Just How Dangerous Is Europe’s Rising Far Right?
Anti-immigration parties with fascist roots — and an
uncertain commitment to democracy — are now mainstream.
Roger Cohen
By Roger
Cohen
Roger
Cohen, who has worked at The New York Times for over three decades, reported
from Paris and eastern France.
May 5, 2024
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/05/world/europe/europe-far-right.html
Jordan
Bardella, 28, is the new face of the far right in France. Measured, clean-cut
and raised in the hardscrabble northern suburbs of Paris, he laces his speeches
with references to Victor Hugo and believes that “no country succeeds by
denying or being ashamed of itself.”
That
phrase, at a recent rally in the eastern town of Montbéliard, brought a chorus
of “Jordan! Jordan!” from a crowd that had lined up for hours to see him. Cries
of “Patrie” — homeland — filled the hall. Bardellamania is in the air.
Mr.
Bardella, the son of Italian immigrants and a college dropout who joined the
National Front party (now National Rally) at 16, is the protégé of Marine Le
Pen, the perennial hard-right French presidential candidate. Moderate in tone
if not content, he is also the personification of the normalization — or
banalization — of a party once seen as a quasi-fascist threat to the Republic.
Across
Europe, the far right is becoming the right, absent any compelling message from
traditional conservative parties. If “far” suggests outlier, it has become a
misnomer. Not only have the parties of an anti-immigrant right surged, they
have seen the barriers that once kept them out crumble as they are absorbed
into the arc of Western democracies.
In Italy,
Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who has political roots in a neo-fascist party,
now leads Italy’s most right-wing government since Mussolini. In Sweden, the
center-right government depends on the fast-growing Sweden Democrats, another
party with neo-Nazi origins, for its parliamentary majority. In the
Netherlands, Geert Wilders, who has called Moroccan immigrants “scum,” won
national elections in November at the head of his Party for Freedom, and
center-right parties there have agreed to negotiate with him to form a
governing coalition.
In France,
Mr. Bardella, as president of the National Rally, is leading his party’s
campaign for the elections in June to the European Parliament, a relatively
powerless institution, but one still important for being the only directly
elected body with representatives from all European Union countries.
Precisely
because the Parliament is relatively weak, the election is closely watched as a
measure of uninhibited popular sentiment, where voters register their
discontent with potentially powerful downstream effects on national politics.
This year
the far-right surge across the continent looks dramatic. The latest polls show
the National Rally with a clear lead, set to take some 31 percent of the vote
in France compared with about 16 percent for the centrist Renaissance coalition
of President Emmanuel Macron. Mr. Bardella is the only politician among
France’s 50 “favorite personalities,” according to a recent ranking in the
Journal du Dimanche newspaper.
The result
is that anti-immigrant parties may win as many as a quarter of the seats in the
720-seat European Parliament. This could lead to a hardening of immigration
regulations Europewide, hostility to environmental reform, and pressure to be
more amenable to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.
For France,
it means that a party that is nationalist, xenophobic and Islamophobic may well
emerge reinforced — accepted, legitimized and eminently electable to high
office in a way that would have been unthinkable even a decade ago.
France used
to call its barrier to the hard right “la digue,” or the dam. The floodgates
are now open in France, but also beyond. Mr. Macron’s successor in 2027 — he is
term limited — may well come from a party whose founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen,
called the Holocaust a “detail” of history.
Could this
resurgence of parties with fascist roots really overturn European freedom and
democracy? The optimistic view is that they are no more than pale descendants
of history’s tyrants, constrained by the existence of a European Union that was
created to guarantee peace among its members. That is a lulling view. The
language of these parties may be less incandescent than former President Donald
J. Trump’s invocations of “bloodshed,” but as they whip up support by
scapegoating immigrants, and even move to lock in systems that could perpetuate
their power, the threat to the postwar order seems real enough.
Not a Monolith
Historical
lessons, it seems, fade after three generations. Warnings of the disasters that
engulfed 20th-century Europe under fascist governments tend not to resonate
with 21st-century supporters of xenophobic nationalist movements that have none
of the militarism of fascism, nor the personality cults of its dictatorial
leaders, but are fed by hatred of “the other” and jingoistic hymns to national
glory.
Europe’s
collective cataclysm between 1914 and 1945 seems like ancient history to many
people, even if the blood shed in the trenches of Ukraine summons images of
that time. “You can no longer rely on saying, ‘This is evil, because look what
happened in the fascist past,’” said Nathalie Tocci, a leading Italian
political scientist. “You have to have an argument for why those ideas are bad
today.”
The
post-fascist or fascist-lite European right of today is not monolithic. At the
most menacing end of the spectrum stands the Alternative for Germany party,
founded in 2013 and now polling as high as 20 percent. It contains about 10,000
extremists, according to the country’s domestic intelligence service. Plans for
mass deportation of immigrants and even a plot to overthrow the government have
been linked to it.
The
National Rally in France began life in 1972 as the National Front, the creation
of Mr. Le Pen, who described the United States as a “mongrel nation” and the
Nazi-puppet Vichy regime in France as not “especially inhumane.”
As for Ms.
Meloni, she got her start in the postwar Italian Social Movement, founded in
1946 by Mussolini supporters bent on defending the legacy of fascism. It had
violent strands into the 1970s, but it eventually folded and its leaders broke
off to start new more moderate parties, though still proud of their lineage.
The symbol of the Brothers of Italy is a tricolor flame, previously used by a
neo-fascist party, and its hostility to immigrants remains firm.
The path to
power, or the brink of it, by the far right has been a long one. Over the
almost 80-year arc of the postwar period, the once-dominant center-left and
center-right — represented in France by the Socialists and the Gaullists, and
in Germany by the Social Democrats and the Christian Democrats — have seen the
foundations of their support (labor unions for the left and the church for the
right) gradually erode.
This
accelerated with globalization after the end of the Cold War and the onset of
atomization with the arrival of the smartphone (that prodigious generator of
status anxiety), leading to more unequal, more polarized, more fretful
societies. The political commons shrank. The definition of truth wobbled.
Parliaments and parties grew more marginal as political heft shifted to social
media.
Increasingly,
with major ideological disputes over the place of the state in the economy
settled, moderate right and moderate left began to feel indistinguishable to
many people. They had no answers to mass migration. The working class, long the
cornerstone of socialism in Europe, migrated en masse to the anti-immigrant
right as an expression of frustration at growing inequality and stagnant
paychecks.
The core
confrontation in Western societies is no longer over internal issues. It is
global vs. national, the connected living in the “somewhere” of the knowledge
economy vs. the forgotten living “nowhere” in industrial wastelands and rural
areas. There lies the frustration, even fury, on which a Trump, a Meloni, a
Wilders, a Le Pen could build.
Progressive
changes in social mores have offered a new rhetorical weapon to these leaders.
For them, as for Mr. Putin, it has been easy to present a simplistic portrayal
of the West of liberal urban elites as the decadent locus of cultural suicide,
the place where family, church, nation and traditional notions of marriage and
gender go to die.
“There is a
disproportionate sense of disappointment in our societies,” Thomas Bagger, the
state secretary of the German Foreign Office told me. “We lost our trust that
we had figured out the long arc of history and that it bends toward democracy.
Russia lost its idea of the future, and Putin turned to the past. We are in
danger of falling into the same trap.”
Normalized, but Still Extreme
The hard
right in Europe has moderated and prepared itself to govern. It has abandoned
calls to leave the European Union — the disaster of Brexit made sure of that —
and to leave the shared euro currency. It has toned down, but not eliminated,
outright racism, even if Islamophobia lurks everywhere.
Mass
immigration — some 5.1 million immigrants entered the European Union in 2022,
more than double the number the previous year — is the core issue behind the
changing nature of the right in Europe. It is widely resented, particularly
because aging populations have put enormous financial pressure on the cherished
social safety nets that they, and previous generations, have long paid into.
Overlooked are the benefits that immigrants can bring to societies with
shrinking labor forces and tax bases. Instead the focus is on migrants
benefiting from handouts.
“We have to
make our country less attractive to a form of immigration that sees us as a
social cash machine,” Mr. Bardella said. “The vocation of France is not to
support all the world’s misery! Social assistance and child benefits must be
reserved for French citizens.”
Quiet-spoken
and methodical, he is no demagogue. But in its last election program in 2022,
the National Rally called for a referendum to amend France’s Constitution. One
proposed new article read: “Foreigners must respect France’s identity and way
of life, and not engage in political activity contrary to national interests.
Their presence must not constitute an unreasonable burden on public finances
and the social welfare system. Family reunification of foreigners may be
prohibited or limited.”
The program
also envisaged the expulsion of undocumented immigrants. “Because they are
sovereign, and the only sovereign, the French people have the right to make
decisions considered necessary to remain themselves,” it said.
Another
serious question that looms over these movements is this: If elected, would
such parties ever leave office?
Prime
Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, who has been in power for a total of 18 years
and is an ally of Mr. Trump, has established a template for the new right.
Demonize migrants and neutralize an independent judiciary. Subjugate much of
the news media. Create loyal new elites through crony capitalism. Energize a
national narrative of victimhood and heroism through the manipulation of
historical memory. Claim that the “people’s will” overrides constitutional
checks and balances.
The upshot
is a form of European single-party rule that retains a veneer of democracy
while skewing the contest sufficiently to ensure that it is likely to yield
only one result.
In Italy,
Ms. Meloni has proposed a constitutional change that would automatically give
the party with the highest number of votes (right now her Brothers of Italy) 55
percent of the seats in Parliament. She says it would make Italian governments
more stable, but her opponents fear that it could also create opportunities for
a future autocrat.
Following
the Orban playbook would face strong constitutional pushback in France, with
its fierce attachment to freedom and human rights as embodied in the 1789
Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. But if the National Rally
controlled the presidency and Parliament, all bets would be off.
“The
normalization of the right does not necessarily make it less extreme,” said Ms.
Tocci, the Italian political scientist. “If constraints loosen, perhaps with
the return of Trump as president in November, Meloni will be more than happy to
show her true face. If Trump and Orban agree to force Ukraine to surrender, she
will not think twice.”
That said,
the right’s ascendancy is not universal, uniform or assured. Poland, through a
protest movement, led the liberation of Europe from the Soviet imperium,
culminating with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Last year, in a November
election, Poland ousted its nationalist governing party, Law and Justice, which
had led an assault on the rule of law. The party had also propagated xenophobic
hatred, portrayed the country as eternal victim and distanced Poland from the
European Union.
“Poles
said, ‘We have a more positive vision to put in the place of a dark view of
human and national life,’” Mr. Bagger, the German state secretary, said. “They
pulled themselves back from the brink.”
Underestimating
the resourcefulness and resilience of democracies is always dangerous. But so,
too, is discounting the unimaginable. As Mr. Bardella’s beloved Victor Hugo
wrote, “Nothing is more imminent than the impossible.”
Roger Cohen
is the Paris Bureau chief for The Times, covering France and beyond. He has
reported on wars in Lebanon, Bosnia and Ukraine, and between Israel and Gaza,
in more than four decades as a journalist. At The Times, he has been a
correspondent, foreign editor and columnist. More about
Roger Cohen
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário