oyvindstrommen.be traktningar

Hear the political upholders
how they pray, those beggars, for an extra vote!
Soon they’ll fold again,
nod and flipflop in the parliament!
They’ll catch each other’s fleas again,
and the Lion(1) will let itself be caged
by the guild of politics.
the red ones, the yellow and the blue
the black ones too
do nothing but yawning
tame, submissive, bent

(Ward Hermans, Flemish nationalist writer, 1979)(2)

As Stanley G. Payne points out in his «A History of Fascism 1914-1945»(3), fascism ‘remains probably the vaguest of the major political terms. This may stem from the fact that the word itself contains no explicit political reference, however abstract, as do democracy, liberalism, socialism and communism. To say that the Italian fascio means ‘bundle’ or ‘union’ does not tell us much’.

From there, Payne goes on trying to find a working definition. He writes of the ideology and goals of fascism, which include «an esposular of an idealist, vitalist and voluntaristic philosophy, normally involving the attempt to realize a new modern, self-determined, and secular culture», the idea of creating «a new nationalist authoritarian state not based on traditional principles or models», a positive evaluation of and use of, or willingness to use, violence and war, and the goal of empire, expansion, or a radical change in a nationa’s relationship with other powers. Further, Payne writes, fascism is anticonservative, anticommunist and antiliberal, has an extreme stress on the masculine principle and on male dominance and a tendency towards an authoritarian, charismatic, personal style of command, whether or not the command is to some degree initially elective.

The Maltese Imperium Europa, for instance, fits nicely into that definition. But there is a problem with it. It lets some fascists off the hook.

Much of the material available on the fascist ideology, and much of the research done, does however have much the same focus as Payne’s book, studying fascism in the time period from the beginning of World War I to the end of World War II. But fascism did in no way die with Hitler in his bunker. It wasn’t buried with the fall of the Third Reich. It continued to evolve and to develop. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it must be a duck, the proverb goes. But today’s ducks aren’t necessarily obsessed with male dominance, and they might even call themselves liberals or conservatives. In many cases the dreams of empire building has also faded away, being replaced by inwardly-looking politics strongly opposed to the foreign.

This is also the reason I have chosen to use Eurofascism as a term, for instance in this article. Those who focus on the fascism of Mussolini’s Italy will of course see fascism as a European movement from the begin with, and the same thing applies for those who see fascism in a wider, but historically limited, context: including for instance the Nazi party in Germany, Hungary’s Arrow Cross Movement, Romania’s Iron Guard and Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists.

In truth, however, fascism has spread across the world. In Turkey, for instance, the ultra-nationalist Bozkurtlar(4) drew inspiration from the Italian fascist Giovannia Gentile’s and his «Actual Idealism»-theory. The group, formally named Ülkucu Hareket, or the Idealist Movement, played a role in the 1980 military coup in the country. The group supports the idea of a great Turkish empire referred to as Turan, in effect a gathering of all Turkic peoples in one nation state(5).

In the United States, fascism comes in a variety of forms, including the American Nazi Party, various offshoots of the Ku Klux Klan, the National Socialist Movement, a number of skinhead groups, etc. Seemingly more mainstream gruops, such as the Liberty Lobby, has also been part of the neo-fascist movement in America, and so has the Institute for Historical Review, which – while describing itself as a «public interest educational, research and publishing center dedicated to promoting greater public awareness of history, and especially socially-politically relevant aspects of twentieth century history» is little but a gathering place for Holocaust deniars of various form and shape.

In South Africa, there is also a rather noticeable neo-fascist scene even today, and with ties back to the early days of the apartheid regime. As World War II broke out there was a short-lasting, but heated discussion in South Africa on whether the country should join the war at all. Although constitutionally obligated to join the British side, the anti-British prime minister Barry Hertzog, also known as the father of apartheid, wanted to keep South Africa out of the war. Eventually Hertzog’s old rival, the pro-British Jan Smuts pulled the longest straw. Hertzog was ousted as prime minister and Smuts took over, declaring South Africa officially at war with Germany.

Pro-German sentiments were strong amongst the Boers, though. The nationalist and pro-Nazi Afrikaner movement Ossewabrandwag(6) had approximately 350.000 members by 1941(7), and had become increasingly militaristic, also creating a paramilitary subgroup referred to as the Stormjaers. The Stormjaers were modelled on the Nazi Brown Shirts, and carried out sabotage within South Africa as a protest against the pro-British government of Smuts. Members of the organisation were rounded up and placed in camp. Amongst them was the Stormjaers ‘general’ B.J Vorster and P.W Botha, both of them future prime ministers of the country.

The government of B.J. Vorster (1966-78) was, however, also to be criticised by Boer extremists. A group calling itself the Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging(8), saw the government as «too left-wing», rallied against softening of the apartheid laws. The group survives to recent day. In the wake of apartheid it clashed violently with South African police in the socalled Battle of Ventersdorp 9. August 1991(9).

On its website, it describes itself as «fearless, Christian and unashaedly nationalistic [...] the new rightist – antithesis to the ANC – battlement for its people – bulwark against liberalism, Marxism and communism». The group has also been publishing a newsletter called Storm. In a 2002 issue of the newsletter it is speculated in whether Jews were involved in the 911 terror attacks:

The American Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), belives that Israeli intelligence could be responsible for or deeply involved in the tragedy of the World Trade Centre of the 11th September 2001. This is according to an American journalist, Jim Galloway, whose article was printed in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and The Austin American-Statement 25. November 2005. Of the 1.100 foreigners that have been arrested by the FBI in connection with the 11. September slaughter, close to a hundred are Jews (10).

An interesting, but little-reported, part of the story of the AWB involves also European neo-fascist movements. According to Martin A. Lee(11), there was «extensive contact between German neo-Nazis who had fought in Croatia and members of the Afrikaner Resistance Movement». Flemish nationalists were also reputedly involved in weapon transactions meant for the AWB(12).

Fascism also spread to other non-European countries. In Latin America it has been represented by groups such as the Falange Socialista Boliviana – a party founded in the 1930s and initially close to Spanish falangism – or the more recent Partido del Nuevo Triunfo(13) in Argentina. In Iran, the party Hezb-e Sosialist-e Melli-ye Kargaran-e Iran14 was founded in 1952. The party looked to the works of José Ortega y Gasset for inspiration, as well as to Hitler, and built up a minor support base in Iranian universities. However, the party soon disappeared. In recent years, the Iranian Nazi party has surfaced again on the Internet, featuring anti-American and anti-Semitic symbolism and claiming to be «relentless enemies of Arabs and Muslims», «extremely anti-Arab». According to the party, «all the races possess some capabilities; but, from amongst them the White Race, especially the superior Aryan Race, have characteristics that others lack»(15).

When studying many of these movements from across the world, one thing becomes fairly obvious. Many of these movements are openly Nazi, even including «National Socialist» or «Nazi» in their official names. Others use symbols that are easily recognisable and often very similar to the symbols of the German NSDAP. The National Front of New Zealand uses the Hitler Salute and quite openly endorses classical Nazi viewpoints.

There are – of course – a number of groups in Europe that do the same, such as the Norwegian Odinist Nazi group Vigrid which is openly enthusiastic about the Waffen SS and also publishes much of Adolf Hitler’s artwork on their webpage. As the climate of European politics these groups have to a certain degree been gaining support, but they remain miniscule and sometimes pariodical. They are not Eurofascists.

The Eurofascist parties are not openly supporting neither fascism as an ideology nor calling themselves «fascist» or «Nazi». And Eurofascism also differs notably from the fascism of the 1930s. First of all, its agenda is not revolutionary, at least not openly so. Eurofascism very often operates under the guise of conservatism.

The Brussels Journal – a web newspaper which has published articles portraying Muslim immigration as «the rape of Europe»(16) and Turkish voters in the Netherlands as a «Trojan horse»(17) – is for instance often seen as a «conservative» voice. The webzine itself claims to «defend freedom» and to «strive to acquire as much knowledge as possible by presenting facts and views that are hard to find in the ‘consensus-media’ of Europe». Its contributors allegedly «all write with an earnest desire for the truth» and what binds them together is their «defence of liberty and the conviction that the state exists to serve man and never the other way round»(18). One of its contributors is a celebrity Islamophobe writing under the name Fjordman, and with him the hint of revolutionary politics is not always very far away. On his own blog he writes:

When I look at Europe today, I see democracies under threat because of an elaborate Eurabian bureaucracy and Islamic fanaticism. I see countries unwilling or unable to defend themselves against massive immigration/colonization, and the possible dawn of neo-barbarism. Has democracy become too soft to function?‘(19)

In an article called «How the West Was Lost», published in the Brussels Journal he writes:

The democratic states of the West are losing the ability to protect their citizenry, and are in some cases turning into enemies of their own people. That is a situation that cannot and will not last forever(20).

He goes on to say that if this is allowed to continue, it might have consequences «most of us» would not like to contemplate.

Another difference is the fact that Eurofascism does not rely on physical violence and campaign of gross intimidation to obtain power and suppress opposition. That does not mean that violence has never been taken in use by people in the Eurofascist parties, and it definitely does not explain away general xenophobic violence coming in the wake of this modern fascism. And still, Eurofascist parties will have an extreme focus on «law and order» and «safety».

Even more importantly is the fact that Eurofascist parties, in spite of having historical and current ties to everything from pro-apartheid movements and Holocaust deniers to neo-nazi groups, WWII collaborators and pre-WWII fascist parties will not describe himself as a fascist. If someone else did so, he would probably be offended – or he would use it as another means for attacking the «politically correct», who are afraid to be confronted by «truth». A Eurofascist calls himself a «nationalist», or a «national democrat». The Eurofascist political parties will also refer to the nation, either by including that very word or by including the name of the country or national group in question: Vlaams Belang, Sverigedemokraterna, Dansk Folkeparti, Front National, Alleanza Nacionale, España 2000, Nationaldemokraterna, British National Party, Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschland etc.

However, there are some very obvious similarities between Eurofascism and classical fascism, too. It wraps itself in the flag, and believes in the primacy of the group represented by that flag, whether French, British, Flemish or Swedish. It also sees its own group as a victim of internal and external enemies alike. It dreads the group’s decline under the corrosive effect of alien influences. Eurofascism, like classical fascism, brands it opponents as traitors or cowards, and it usually scorns intellectuals, academics and artists. Eurofascism is hostile to leftist and labour movements, and is often obsessed with a mythic «better time» of the past.

In many ways, Eurofascism has much in common with classical fascism. But clad in a suit and a tie, and in the robes of conservatism, it has become much more likely to gain broad acceptance within stable democratic countries.

—–

Comments are welcome on email oyvindstrommen at gmail dot com.
—–

^Footnotes:

^{1. A reference to the Lion in the Flemish flag.}

^{2. Quoted in Spruyt, Marc: «Wat het Vlaams Blok verzwijgt», 2000. Translated to English by the author – the original in Flemish is as follows: Hoor de politieke pooiers! / Hoor ze bedelen, de schooiers, om en voorkeurstem! / Straks dan staan ze weer te plooien / te knikken en te flikkeflooien in het parlement / Vangen weer malkanders vlooien,/ En de Leeuw… die laat zich kooien / door de politieke bent; / Roje, gele, blauwe leeuwen, / Zwarte ook, doen niets dan geeuwen, / tam, gedwee, getemd.}

^{3. Payne, Stanley G: «A History of Fascism 1914-1945», 1996}

^{4. Grey Wolves.}

^{5. Interestingly, the Bozkurtlar is said to have ties to both the Turkish mafia, Turkish intelligence services and the CIA, as well as to the CIA-backed Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations, a coalition also involving erstwhile fascist collaborators from Eastern Europe. See for instance Martin Lee: «Les liaisons dangereuses de la police turque», Le Monde Diplomatique, March 1997, available here: http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1997/03/LEE/8019.html}

^{6. The Brigade of Oxwagon Sentinels}

^{7. According to africanhistory.about.com}

^{8. The Afrikaner Resistance Movement}

^{9. Ventersdorp was a stronghold for the AWB and the home town of its leader, Eugene Terre’Blanche. When then state president F. W. De klerk was to speak at the town hall, armed AWB members confronted police lines. In the ensuing violence, a passerby and three AWB supporters were killed.}

^{10. Storm, Feb-Mrt, 2002. Translated from Afrikaans by the author. This example, incidentally, also demonstrates the blatant anti-Semitism of many of the conspiracy theories surrounding 911.}

^{11. Lee, Martin A: «The beast reawakens», 1997}

^{12. Weapons were supposedly transferred in a pub in Roeselare, Belgium, 12. March 1994, were – amongst others – the Flemish nationalist Roger Spinnewijn was present. The Belgian police did look into the matter, and found no evidence for illegal trade in weapons. Spinnewijn was however convicted for the illegal possession of weapon. In connection with the case he was also arrested in Germany, but shortly thereafter released again. The socialist parliamentarian Patrick Hostekint asked minister of Justice, Stefaan de Clerck, about this case in a hearing in the Belgian Senate, 14. December 1995.}

^{13. The New Triumph Party. This party had «Una Nación, Un Pueblo, Un Lider» as slogan, and was banned in 2004, by a federal judge who stated that their identification with the Hitler regime was unconstitutional. The party subsequently went underground.}

^{14. Iran National-Socialist Workers Party. There was also a Nazi party in Iran in the early years of the war, Kabud. This party was outlawed in 1941.}

^{15. Quotes from sumka.blogfa.com}

^{16. «The Rape of Europe», 25. October 2006}

^{17. «Trojan Horse: Ankara Influenced Dutch Election Results», 8. December 2006. The story tells of how a politician from the social liberal party D66 got elected thanks to a considerable number of individual votes. She is of Turkish background, but is hardly what the newspaper describes as «a Trojan horse[s] of foreign nationalism and religious fanaticism».}

^{18. From the About-section of brusselsjournal.com}

^{19. Anon ‘Fjordman’: «The West in the 21st century»}

^{20. Anon ‘Fjordman’: «How the West Was Lost», 4. December 2006}

From salon.com:

On Nov. 28 — six days before the Times ran its photos of Padilla — Demetrius “Van” Crocker was sentenced to 30 years in prison. David Kustoff, the United States Attorney for the Western District of Tennessee, where Crocker was prosecuted, tells Salon that “It was one of the preeminent anti-terrorism cases of 2006 nationwide.” Whether or not that is true, few outside of the greater Memphis metropolitan area have ever heard of Crocker. Only one reporter, John Branston of the weekly Memphis Flyer, even covered his entire trial. What is certain is that in every particular his case is a study in contrasts with the prosecution of Jose Padilla.

Previous post covering a similar topic:
White Terrorism Overlooked

^{A poster of the Polish neo-fascist party ‘National Rebirth of Poland’. This marginal party received 0.64% in the recent regional elections, and represents a quite recognisable form of fascism. But Eurofascism does not always look like that, more often it dresses in a suit and tie.}

An article in Newsweek, quoting a Taliban source, says that two Norwegian citizens have been trained by al Qa’eda. – Their task is to function as organisers for al Qa’eda in their homeland, a former Taliban intelligence chief told the magazine. It could be tempting to interpret his words as a propaganda effort, but I won’t. It is in no way impossible that people amongst Norway’s Muslim minority have found an ideological home in radical Islamism. Experiences from other European countries show that kids growing up in Western European countries have joined up with organisations that could be described as Islamofascist, and the terror attacks in Madrid and London were indeed conducted by such recruits to holy war.

Time to face the facts

But it is time to face the facts. Young radical Muslims are not the most significant modern-day anti-modernist group in Europe today. Even if attracted to terrorist groups, their potential at destroying the democratic fabric of Europe is limited, and worst of it all: these youngsters do in no way represent the largest challenge that Europe will have to face as a result of a growing number of immigrants. In other words, the focus of both the media and of the authorities is very often very wrong. Instead of worrying about Islamofascism, European politicians should worry about not-so-good, old-fashioned European fascism, which increasingly makes it presence known in a number of European countries. Groups on the socalled far right use the onesidedness of the media to their advantage; and are gaining a momentum. The spokesmen of fascism are once again being listened to as wise and daring voices, voices who speak out against the «occupation» of Europe by «strangers».

The modern-day fascists come in all kinds of clothing, some of them dressing like liberals and some of them like conservatives. Many modern-day fascists will deny being so. But fascism is not as easy to recognise as in «V for Vendetta», not in most cases. European fascists have learnt to dress themselves in the robes of political correctness, that is – in a suit and with a tie. This is what Eurofascism looks like, and it even appeals to people who are not fascists at all. You will find both misguided conservatives and confused liberals joining forces with the descendants of brownshirts. Pointing out who they are hanging out with is sometimes contraproductive. The role of the martyr fits these people well.

From failed coup to close victory

Still, it is necessary to know the past of a number of the anti-immigrationist parties that are winning forth around Europe these days. Take the Italian Social Movement, Movimento Sociale Italiano, which was founded shortly after the war by veterans of Mussolini’s last-gasp Saló Republic. That party’s honorary leader was admiral Junio Valerio Borghese. In 1970, he had to flee Italy after an attempted coup on the night of 7-8. December. The attempted coup, referred to as Golpe Borghese, was planned and executed by a number of neo-fascists with the support of members of the Italian military, police and secret service.

What did Borghese do? He went to Spain, still ruled by the fascists under Franco. There he met up with an old friend named Otto Skorzeny. Skorzeny was the man personally selected by Hitler to lead the operation to free the captured Mussolini in 1943. He was a former Nazi officer. But he was also very much still a believer. Those who do not see fascism there, are probably quite blind. And yet, not more than a couple of decades later, in 1993, a representative for the same political party, Gianfranco Fini, ran for election as mayor of Rome. He came very close to winning, gaining 47 per cent of the votes. His big break was yet to come, soon he was to forge an alliance with Silvio Berlusconi, to start calling himself a post-fascist and to transform his party into the National Alliance. Fini, who in 1992 described Mussolini as «the greatest statesman of the century», went on to become deputy prime minister and foreign minister of Italy. Fini has surely become more moderate and probably have realised some of his earlier mistakes. His party is however still riddled with militants.

Why worry?

So, why should I be more worried about this than about Islamofascism, you might ask. There are a number of reasons. First of all, many of the smaller groups that exist in the wake of the neo-fascist wave flushing through Europe are perfectly capable of both violence and terrorism. It might not get the same attention as Islamist terrorism, but the terror of the socalled far right is already killing people. In August, for example, a bomb blast killed eleven (12, according to some sources) people at a multi-ethnic market in Moscow. Two young Russians were arrested, and admitted to targeting the market because of its largely Asian workforce.

“The explosion at Cherkizovo is the start of a campaign of street terrorism”, Dmitry Demushkin of the group Slavic Union told the newspaper Kommersant.

A second reason to be worried is the increased political importance of neo-fascist political parties. In Flanders, Vlaams Belang have gained a quarter of the votes. In France, Front National’s Jean Marie Le-Pen qualified for the second round in presidential elections, and will try doing that again. In Bulgaria, Volen Siderov of Ataka also qualified for the presidential election runoffs. In England, the British National Party is gaining support. In Germany, the Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands.

Some of these parties are decidely more mainstream than others, and few of them are as obviously fascist as for instance the Maltese Imperium Europa or the Polish Narodowe Odrodzenie Polski. But in spite of having had limited success in their direct grasp for power, several of the above parties have had some political success. They have managed to change European politics in a more intolerant and more xenophobic direction. That xenophobia even targets other Europeans, like the Bulgarian and Romanian workers that are wanted as cheap labour in their homecountries, but not as a new face in the apartment building around the corner in Luton.

More than ripples

In the Muslim world, Islamofascism is very much capable of creating mayhem and might potentially topple governments. While only ripples are likely to be felt in Europe, even ripples of the large-scale political violence of today’s Iraq can be very bloody. Eurofascism, on the other hand, has the potential of changing Europe fundamentally, and might ultimately lead to both the fall of liberal democracy and to ethnic cleansing and war.

Worth reading in connection with the below:

hjorthen (Norwegian): Hvit terrorisme
hjorthen (Norwegian): Medier dyrker religionskrig
The Phoenix: Quiet warfare

The facts should speak for themselves. Two men were arrested last month with an array of bomb-making components and weapons. A rocket launcher was found, though some reports indicate more than one, as was a biological suit and chemicals that could be used to make bombs. Surely this warranted front-page news? Actually no.

In an article in Searchlight Magazine, Nick Lowles looks at how possible plans for terrorism did not make the frontpages. And there is something odd about how little attention the arrests of Robert Cottage (49) and David Jackson (62) have gotten in the media.

In Cottage’s house, some 22 chemical components were discovered. At Jackson’s house a rocket launcher and a biological suit were found, as well as what in other cases might have been described as radical or extremist literature. In this case the literature came from the party mr. Cottage recently ran for election for: the neo-fascist British National Party.

I can not say whether plans for terror even existed, although I have some problems imagining legitimate reasons to stock up on chemical explosives and rocket launchers. It would have been interesting to know, though, whether the news stories would have been limited to this kind if the arrested men were named Muhammed and Said rather than Robert and David?

Would the story of a man “the largest amount of chemical explosives of its type ever found in the country” then have been extensively covered even in other newspapers than the Burnley Citizen?

Alex Harrowell, A Fistful of Euros writes on the upcoming French elections, and – of course – on [Jean-Marie Le Pen]:

A few years ago, it was fashionable for the same liberal-hawk types to worry about the rise of the same politicians on the grounds that they were dangerous anti-semitic swine. Now, we are asked to believe that everyone else is anti-semitic, traitorous, etc and that they are heroic strugglers for Western civilisation. Which happens to be what they think themselves to be. Whether it is wise to take quasi-fascists at their own self-evaluation is left as an exercise to the reader.

Worth checking out in this connection: Jean-Marie Le Pen and the National Front, Jewish Anti-Defamation League

A wreath left by the British National Party at a war memorial has anger churchgoers and war veterans, reports icCroydon. On Sunday, British National Party members laid poppies after a Remembrance service at St Mary’s Church in Addington Village Road. The message on the wreath read: “To those who fell for our race and nation to keep Britain British we will never forget them. Croydon BNP.”

Michael Lyons, 73, chairman of the New Addington branch of the Royal British Legion and veteran of the Suez conflict in 1956, described the message as inflammatory and disgusting. Councillor Brenda Kirby (Labour) said: “Anybody who wants to commemorate those who died has the right, but you can’t pick out a section of them. Thinking our fathers and grandfathers died only to keep Britain white is the most insulting and obscene thing”.

“My dad did not get captured in Calais and force-marched to Poland to keep Britain white. He was fighting for his country and freedom for the world. It was a world war.”

Vincent Reynouard has been arrested in France, charged of denying the Holocaust. While it is doubtful that this is an effective way to fight holocaust denial, the arrest might shed some light on the activities of the group Vision historique objective (Vision of Objective History). The group, which principally aims to deny the Holocaust, is the French-speaking branch of the Flemish group Vrij Historisch Onderzoek. A leader of the Flemish VHO, Siegfried Verbeke, was also arrested on the 14 November in Kortrijk (Courtrai). He was released one day later.

Verbeke was a founding member of Vlaams Blok (now: Vlaams Belang). Together with Roeland Raes, a former senator for the party, he edited the magazine Haro, a magazine “for the concervative revolution”, notorious for its denial of Holocaust, which it described as “fiction and manipulation of the historical realities” kept in place by “the censorship of the democrats”.

Onkel Henning læser avis (Uncle Henning reads the newspaper) is one of the more interesting Danish blogs around. In a recent post Henning Holm comments on an article in Information. Henning makes some points that deserve a much wider audience than the Danish or Scandinavia blog readers, and I warned him that I would steal some of his points for use on this English-language blog.

The article in Information was a critical response from Frederik Stjernfeldt on Swedish journalist Stefan Jonsson’s analysis of the Danish debate on immigration. Jonsson’s main point was that the Danes have become obsessed with Islam. Stjernfeldt writes:

“The false understanding of constant cultural essences has become one of the premisses of the debate”. This is one of the critical comments on the Danish debate from Stefan Jonsson. Here, I think he is completely correct. Of course, it concerns Islam, and the idea of Islam as a constant cultural essence it thriving both on the right-wing – where Islam is routinely seen as a culture with no hope for improvement, quickly associated with terrorism – and on the left-wing – where Islam is, just as routinely, seen as made up by poor, innocent victims alone, people whose picturesque culture must be protected.

Many on the left would not like to admit it, but this description is more than a caricature. Some left-wingers are drawn from their (often justified) criticism against Western powers (i.e. the United States) to support of anyone who fights against these same powers. Those who struggle against the perceived “imperialist hegemony” are then automatically understood as having noble intentions, simply because they are the enemy of the enemy. In this way, the West is made into an essence and understood as necessarily ‘evil’.

When right-wingers ask ‘do you want Saddam back, then?’ they are mostly discussing against strawmen built by themselves. But amongst that army of strawmen, some real people on the left have also found refugee. Henning Holm mentions Carsten Kofoed. I could think of others, too.

Another aspect, which I see as more important, is the fact that many of Europe’s progressive left-wing parties have shun away from discussing problems surrounding immigration and immigrant communities. Some feminist groups are quick to protest against the opening of a new sex store, connecting sex stores with the porn industry, but are slow to fight against brutal suppression of immigrant women. Some left-wingers, and people on the liberal right, are quick to criticise Christian homophobia, but slow to criticise Muslim homophobia. Seen in that light, the growth of various populist right and even neo-fascist parties is not difficult to explain. They are seen as the only one standing up for Western values; when in fact, they oppose central tenets of a Western democracy.

But then, how should the left wing and the liberal right address these problems? I have stolen Henning Holm’s list and slightly adopted it:

1. Fight against stupid anti-Americanism based on monolithic thinking, just as you would fight against stupid Islamophobia based on the same.

2. Do not set lower standards for immigrants or minorities than for anyone else. This is racism reverted. If someone is spouting Jew-hatred or homophobia, they should be confronted, regardless of their ethnic, cultural or religious background. Also, do not excuse someone’s despicable actions or attitudes because they are in agreement with you on other areas.

3. Do not let the socalled far right define the debate. Opposition to stricter rules on family reunions is not the same as support of forced marriages. Confronting the views of the far right is good, but critique coupled with alternative suggestions to solve actual problems is better.

4. The “big debate” on Islam should be modularised. It is pointless to discuss the Taliban in the same context as youth crime in European ghettos, and stupid to discuss female genital mutilation in the same setting as the Iraq war. The main challenges of integration have little to do with 1960s Egyptian radicalism and even less to do with Ottoman policy in Southern Bulgaria.

5. The debate should be deislamified. The problem with forced marriages is not that they take place in Islamic cultures, but that people are married against their will. The problem with female genital mutilation is not that the tradition is practiced in some Muslim countries, but that the tradition is practiced at all. The problem with al Qa’ida is not that they pray to Allah, but that they are involved in terrorism. These problems should be seen in the most relevant context(s), which often does not include the religious one.

A reader has responded to my post Fisking Mark Steyn and since the response both has little to do with Mark Steyn and is very interesting as a point for further discussion, I have decided to reply in a separate post. I will respond to his post part by part, but let me begin with one of his main points, namely that parties promoting xenophobia are on the rise across Europe because the left has somehow failed.

I am not sure I agree with Iblis, as my reader calls himself, in how the left has failed. I am, however, in full agreement with him in the notion that the left – and for that matter the liberal right – has failed. European integration policies are not extremely successful, and this is the case for a number of reasons. Also, feminist groups, left-wing and right-wing alike have failed to raise to raise the role of women in immigrant communities. I have written quite extensively on this at earlier occassions, in between what Iblis describes as my “whining on the internet”. One example is my article, “Our own madness” where the reluctance of the left to address some central issues is one of my central points.

The (still short) FAQ-section of this page also should serve to give a better understanding of my point-of-view.

Then for my response to Iblis, who writes:

You seem dedicated to “expose the renaissance of hatred”. Exposing racism is a noble cause indeed, if there really is any racism to be exposed. If rising fascism in Europe is a problem, the first step in contering the problem should be to find the causes of the problem, not whine on the internet as you do.

One might say the same thing about another problem, namely the perceived rise of Islamic fundamentalism in Europe. If this is indeed a problem, the first step in countering the problem should be to find the causes of the problem, not whine on the Internet as quite a number of people, including Iblis himself with his blog “Right Wing Revolution”, does. Sadly, the far right seems totally incapable of understanding the root causes of for instance the rebelling youth of mostly immigrant background in France. It does not with a lack of understanding. People who do point out central root causes, and the obvious similarities to for instance the Watts riots, are consistently being ridiculed.

In other words: Iblis should apply the same standards towards what many refer to as Islamic fascism (and perhaps rightly so) as he wants me to apply towards what I refer to as fascists. To quote Starship Troopers: “If you want to kill the bug, you have to understand the bug”.

Personally, I believe the best understanding of the problems France do face and will face comes from people like Fadela Amara who speaks out against both what she refers to as “green fascism”, and against the blatant racism of the far right. If people like Iblis were really concerned about for instance Islamic radicalism or criminal immigrant youth; they would ally with Amara. Of course, that’s difficult for them; she is of immigrant background and she is a Muslim. As Iblis clearly demonstrates in the rest of his comment, that makes her part of the problem, not part of the solution.

That kind of thinking is not fascist in itself. But when it comes from political parties with provable historical ties to fascist politicians, movements and parties, such as the British National Party, the French Front National or the Flemish Vlaams Belang, you should consider the possibility.

What is the cause of rising fascism in Europe in 2006 (I dont necessary agree with you that critics of muslim immigration can b[l]e labeled fascist, but I will use the word “fascist” for now, because that is your rhetoric)?

I do not agree with “me” that critics of Muslim immigration can be labeled fascist either. I am not saying that all Islam critics or all who oppose or are critical to immigration are fascists. I have never said so. It would be wrong. What I am saying is that there are genuine fascists who are playing political roles on the socalled far right and that there are people who have genuinely fascist ideas. I am also saying that a certain tendency towards fascism is penetrating well into a number of European far right parties, but I have described this as “a touch of madness“, not as “utter madness through-and-through”.

Why is right-wing political parties getting support?

I’m not sure a party like Vlaams Belang is right-wing at all, and I think a number of market liberalists I know have every right to be offended when the party is referred to as far right. But why does for instance Front National get support? There are a number of factors that play a role, including the left’s reluctance to raise some central issues concerning immigration and integration, but also including for instance media coverage and the creation of myths done by the far right itself. Who would have thought, after hearing the propaganda of the far right, that the crime rate in Belgium is considerably lower in 2005 than it was in 2000? Who would have though, listening to bloggers like Iblis, that the murder rate in Norway is lower now than it was in the 1970s? In Oslo, described by Iblis as a “multicultural hellhole”, there had been 10 – ten – murders this year when the last statistics were reported in early October. I would not be surprised if a casual reader of newspapers would guess a number ten or even twenty times higher.

Remember, no one asked the millions of european workingclass people if they really wanted third world immigration in the first place. Now they strike back. How can you ask of them to adapt to the “new Europe” if they dont want it? Working against social phenomenons you dont like is basic politics, and it makes very much sense.

Most Western European countries, with the exception of Spain and Portugal, which was ruled by fascist regimes well after WWII, are and have been democratic countries where people can vote. That, my friend, is basic politics, and it means that the European worker class people you seemingly worry about, have had every chance at voting out the parties supporting immigration. Truly, a number of neo-fascist party try to sell the idea that Europeans have never had a say, blaming the “marxists” (including liberal socialists), or “the left-wing” (including right-wing liberals) or even, in the case of several European far right politicians, the Jews (!) for it. In other words, your pretense is false.

Still, you are of course perfectly entitled to work against “social phenomenons” you do not like. Just do not expect me to agree with you.

To label it “fascism” without trying to understand is just counterproductive, because you push the people even more away from the political establishment.

Agreed. See above.

The demographic factor you seem to downplay also plays a major concern in this. Today almost 40% of Oslos firstgraders are non-european. In twenty years they will make out 40% of Oslos 26 years old. There is not many non-violent ways to change that fact.

I am not at all downplaying the demographic factor (although I am not upscaling it either, as you are when you cleverly add “almost” to a higher number than the actual, and then leave the “almost” out in the following sentence). I am pointing out that the most central demographic development in the world at this time in history is not immigration to Europe, it is the demographic revolution going on in large parts of the socalled developing world, including most Muslim countries. Immigration to Europe is a side-effect.

Mark Steyn’s description is heavily flawed, as he bases his understanding on the Gaza Strip and Yemen, rather than basing it on the majority of Muslim countries. The process going on is, in many ways, very similar to the demographic revolution Europe went through in the 1800s. In the 1860s as many as ten to fifteen per cent left Norway. They were welcomed in the United States, although some of them were also met with xenophobia and prejudices.

One member of the Wisconsin legislative council said, in a time were black people were not exactly treated fairly, that “the negroes here were more intelligent, more civilized, better acquainted with our institutions…” than the Norwegians, whom he “[had seen] living without what any other people would have considered the most absolute necessaries of life, burrowed so to say in holes in the ground, in huts dug in the banks of the earth”. This time around, the new colossus is lifting her lamp besides the Golden Door of Europe – and, of course, Europe will change. The numbers you refer in your article seem accurate enough (of course, good numbers does not make for good conclusions, but that’s another story). Your comment above is more worrying:

There is not many non-violent ways to change that fact.

Can you explain to me what that actually means? Which non-violent ways are there, and what do you suggest to do if these non-violent means do not work?

You continue:

From my perspective the immigration policy of the socialdemocratic parties in Norway are the very cause of the negative social development in Oslo and Norway. [...] No, I rather cast my vote for those who promise to end insecurity and stop muslim immigration. They may not succed in delivering those promises, but at least they try. The lefts only solution is to make things even worse.

There is one big problem with that logic. The problem is not your notion that the immigration policy of the social-democratic parties is unsuccessful, resulting in negative social developments (which I hope is not simply a codeword for “bloody foreigners”, although I have my suspicions). The problem is your notion that it helps voting for “those who promise to end insecurity and stop Muslim immigration”. In Norway, you will have to look long and hard for any political party giving those promises, of course, but in a number of European countries the people who make those promises come from the same political movement as the guy who wrote this some decades ago:

But, on the other hand, nothing gives better proof of the vital forces of a people [...] than that one day, through a happy decree of Destiny, a man arises who is capable of liberating his people from some great oppression, or of wiping out some bitter distress, or of calming the national soul which had been tormented through its sense of insecurity, and thus fulfilling what had long been the universal yearning of the people.

I think I will leave it up to my readers to guess who that man was. Your final claim, Iblis, is the following:

The political climate in Norway and Europe is really depressive, but it is one thing that is positive. The positive thing is that my view (which you may label “fascist”) is much more common among the young people. My generation seem alot more concerned with muslims and immigration than those who rule today.

In fact, the younger generation is – in general – more positive towards immigration and immigrants than older people. I guess we are not all living in the same bubble. And… I am quite happy I am not sharing a bubble with you.