The far right in Europe, something to worry about?

[MrFancypants]

Originally Posted by Akula971

You misunderstand the term national socialist . I'm a socialist at heart, I believe in the collective ownership of key industries and utilities that a country should have. The nationalist part is that I believe that the government in power should put the interests (not just financial) of its people (the people who they represent) FIRST, above those of corporations, foreign nationals or countries. Today government is conducted in the interests of the "vested" interests, eg corporations, multinationals, and globalist agenda's which at heart are pure capitalism and have no regard for the individual or their rights in ANY country, as their only god is profit.
I am not against a market and market forces, but it must have clear boundaries.

Ah ok, I thought you are talking about fascism.

Originally Posted by Akula971

I disagree with you. Europe has never had a tradition of liberal democracies in any form. The continent has been plagued with dictatorships for centuries, plunging Europe into centuries of war. Napoleon, The Kaiser, Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, all home grown in that strong liberal tradition (you are f**king joking, are you not?)
It has usually fallen on other countries to rescue Europe from its own problems, with the British Empire, then the Americans having to step in to rid Europe of its many dictators.
And the biggest joke of all. The EU. Why have so many little regimes that sought to have control over Europe through war, when you can have one giant mechanistic bureaucracy that does it so much better.

Western Europe created such a tradition in the last decades. Even Spain, the last country to overcome extremist right-wing ideology in Europe, has now a rather liberal population.
This is perhaps little in comparison to the centuries of feudialism we had before that, but it is better than nothing and will make a possible right-winged dictatorship less likely.

Not sure why you think the EU is something evil, it is far from perfect, but it is also the only way smaller European countries can compete with giants like the US, Russia or China in the future.

[*SW3D3*]

Originally Posted by Relander

*SWEDE*: isn't that rather simplistic to blame just the immigrants about the condition of Swedish economy? In addition to administrative methods & politics, have you taken into account different exports & imports of countries, emphasizes at national budget, corporations, amount of national debt etc? Even if the immigrants would cause so big drain of money (how about bums, indifferent & lazy people, "work is poverty" idealists etc?), it's not just them to blame but the whole structure of Swedish social security network, in the end the Social Democrats.

Yes I agree that it is a one way lane I have brought up. I do believe however, that the large masses if immigrants that has come to Sweden is a mayor problem for both the Swedish economy and Swedish tolerance. The so called Swedish tolerance is something that politicians in Sweden love to bring up.
The funny thing is, I've haven't seen it for almost 10 years now. It was pretty clear by the end of the 1990's that the so called tolerance among the regular people was dead.
But back to the question, is it fair to blame immigrants to 100%?
Of course not, as you say, the politics that the Social Democrats have ruled Sweden for almost a 100 years, except for a few years, is to blame aswell. When Sweden decided to become a "wealth fare" state (with free healthcare etc), they had made tons of money from the war and and was still making tons of money, since Swedish industry wasn't in ruins like the rest of the industries in Europe were.
The "new" system costed a lot of money, both to build up and to maintain. In the mid 80's it was clear that Sweden didn't have any money left. They started to take loans to be able to maintain the "best health care in the world". The gigantic economy crash came in 1992. Sweden's national debt raised from 600 billion SEK in 1990 to 1500 billion SEK in 1995. In the year of 1999, it was up to almost 1700 billion SEK, and today it's 1270 billion SEK (source: Riksgäldskontoret - www.rgk.se)
The biggest problem, as you mentioned is the Social Democrats and their denial of that anything is wrong. And their denial has costed Sweden many thousand billions of Crowns.

Originally Posted by Relander

The Alliance led by Fredrik Reinfeldt brought the issue into the table in the elections of last Autumn, system which isn't just expensive but also ineffective & passivating. The government employs hundreds of thousands of people by trick employment policies: getting people from job course to other, state's support employment, transferring people to live out from state benefit and so on.

Yes back to the denial, Mr. Reinfeldt, has other issues that he's denying being a problem, so I don't trust him particular much.

Originally Posted by Relander

Sweden has failed in its integration policies and it has taken too many immigrants too quickly. Though we must take into account the conditions where the immigrants arrive: new country with different culture, habits, language and perhaps with no proper training or work experience and with little money. Attitudes of employers and Swedish nationals doesn't make the situation any easier. However I agree that the government should take tougher stance on crimes committed by immigrants and when the situation in the home country has become peaceful, it should be possible to return the immigrants back to their home country.

The problem here, as we mentioned, to many in to short time. Sweden didn't have any integration policy until quite late in the 1990's. Sweden did however have assimilation instead. Which IMO was better, the immigrants who came there, they were to be adapted to the Swedish society, and not the Swedish society adapting after them, as the case is with integration.
Attitudes among "regular" people have always been fairly negative towards immigrants in Sweden, atleast that is my general understanding.
This of course includes employers aswell. If you're name isn't Scandinavian/north/west European, you will have a VERY hard time to find a proper job. If you're dark, they will exclude you right away, if your Swedish isn't 110% tiptop, you will be excluded aswell.
This is indeed a matter of attitudes. But as things are today, I have a hard time visualising that it would change.

Originally Posted by Relander

I'm worried about the rise of the far right in Europe. Sure some people are tired on traditional major parties but aren't there other than extremist parties to give your vote for or other means to express dissatisfaction? At least for me the answer is yes. Europe had its time of far right extremists and it didn't end up that well.

Well I particular felt I wanted to answer this part.
Most governments in north/western Europe tried to avoid to talk about the "immigration" problems as long as possible.
Well due to their passivity (the established parties), the right wing is coming strong. They have done all they could to exclude them from the public debate, that includes control media by telling them not to write with to big headlines when an immigrant has committed a horrible crime etc.
IMO they (the established parties) have only them selves to blame. If they realized the problem earlier, the right wing wouldn't been marching again.

[MrFancypants]

Originally Posted by *SW3D3*

Well I particular felt I wanted to answer this part.
Most governments in north/western Europe tried to avoid to talk about the "immigration" problems as long as possible.
Well due to their passivity (the established parties), the right wing is coming strong. They have done all they could to exclude them from the public debate, that includes control media by telling them not to write with to big headlines when an immigrant has committed a horrible crime etc.
IMO they (the established parties) have only them selves to blame. If they realized the problem earlier, the right wing wouldn't been marching again.

You are right that the large parties have themselves to blame, but why don't they want to talk about immigration-problems?
I think because it is a two-sided blade. If you allow immigration you'll get problems with those that refuse to integrate themselves which eventually costs a lot of money. If you don't allow immigration your population will decrease which ultimately might result in breaking up of the rental system.

The difference is that larger parties can afford analysts who make predictions what kind of immigration-level is needed to keep the economy going while small extremist parties just act out of xenophobia.

[Akula971]

I group the Neo Nazi in with the left wing like the communist party, they are wishing for the return of ideas that are old, have been proven to be wrong. Politically they are going nowhere. They might get a small percentage of the vote, but that is all they will ever get, and remain on the fringes of mainstream politics. Here in the UK we have the BNP, which seems to have transformed itself over the last five years, just as the Labour party transformed itself into new Labour, they both bear no resemblance to their original form. Labour is more of a thatcherite party than ever before, the opposition conservatives are on shaky ground as new labour have used all of their policies. What new labour fear now is that the people moving towards the BNP are not right wing ex conservatives, but their working class foundation vote. So here in the UK, we have two main parties that most people are hard pressed to tell the difference between them. When confronted by the same old issues of crime, law and order, the economy, foreign relations, they both trot out the same solutions each time, no of which work. People want to see harsh action taken on crime and immigration, and will vote for people that promise to give it too them.

On crime. The vast majority of the population wish to see a return to capital punishment. The main parties say no = disillusioned electorate.
On immigration. Most people would say stop now, we are full. The main parties, anxious not to offend anyone say no = disillusioned electorate.
The list could go on....

btw. Most of us here in the UK do not consider ourselves part of Europe, we are off the coast of Europe, the joy of being an Island!

[Karst]

We Austrians know this problem only too well. One of the four major parties here is the FPÖ ("Freedom Party), a party that has its roots in the German National party from the 19th century. After WW2, most important Nazi figures that weren't imprisoned joined this party, and although most of the original generation Nazis are dead, the younger party members are often easily as bad.
The entire agenda they advertised is based on cutting immigration and taking away immigrant's rights, their rascist posters have already caused a minor scandal. Now pictures of the party leader playing Nazi as a youngster are appearing....now surprises there.
What's really sad about these people is that they are not a negligable minority, but the third/fourth most powerful party.

[Akula971]

People just love law and order

[Afterburner]

Mind defining "far right" for us non-Europeans? Are we talking Nazi-party type stuff? Or are your "far right" our moderates or something like that?

[Relander]

Originally Posted by Akula971

People just love law and order

Though unluckily some people don't understand that too keen attitude towards "law and order" eventually leads to some totally different.

Originally Posted by Afterburner

Mind defining "far right" for us non-Europeans? Are we talking Nazi-party type stuff? Or are your "far right" our moderates or something like that?

European far right is consisted from parties which are generally deeply nationalist, prefer law & order and are against immigration, foreigners, EU & Nato (including neo-nazis) and usually use means of political populism to get support (appealing directly to people & their emotions rather than factual information or common sense, make big promises etc).

What's your opinion about the far right in Europe? How are the things in the USA regarding the far right, does it form any kind of threat?

[MrFancypants]

Originally Posted by Afterburner

Mind defining "far right" for us non-Europeans? Are we talking Nazi-party type stuff? Or are your "far right" our moderates or something like that?

Depends, in Germany the far right is bascially the political branch of illegal neo-nazi organizations. In other countries "far right" is similar to American conservatism, only more extreme in some cases.

[Afterburner]

Originally Posted by Relander

What's your opinion about the far right in Europe? How are the things in the USA regarding the far right, does it form any kind of threat?

Originally Posted by MrFancypants

Depends, in Germany the far right is bascially the political branch of illegal neo-nazi organizations. In other countries "far right" is similar to American conservatism, only more extreme in some cases.

Well in the U.S. the "far right" really doesn't exist in any appreciable form, except maybe one or two republicans who happen to get elected. You have to remember that the U.S. is a two party system, and both parties are pretty damn close to being on a centerline between left and right. Almost nobody wants socialism, and almost nobody wants some ultra-national overly powerful government.

Nazis aren't really a threat because no one takes them seriously over here. They are the target of jokes and ridicule and have absolutely no power in any form.

I don't know if it is the same thing in Europe. I personally have no fear of any radical power taking power in the U.S. anytime within my lifetime. Of course though, they do have the right to form a political party and put forward their ideas. But what about the REALLY radical parties like Nazis and others who promote murder, racism or violence? Should these parties even be allowed? Isn't a party that promotes violence just as bad as a person who makes a violent threat? Shouldn't they be treated the same way?