ll have a voice when we’re in par­lia­ment,” he said. “We won’t be an easy oppo­si­tion.”

    He expects oth­er par­ties will shun the AfD for a year or two but ulti­mate­ly work with it, point­ing to the region­al assem­bly in the east­ern state of Sax­ony-Anhalt, where the AfD and Merkel’s Chris­t­ian Democ­rats vot­ed to set up a com­mit­tee to inves­ti­gate left-wing extrem­ism.
    ...

    So there we go: inves­ti­gat­ing mutu­al polit­i­cal ene­mies. That can be the com­mon ground that unites Germany...or at least unites the right. Although there’s at least one inves­ti­ga­tion the CDU isn’t going to be very inter­est­ed in

    ...
    Gauland told Reuters the AfD would call for a com­mit­tee to inves­ti­gate the chan­cel­lor after enter­ing par­lia­ment: “We want Ms Merkel’s pol­i­cy of bring­ing 1 mil­lion peo­ple into this coun­try to be inves­ti­gat­ed and we want her to be severe­ly pun­ished for that
    ...

    Yep, the AfD wants to inves­ti­gate and “severe­ly pun­ish” Angela Merkel for let­ting the Syr­i­an refugees in. Because dilut­ing the per­cent­age of eth­nic Ger­mans a bit in response to a human­i­tar­i­an emer­gency is the worst thing that you could do in the views of the AfD and irre­versibly dooms Ger­many to ‘white geno­cide’ or some­thing. But don’t call them Nazis. Even if one of their lead­ers referred to the gov­ern­ment as “pigs” who are “noth­ing oth­er than mar­i­onettes of the vic­to­ri­ous pow­ers of the sec­ond world war, whose task it is to keep down the Ger­man peo­ple”:

    The Guardian

    Ger­many’s rightwing AfD par­ty could lead oppo­si­tion after elec­tion

    Scan­dals have failed to dent pop­u­lar­i­ty of anti-immi­gra­tion AfD, which lat­est polls put in third place on 11% of the votes

    Philip Olter­mann in Berlin

    Sun­day 17 Sep­tem­ber 2017 12.07 EDT
    Last mod­i­fied on Sun­day 17 Sep­tem­ber 2017 17.00 EDT

    Rightwing pop­ulists could make up the biggest oppo­si­tion force in the next Ger­man par­lia­ment after a series of scan­dals appear to have gal­vanised rather than weak­ened the chances of the far-right in next Sunday’s elec­tion.

    The Euroscep­tic, anti-immi­gra­tion Alter­na­tive für Deutsch­land (AfD) par­ty has pulled up to third place in four of the last five polls con­duct­ed. A sur­vey pub­lished on Sun­day by the polling insti­tute Emnid in Bild am Son­ntag news­pa­per has the AfD on 11%, behind Angela Merkel’s Chris­t­ian Demo­c­ra­t­ic Union on 36% and the cen­tre-left SPD on 22%.

    Should Merkel and her main chal­lenger, Mar­tin Schulz, agree to con­tin­ue gov­ern­ing in a “grand coali­tion” between the two strongest par­ties, the AfD could lead the oppo­si­tion in the Bun­destag, a role that tra­di­tion­al­ly car­ries addi­tion­al priv­i­leges, such as the pres­i­den­cy of the parliament’s bud­get com­mit­tee.

    Accord­ing to a pro­jec­tion pub­lished last week by Berlin’s Tagesspiegel news­pa­per, the far-right par­ty could end up with as many of 89 out of 703 mem­bers in the Bun­destag.

    Found­ed in Feb­ru­ary 2013 by a group of econ­o­mists opposed to bailout pack­ages for ail­ing euro­zone mem­bers, the par­ty has tacked to the right after nar­row­ly fail­ing to clear the 5% hur­dle for par­lia­men­tary seats at the last elec­tion.

    The party’s prospects have looked promis­ing ahead of next Sunday’s fed­er­al elec­tions, in spite of its lead­er­ship duo hav­ing dom­i­nat­ed the head­lines in a series of scan­dals.

    ...

    A leaked email writ­ten by AfD’s co-leader, Alice Wei­del, mean­while, echoed the rhetoric of the rightwing extrem­ist Reichs­bürg­er move­ment, describ­ing the cur­rent gov­ern­ment as “pigs” who are “noth­ing oth­er than mar­i­onettes of the vic­to­ri­ous pow­ers of the sec­ond world war, whose task it is to keep down the Ger­man peo­ple”. Ini­tial­ly dis­missed as a fake by the AfD press team, Weidel’s lawyer no longer rejects the author­ship of the email.

    Wei­del, who rep­re­sents the AfD’s eco­nom­i­cal­ly lib­er­al wing and lives in a same-sex rela­tion­ship with a Sri Lankan-born part­ner in Switzer­land, was also accused last week by week­ly Die Zeit of pay­ing a Syr­i­an refugee under the table to work as a house­keep­er. Wei­del, whose par­ty wants to seal EU bor­ders and set up hold­ing camps for asy­lum seek­ers abroad, has reject­ed the accu­sa­tion.

    ———-

    “Ger­many’s rightwing AfD par­ty could lead oppo­si­tion after elec­tion” by Philip Olter­mann; The Guardian; 09/17/2017

    A leaked email writ­ten by AfD’s co-leader, Alice Wei­del, mean­while, echoed the rhetoric of the rightwing extrem­ist Reichs­bürg­er move­ment, describ­ing the cur­rent gov­ern­ment as “pigs” who are “noth­ing oth­er than mar­i­onettes of the vic­to­ri­ous pow­ers of the sec­ond world war, whose task it is to keep down the Ger­man peo­ple”. Ini­tial­ly dis­missed as a fake by the AfD press team, Weidel’s lawyer no longer rejects the author­ship of the email.”

    And the par­ty led by some­one who views the Ger­man gov­ern­ment as mar­i­onettes of the vic­to­ri­ous pow­ers of the sec­ond world war is poised to become the lead­ing oppo­si­tion par­ty in Ger­many.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | September 18, 2017, 1:00 pm
  8. Inter­est­ing, although not unpre­dictable:
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/09/20/meddling-germany-election-not-russia-but-u-s-right-wing/676142001/

    Less than a week before Sun­day’s vote that is like­ly to hand Ger­man Chan­cel­lor Angela Merkel a fourth term, evi­dence of antic­i­pat­ed Russ­ian med­dling has yet to mate­ri­al­ize, but U.S. right-wing groups have inter­fered, accord­ing to Ger­man researchers.

    Posted by Uncle Grody | September 20, 2017, 8:11 am
  9. Fol­low­ing the AfD’s cap­ture of 13 per­cent of the vote in Ger­many’s fed­er­al elec­tions on Sun­day (enough to get 93 seats in the Bun­destag), Alexan­der Gauland, the AfD leader who recent­ly pro­voked out­rage after sug­gest­ing that Ger­mans should no longer be reproached with the Nazi past and instead should take pride in what Ger­man sol­diers achieved dur­ing World War One and Two, appar­ent­ly decid­ed to troll Ger­many’s Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ty: Ger­many’s Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ty has noth­ing to fear, Gauland troll­ish­ly reas­sured the pub­lic the day after the AfD’s shock show­ing. It’s the kind of cru­el trolling one should expect from the far-right, both in terms of con­tent and mes­sen­ger.

    It was also the kind of trolling made more cru­el by the fact that AfD leader Frauke Petry left the AfD just hours after the elec­tion over its extrem­ism. Yep, the AfD is too extreme for one of its main pub­lic lead­ers, Frauke Petry (who is pret­ty damn extreme), after the par­ty refused to heed her calls for the AfD to reject the extrem­ist voic­es that cre­at­ed one “OMG, these guys are actu­al Nazis” con­tro­ver­sy after anoth­er for the par­ty in recent months. And right after the vote, when the AfD did far bet­ter than ini­tial­ly expect­ed, Petry announced that she would not be join­ing par­lia­ment as an AfD mem­ber. This was a day before Alexan­der “let’s be proud of the Nazis’ accom­plish­ments” Gauland told Ger­many’s Jews there was noth­ing to wor­ry about:

    Quartz

    The leader of Germany’s far-right par­ty quit hours after its elec­tion success—because it’s too rad­i­cal

    Jill Pet­zinger
    Sep­tem­ber 25, 2017

    Just hours after the hard-right Alter­na­tive for Ger­many (AfD) won its first-ever round of seats in the Ger­man par­lia­ment, its co-leader Frauke Petry told a press con­fer­ence in Berlin—with her new­ly-elect­ed col­leagues next to her—that she had decid­ed not to go into par­lia­ment with the par­ty. Then she got up and stormed out of the press con­fer­ence.

    “I think we should be open today that there is a dis­agree­ment over con­tent in the AfD and I think we shouldn’t hush this up,” said Petry.

    She said she want­ed to posi­tion her­self as an inde­pen­dent politi­cian and have a “con­ser­v­a­tive new start” but didn’t say whether she was found­ing a new par­ty. Lat­er, on her Face­book, she slammed the par­ty for the “shrill and far-out state­ments of sin­gle mem­bers” which dom­i­nate the view the pub­lic has of them.

    This doesn’t mean Petry is a mod­er­ate, she’s far from it. A mem­ber of the AfD since 2013, it was she who put the for­mer euroscep­tic par­ty on its new anti-immi­gra­tion plat­form dur­ing the height of the refugee cri­sis in 2015. She’s made numer­ous con­tro­ver­sial state­ments about refugees too, includ­ing that “Islam does not belong in Ger­many,” and say­ing that Ger­man bor­der police should be allowed to fire on migrants along the Aus­tria-Ger­man bor­der.

    Petry, who for some has been accept­able face of xeno­pho­bia, has been crit­i­cal of rad­i­cal state­ments made by oth­ers in the par­ty as she believed it made it less attrac­tive to mod­er­ate vot­ers as well as for poten­tial coali­tion part­ners when it would enter the Bun­destag for the first time.

    In a par­ty rid­dled with infight­ing, she was slammed by some mem­bers for not sup­port­ing com­ments made by an AfD leader in Thuringia state, who said Berlin’s holo­caust memo­r­i­al made the coun­try “laugh­able.” She also pub­licly crit­i­cized Gauland for say­ing Ger­many should be proud of what Ger­man sol­diers had achieved in two world wars.

    What now AfD?

    It is unlike­ly that Petry’s sud­den depar­ture will mean much for the par­ty, which many expect will strug­gle not only as a pari­ah in par­lia­ment, but also because it real­ly only has one core pol­i­cy issue—being against immi­gra­tion.

    “It is part of a pow­er strug­gle, in which she may hope that her steps will cre­ate more fric­tion in the par­ty,” Josef Jan­ning of the Euro­pean Coun­cil of For­eign Rela­tions told Quartz. “She may also hope to split the fac­tion and pull over some oth­er deputies.”

    ...

    While the now-93 new AfD mem­bers of par­lia­ment can raise a stink in oppo­si­tion, some polit­i­cal experts believe they won’t real­ly make much dif­fer­ence in Ger­man pol­i­tics. “No one will form a coali­tion with them. They’ll be exclud­ed. Their motions will be shot down,” said Oskar Nie­der­may­er, a pol­i­tics pro­fes­sor at the Free Uni­ver­si­ty of Berlin. “If they put for­ward rea­son­able motions that oth­er par­ties might agree with, they will be vot­ed down, and the oth­er par­ties will put for­ward slight­ly mod­i­fied motions.”

    No change in tone

    Alexan­der Gauland stuck to his inflam­ma­to­ry rhetoric at the party’s first post-elec­tion press con­fer­ence on Mon­day morn­ing. “One mil­lion peo­ple, for­eign­ers, being brought into this coun­try are tak­ing away a piece of this coun­try and we as AfD don’t want that,” Gauland said. “We don’t want to lose Ger­many to an inva­sion of for­eign­ers from a dif­fer­ent cul­ture.”

    It intends, Gauland said last night, to “hunt” Merkel, and “take back our coun­try and our peo­ple.”

    That xeno­pho­bic mes­sage res­onat­ed with 13% of those who vot­ed yes­ter­day: An ARD/ Infrat­est Dimap poll on why Ger­mans vot­ed for the AfD found that near­ly 70% of them were con­cerned about the fight against ter­ror­ism, and 60% were wor­ried about both crime and the influx of refugees.

    The AfD’s nation­al­is­tic mes­sage pro­pelled it to big wins in some for­mer East­ern Ger­man states—it was the biggest par­ty in Sax­ony. In for­mer GDR states, the AfD is in sec­ond place over­all, behind Angela Merkel’s Chris­t­ian Democ­rats.
    ———–

    “The leader of Germany’s far-right par­ty quit hours after its elec­tion success—because it’s too rad­i­cal” by Jill Pet­zinger;
    Quartz; 09/25/2017

    “Petry, who for some has been accept­able face of xeno­pho­bia, has been crit­i­cal of rad­i­cal state­ments made by oth­ers in the par­ty as she believed it made it less attrac­tive to mod­er­ate vot­ers as well as for poten­tial coali­tion part­ners when it would enter the Bun­destag for the first time.”

    Too extreme for its for­mer extrem­ist leader. That’s the lat­est twist to the AfDs rise. It’s also worth not­ing that the seat in the Bun­destag that Petry is giv­ing up is in Sax­ony where the AfD won the vote with 27 per­cent.

    But it’s also worth not­ing that Petry had been falling out with the rest of her par­ty for much of this year so this res­ig­na­tion is to be expect­ed to a large extent: She was hint­ing at resign­ing at the end March after the AfD dipped in the polls. Then she stepped aside as the AfD’s top can­di­date a few weeks lat­er after express­ing frus­tra­tion with a lack of coher­ent strat­e­gy and the par­ty’s fur­ther lurch­ing to the right. Alex Gauland got that slot instead. Petry sur­vived an coup attempt to kick her off the bal­lot in Sax­ony in July by AfD mem­bers accus­ing her of split­ting par­ty ranks (At the same con­fer­ence, the AfD’s leader in the east­ern Ger­man state of Thuringia, Björn Höcke, called for an end to Ger­many’s nation­al Holo­caust memo­r­i­al and the coun­try’s devo­tion to teach­ing its cit­i­zens about Nazi geno­cide). And to add insult to injury, back in August the Sax­ony branch of the AfD did­n’t even offi­cial­ly com­plain when Petry’s immu­ni­ty was lift­ed over charges she lied under oath about the AfD’s cam­paign financ­ing.

    So as we can see, the AfD grew too extrem­ist for Frauke Petry. The par­ty she used to lead ignored her warn­ings about turn­ing off mod­er­ate vot­ers and get­ting too extrem­ist, it side­lined her, and then the AfD exceed­ed expec­ta­tions with 13 per­cent of the in the final vote and win­ning Sax­ony out­right with 27 per­cent. It’s a rather wor­ri­some out­come.

    But don’t wor­ry. Alexan­der “Be proud of the Nazis accom­plish­ments” Gauland says there’s noth­ing to wor­ry about.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | September 25, 2017, 9:15 pm
  10. Kotle­ba is head of a Slo­va­kian Nazi Par­ty that is cam­paign­ing by tap­ping into the pub­lic anger. Although, not stat­ed in this sto­ry, the anger is fueled by right wing media out­lets spurring the anger with fas­cist pro­pa­gan­da. The best quote from the arti­cle is:

    “The par­ties like that are not look­ing for solu­tions, it’s all about protests,” Chme­lar said. “You can see it glob­al­ly. It’s the same with Don­ald Trump, it’s the same with (Marine) Le Pen in France. What’s impor­tant is to be against the sys­tem. They’re all rid­ing on a wave of pub­lic dis­sat­is­fac­tion that has been grow­ing.”

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/slovakia-far-right-peoples-party-embraces-nazi-past/

    AP Novem­ber 18, 2016, 9:52 AM
    Rise of proud­ly-neo-Nazi par­ty unnerves a Euro­pean nation

    The leader of the right wing LS-Nase Sloven­sko (Our Slo­va­kia) par­ty Mar­i­an Kotle­ba takes the oath of office on the Slo­vak Con­sti­tu­tion on March 23, 2016 in Bratisla­va dur­ing the first ses­sion of the par­lia­ment since the March 5 elec­tions.
    l
    BRATISLAVA, Slo­va­kia — The wave of far-right par­ties across Europe has been gath­er­ing steam from Greece to France, Aus­tria and Ger­many. While most of the continent’s extreme forces have tak­en pains to steer clear of Nazi imagery, Slovakia’s answer to the trend cel­e­brates it.

    Kotle­ba — The People’s Par­ty Our Slo­va­kia — won almost 10 per­cent of the seats in Par­lia­ment in March. It open­ly admires the Nazi pup­pet state which the coun­try was dur­ing the World War II.

    Par­ty mem­bers use Nazi salutes, blame Roma for crime in deprived areas, con­sid­er NATO a ter­ror group and want the coun­try out of the alliance and the Euro­pean Union.

    Euro­pean nations that could fol­low U.S. swing to the right
    The par­ty takes its name from its leader, Mar­i­an Kotle­ba, pre­vi­ous­ly chair­man of the banned neo-Nazi Slo­vak Togeth­er­ness-Nation­al Par­ty, which orga­nized anti-Roma ral­lies and admired Nazi rule in Slo­va­kia.

    Thou­sands have signed a peti­tion demand­ing that the par­ty be banned. Ana­lysts say the party’s pop­u­lar­i­ty could grow even fur­ther.

    Its sim­ple slo­gan — “With courage against the sys­tem!” — attracts young peo­ple fed up with cor­rup­tion and the inabil­i­ty of main­stream par­ties to deal effec­tive­ly with the post-com­mu­nist country’s prob­lems.

    In con­trast to most of Europe’s far-right groups, “it’s tru­ly neo-Nazi, it advo­cates the lega­cy of the Nazi war state,” says Eduard Chme­lar, a Slo­vak polit­i­cal ana­lyst.

    Miroslav Mares, an expert on extrem­ism from the Masaryk Uni­ver­si­ty in the Czech city of Brno, said the par­ty belongs to the “hard core of right-wing extrem­ism” in Europe. He said it has only some fea­tures sim­i­lar to Greece’s Gold­en Dawn par­ty and to Hungary’s Job­bik at its begin­ning.

    What they have in com­mon is tar­get­ing the main­stream pol­i­tics.

    “The par­ties like that are not look­ing for solu­tions, it’s all about protests,” Chme­lar said. “You can see it glob­al­ly. It’s the same with Don­ald Trump, it’s the same with (Marine) Le Pen in France. What’s impor­tant is to be against the sys­tem. They’re all rid­ing on a wave of pub­lic dis­sat­is­fac­tion that has been grow­ing.”

    These par­ties “com­mu­ni­cate and coop­er­ate with each oth­er, and that dra­mat­i­cal­ly changes the sit­u­a­tion in Europe, and that’s dan­ger­ous,” Chme­lar said. “So far, there’s no recipe to stop them.”

    Kotleba’s new par­ty made news by launch­ing patrols on trains in April in a reac­tion to a rob­bery blamed on a mem­ber of the Roma minor­i­ty. Par­lia­ment banned such activ­i­ties in Octo­ber.

    The par­ty has pro­posed leg­is­la­tion to label non-gov­ern­men­tal orga­ni­za­tions that receive fund­ing from abroad as for­eign agents, and is try­ing to get the 350,000 sig­na­tures need­ed to force nation­wide ref­er­en­dums on the country’s mem­ber­ship in NATO and the Euro­pean Union.

    “Among our major goals is above all a cre­ation of an inde­pen­dent and self-suf­fi­cient Slo­va­kia, that is Slo­va­kia which has an autonomous for­eign pol­i­cy that is not dic­tat­ed by any for­eign struc­ture, such as the Euro­pean Union,” Milan Uhrik, a deputy chair­man of the par­ty, told The Asso­ci­at­ed Press in a rare inter­view. Kotle­ba refus­es to talk to for­eign media, The AP was told.

    Speak­ing in the Par­lia­ment build­ing, Uhrik said the EU has been turn­ing into a super state with Brus­sels in pow­er. “What’s the worst is that EU leg­is­la­tion is above Slo­vak law,” he said.

    NATO is anoth­er tar­get.

    “It’s impor­tant for Slo­va­kia to leave NATO because we con­sid­er NATO a ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tion. It doesn’t bring peace to the world, quite the con­trary,” Uhrik said.

    “NATO is in fact a mil­i­tary orga­ni­za­tion of the Unit­ed States and we are mil­i­tar­i­ly sub­or­di­nat­ed to the Unit­ed States.”

    A cel­e­bra­tion of wartime Slo­va­kia remains par­tic­u­lar­ly con­tro­ver­sial, but Uhrik says it is not about fas­cism.

    “As nation­al­ists, we can­not reject the first inde­pen­dent Slo­vak state,” he argued. “We rec­og­nize the Slo­vak (war) state because it was the first Slo­vak state, not because it was a fas­cist state.”

    On Oct. 13, par­ty mem­bers cel­e­brat­ed the 129th anniver­sary of the birth of Jozef Tiso, a Catholic priest and politi­cian who was Slovakia’s war pres­i­dent. Dur­ing his rule, some 60,000 Slo­vak Jews were trans­port­ed to Nazi death camps. He was sen­tenced to death and hanged in 1947.

    Rights activists have sub­mit­ted a peti­tion with 20,000 sig­na­tures call­ing for the par­ty to be banned. Pros­e­cu­tors are review­ing that request.

    “Racism, xeno­pho­bia, anti-Semi­tism, Holo­caust denials and oth­er such things have no place in democ­ra­cy,” said Peter Weisen­bach­er from Bratislava’s Human Rights Insti­tute.

    Kotle­ba is not a new­com­er on Slovakia’s polit­i­cal scene.

    In 2013, he was elect­ed the head of a region­al gov­ern­ment, cam­paign­ing on a strong anti-Roma tick­et. He promised to have a recipe to solve prob­lems with the embat­tled minor­i­ty, call­ing its mem­bers “Gyp­sy par­a­sites.”

    He defeat­ed a can­di­date of the rul­ing left­ist Smer-Social Democ­ra­cy par­ty in a runoff vote despite that party’s chair­man, Prime Min­is­ter Robert Fico, claim­ing that “a bag of pota­toes” would beat Kotle­ba.

    “It was a shock for me when (Kotle­ba) won the region­al elec­tion,” said Ingrid Koso­va, a Roma activist. “I remem­ber peo­ple were call­ing me every day say­ing that they were ridiculed on the streets, they were not allowed to board bus­es, they were real­ly afraid. Lat­er on the sit­u­a­tion calmed down but until now they live with wor­ries and fears.”

    In a region hit by unem­ploy­ment around 15 per­cent, and over 25 per­cent in one coun­ty, Koso­va said Kotle­ba suc­ceed­ed in poor areas where the prob­lems with the Roma minor­i­ty are felt, and “which he mis­used to get to pow­er.”

    When the par­ty won seats in Par­lia­ment, “I was abroad in the Czech Repub­lic and I was con­sid­er­ing stay­ing there for good,” Koso­va said.

    Dur­ing the cel­e­bra­tion of the 70th anniver­sary of the Slo­vak Nation­al Upris­ing against the Nazi rule in 2014, with for­eign pres­i­dents and oth­er dig­ni­taries in the cen­tral city of Ban­s­ka Bystri­ca, the seat of Kotleba’s region, Kotle­ba was fly­ing a black flag from his office and unveiled ban­ners say­ing “Yan­kees go home!” and “Stop NATO!”

    The Upris­ing is con­sid­ered a defin­ing moment of the Slo­vak his­to­ry, and for most Slo­vaks a source of nation­al pride because they stood against the Nazi rule.

    Peter Gogo­la was may­or there at the time.

    “I can’t for­give him that,” Gogo­la said. “My grand­pa was forced to fight in the Hun­gar­i­an fas­cist army and died at Stal­in­grad. I can’t stand fas­cism.”

    Mar­tin Slosiarik, the head of Bratisla­va-based poll­ster Focus, said 70 per­cent of those who vot­ed for Kotle­ba are under 40. He said most of them vot­ed for him not because they would share his extrem­ist views but because he promised “to deal with the Roma and get rid of cor­rup­tion.”

    “They’ve learned how to work with the pub­lic opin­ion to cre­ate a pic­ture that they’re the only force ready to chal­lenge the cur­rent cor­rupt sys­tem,” Chme­lar said. He pre­dict­ed the par­ty could reach more than 10 per­cent of the pop­u­lar vote at the next elec­tion.

    Posted by Annonomous | January 5, 2018, 8:27 pm
  11. Well this should be inter­est­ing: the win­ners of Italy’s par­lia­men­tary elec­tions in March have had a hard time form­ing a coali­tion gov­ern­ment. So hard that Italy’s pres­i­dent was plan­ning on appoint­ing a tem­po­rary neu­tral gov­ern­ment and rehold­ing elec­tions lat­er this year. But it sounds like the top two par­ties in par­lia­ment might be on the verge of form­ing a gov­ern­ment.

    And while the poten­tial end to this kind of dead­lock might nor­mal­ly sound like rel­a­tive­ly good news for Italy, it becomes far less pos­i­tive when you learn which two par­ties are about to form Italy’s next gov­ern­ment: the ‘populist’-leaning, but still pro­to-fas­cist, 5‑Star Move­ment and the intense­ly xeno­pho­bic pro­to-fas­cist North­ern League (which now sim­ply goes by the “League”):

    Reuters

    Italy’s 5‑Star, League head for anti-sys­tem coali­tion after nine-week stale­mate

    Gavin Jones, Crispi­an Balmer
    May 9, 2018 / 7:30 AM

    Pres­i­dent Ser­gio Mattarel­la said he would hold off on plans to name a non-par­ti­san prime min­is­ter for 24 hours after the two par­ties told him they were hold­ing last-minute nego­ti­a­tions to try to clinch an elu­sive coali­tion deal.

    A cru­cial obsta­cle was removed late in the day when for­mer prime min­is­ter Sil­vio Berlus­coni, the League’s main ally, gave his green light to the talks, accept­ing a demand from 5‑Star that his Forza Italia par­ty take no part in the next gov­ern­ment.

    “It cer­tain­ly won’t be us who impos­es vetoes,” Berlus­coni said in a state­ment, adding that although he would not sup­port such a coali­tion in par­lia­ment, his part­ner­ship with the League would still con­tin­ue at a local lev­el.

    News that 5‑Star and the League were seek­ing a deal pushed the spread between Ital­ian bench­mark bond yields and the safer Ger­man equiv­a­lent to their widest lev­el in near­ly six weeks. Ital­ian shares were lit­tle changed.

    A March 4 vote end­ed in a hung par­lia­ment and repeat­ed efforts to end the impasse have failed. Frus­trat­ed by the stale­mate, Mattarel­la was set to nom­i­nate some­one from out­side the world of pol­i­tics to head a “neu­tral gov­ern­ment” and pre­pare the coun­try for ear­ly elec­tions, per­haps as soon as July.

    With the clock tick­ing, the lead­ers of 5‑Star and the League — the two largest groups in par­lia­ment — unex­pect­ed­ly met once more and indi­cat­ed they had made progress, but need­ed more time.

    “We are doing all we can,” said League leader Mat­teo Salvi­ni. Par­lia­men­tar­i­ans from both par­ties expressed opti­mism that the out­line of a pact would be in place by Thurs­day.

    5‑Star has repeat­ed­ly offered to form a gov­ern­ment with the League but on con­di­tion it broke free from Berlus­coni.

    Salvi­ni had refused to do this in the name of loy­al­ty to the cen­ter-right bloc, but he put grow­ing pres­sure on Berlus­coni to vol­un­tar­i­ly stand aside to allow him to forge ahead alone.

    5‑Star views the 81-year-old Berlus­coni, who has a con­vic­tion for tax fraud and is on tri­al for alleged­ly brib­ing wit­ness­es, as a sym­bol of polit­i­cal cor­rup­tion.

    ELECTION THREAT

    Loren­zo Codog­no, head of LC Macro Advi­sors and for­mer chief econ­o­mist at the Ital­ian trea­sury, warned that a 5‑Star and League gov­ern­ment would prob­a­bly trig­ger a mar­ket back­lash.

    “An anti-estab­lish­ment, anti-euro (though some­what watered down) and anti-aus­ter­i­ty gov­ern­ment would not bode well for Ital­ian finan­cial assets,” he said.

    Both par­ties want to rene­go­ti­ate the EU’s fis­cal rules to allow Italy to spend more. 5‑Star has rowed back on a pre­vi­ous pledge to hold a ref­er­en­dum on Italy’s mem­ber­ship of the euro zone, but the League still calls the euro a “flawed cur­ren­cy” and wants to exit it as soon as is polit­i­cal­ly fea­si­ble.

    5‑Star’s flag­ship pol­i­cy is uni­ver­sal income sup­port for the poor, while the League’s main cam­paign promise was a “flat tax” of 15 per­cent for indi­vid­u­als and com­pa­nies. Both poli­cies would be cost­ly for Italy’s strained pub­lic finances.

    A polit­i­cal source said Berlus­coni faced huge pres­sure from with­in his own par­ty to step back after polls sug­gest­ed sup­port for Forza Italia would crum­ble if there was an imme­di­ate re-vote.

    Even after Berlusconi’s retreat, gov­ern­ment talks between 5‑Star leader Lui­gi Di Maio and Salvi­ni will not be sim­ple.

    “We still need to talk about pro­grams, things to do, tax­es, labor, pen­sions, immi­gra­tion, school­ing,” Salvi­ni told reporters after meet­ing Di Maio.

    On Sun­day, the 31-year-old Di Maio with­drew his pre­vi­ous insis­tence that he should be prime min­is­ter, say­ing instead that he and Salvi­ni should pick a mutu­al­ly accept­able fig­ure.

    ...

    ———-

    “Italy’s 5‑Star, League head for anti-sys­tem coali­tion after nine-week stale­mate” by Gavin Jones, Crispi­an Balmer; Reuters; 05/09/2018

    “A March 4 vote end­ed in a hung par­lia­ment and repeat­ed efforts to end the impasse have failed. Frus­trat­ed by the stale­mate, Mattarel­la was set to nom­i­nate some­one from out­side the world of pol­i­tics to head a “neu­tral gov­ern­ment” and pre­pare the coun­try for ear­ly elec­tions, per­haps as soon as July.”

    A tem­po­rary “neu­tral gov­ern­ment” appeared to be what was in store for Italy due to the fact that the two largest groups in par­lia­ment — 5‑Star and the North­ern League — could­n’t come to an agree­ment on the terms of form­ing a new gov­ern­ment. It sounds like the inclu­sion of Sil­vio Belus­coni’s par­ty was the main stick­ing point. But then progress was unex­pect­ed­ly made, at least accord­ing to recent announce­ments:

    ...
    With the clock tick­ing, the lead­ers of 5‑Star and the League — the two largest groups in par­lia­ment — unex­pect­ed­ly met once more and indi­cat­ed they had made progress, but need­ed more time.

    “We are doing all we can,” said League leader Mat­teo Salvi­ni. Par­lia­men­tar­i­ans from both par­ties expressed opti­mism that the out­line of a pact would be in place by Thurs­day.

    5‑Star has repeat­ed­ly offered to form a gov­ern­ment with the League but on con­di­tion it broke free from Berlus­coni.

    Salvi­ni had refused to do this in the name of loy­al­ty to the cen­ter-right bloc, but he put grow­ing pres­sure on Berlus­coni to vol­un­tar­i­ly stand aside to allow him to forge ahead alone.

    5‑Star views the 81-year-old Berlus­coni, who has a con­vic­tion for tax fraud and is on tri­al for alleged­ly brib­ing wit­ness­es, as a sym­bol of polit­i­cal cor­rup­tion.
    ...

    So what should we expect if they do suc­ceed in form­ing a gov­ern­ment? Well, both par­ties want to rene­go­ti­ate the EU’s fis­cal rules, which would actu­al­ly be a great thing for the EU in gen­er­al if they suc­ceed­ed. And both par­ties have expressed inter­est in pulling Italy out of the euro­zone, which is unlike­ly to hap­pen but cer­tain­ly an under­stand­able sen­ti­ment giv­en the deep flaws in how the euro­zone is designed (a shared cur­ren­cy with­out a shar­ing of the bur­dens that come with shar­ing a cur­ren­cy and seem­ing­ly design to ben­e­fit the export-ori­ent­ed economies). And both par­ties have embrace the anti-immi­grant sen­ti­ments that have gripped Italy’s elec­torate, so we should prob­a­bly expect a num­ber of laws tar­get­ing immi­grants.

    But beyond that, it sounds like 5‑Star and the Norther League have deeply con­flict­ed pol­i­cy agen­das. Where 5‑Star wants uni­ver­sal income sup­port for the poor, the Norther League wants a flat tax:

    ...
    Loren­zo Codog­no, head of LC Macro Advi­sors and for­mer chief econ­o­mist at the Ital­ian trea­sury, warned that a 5‑Star and League gov­ern­ment would prob­a­bly trig­ger a mar­ket back­lash.

    “An anti-estab­lish­ment, anti-euro (though some­what watered down) and anti-aus­ter­i­ty gov­ern­ment would not bode well for Ital­ian finan­cial assets,” he said.

    Both par­ties want to rene­go­ti­ate the EU’s fis­cal rules to allow Italy to spend more. 5‑Star has rowed back on a pre­vi­ous pledge to hold a ref­er­en­dum on Italy’s mem­ber­ship of the euro zone, but the League still calls the euro a “flawed cur­ren­cy” and wants to exit it as soon as is polit­i­cal­ly fea­si­ble.

    5‑Star’s flag­ship pol­i­cy is uni­ver­sal income sup­port for the poor, while the League’s main cam­paign promise was a “flat tax” of 15 per­cent for indi­vid­u­als and com­pa­nies. Both poli­cies would be cost­ly for Italy’s strained pub­lic finances.

    A polit­i­cal source said Berlus­coni faced huge pres­sure from with­in his own par­ty to step back after polls sug­gest­ed sup­port for Forza Italia would crum­ble if there was an imme­di­ate re-vote.

    Even after Berlusconi’s retreat, gov­ern­ment talks between 5‑Star leader Lui­gi Di Maio and Salvi­ni will not be sim­ple.

    “We still need to talk about pro­grams, things to do, tax­es, labor, pen­sions, immi­gra­tion, school­ing,” Salvi­ni told reporters after meet­ing Di Maio.

    On Sun­day, the 31-year-old Di Maio with­drew his pre­vi­ous insis­tence that he should be prime min­is­ter, say­ing instead that he and Salvi­ni should pick a mutu­al­ly accept­able fig­ure.
    ...

    We’ll see if they do indeed suc­ceed in form­ing a gov­ern­ment over the next few days. But if they do, keep in mind that, of all the areas where 5 Star and the North­ern League agree (on the EU poli­cies, the euro­zone, and anti-immi­gra­tion), the anti-immi­grant poli­cies will prob­a­bly be the eas­i­est for them to imple­ment since that’s some­thing Italy can poten­tial­ly do on its own. In oth­er words, if they do form this gov­ern­ment, it’s going to be a dark time for Italy’s immi­grants. Or, rather, a dark­er time for Italy’s immi­grants.

    Posted by Pterrafractyl | May 10, 2018, 1:58 pm

Post a comment

Recommended Reading

Family of Secrets Family of Secrets The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, and What Their Influence Means for America Read more »