As for Britain (and Canada & the US), electoral reform is up against political habits that don't die easily. Keir Starmer is on record saying FPP encourages people to "put down local roots" or words to that effect.
Really dislike the uncritical use of the term far right. Seems to have become an almost meaningless term used merely to slander anyone on the right.
Are the RN ideas as you described them—"RN is a populist nationalist party. Its policy is to reduce net immigration and to crack down on illegal immigration. It’s no longer anti-EU, but seeks to reform the EU from within, to defend French interests."— really "far right"? Barak Obama had quotes on immigration which could pass as an RN politician's.
Additionally you say that "For the sake of electoral success and political pragmatism, these far-right parties have chosen to be less extreme"... so if the party has moderated and is not extreme, they would simply just be right wing rather than far right, no?
Can you explain how you use the term "far right" and how it applies to these parties? I admit, I am not the most educated about Euro politics, but am increasingly disillusioned by the way terms like "far right" or "x-phobic" are used. Seems to me it's essentially the left-wing version of Right-wing terms like "groomer" for LGBT activists
Agree - if you've read "The Coddling of The American Mind" or similar you'll be aware that Western civilisations are going down the rat-hole of extreme rhetoric and us/good vs them/evil thinking.
The political classes here in NZ and in the west in general have morphed over the years into technocratic elites, captured by essentially the military/industrial complex, removed from concerns of ordinary people and refuse to self-reflect on why the proletariat have become disillusioned with them.
I don't really see UK swinging to the left, France/Europe swinging to the right. Look more closely and they are simply voting their incumbents out. They're sick of the hawkish approach their govts have taken to the Ukraine war, support for genocide in Gaza, cost of living, unaffordability of housing caused by Covid, war and neo-conservative policies in general. Who'd have thought that the neo-cons in the US would have so successfully convinced the west to support their objective of "full spectrum dominance" - a policy that is coming home to roost for the US empire and western civilisation in general.
I agree that "far right" may be too crude a label for these morphing right-wing parties, and would be interested to hear Grant's answer. Are we partly seeing a generational clash, in which the youngest part of the voting population - particularly young men - are in reaction against the left-wing views of their parents' generation?
That's partly what's going on, Kai, but remember that the voting populations are now weighted towards the older people. And I'd like to be able to concede Brandon's point, but it will depend on how these parties perform. RN and FdI both have some fascist origins, if you look at the history. But it makes little sense to compare le Pen to Petain or Meloni to Mussolini – and the socio-economic conditions that produced fascism in the 20s and 30s simply don't exist at present. The logic of politics in the present is to pursue the middle ground, and I'd have some faith in even right-wing French and Italians that they're not going to vote for anything extreme in large enough numbers. That may turn out to have been wishful thinking...
We might want to be bit more cautious when we apply the term fascist to what is loosely seen today in Europe as the 'far right'. Not only are there differences in support for Ukraine (eg Meloni supports the EU position while the AFD is opposed) but it is misleading see facism as being about Hitler and the Nazis and Mussolini and the Fascists. Both these countries were responding to particular historical circumstances. If we look at British Facism in the 1920s and 30s we would see views shared by many of the wider population (both then and now): A commitment to high taxes and redistribution of wealth to 'the people', anti-capitalist and a support for a top-down, state controlled economy that served 'the people', a view that democracy was chaotic and inefficient, a reluctance to participate in international wars (many British fascists were ex-military from WW1 - they were disillusioned with the 'peace' of the 1920s and 30s and wanted no more war) and opposition to expanding imperialism (Britain already had the largest Empire the world had ever seen and didn't need to invade anyone). British fascism enjoyed considerable support among the aristocracy between the wars and while they shared the racist and anti-semitic ideas of their European associates there were clear differences with the Nazis. So what we loosely call the 'far-right' today shares an opposition to immigration from non-European countries, there are differences between them and am not convinced that lumping them all together captures what is actually happening.
Great comments, thanks Mark. It really is important to recall the historical complexities before we resurrect old accusations. And France's RN party increased its popular vote in the second round from 31 to 37%, but I have yet to see that reported anywhere in the media. It was only due to manipulation of district elections that they were relegated to 24% of seats.
How on earth are you measuring "right" when you call RN "far right"? We really seem to be at a point where "far right" just means anyone disliked by establishment elites.
From what I can see RN policies (welfare, economy, etc) are socialist. They can't even be described as socially "conservative", even being pro-abortion now.
So French voters are really choosing between two competing socialist movements - nationalistic or globalist.
It's a fair critical comment, thanks Alister. It could be said I'm just using 'far right' because so many others do. RN, FdI and AfD all have some roots in a fascist past, but they do seem to be moderating, as I mentioned, in the interests of electoral gains. On the other hand, the conservative welfare regimes in continental Europe (especially Germany's) were originally intended to combat socialism and to tie workers' loyalties to the state. In NZ, we tend to associate welfare with socialism, for good historical reasons. Cheers. Grant
How on earth are you measuring "right" when you call RN "far right"? We really seem to be at a point where "far right" just means anyone disliked by establishment elites.
From what I can see RN policies (welfare, economy, etc) are socialist. They can't even be described as socially "conservative", even being pro-abortion now.
So French voters are really choosing between two competing socialist movements - nationalistic or globalist.
I arrived back in NZ from France yesterday. My host was so concerned about the far right he drove for five hours to and back from his voting district twice (for the EU and French elections). I would suggest that many in France shared his commitment knowing what was at stake.
This may be wishful thinking on my part, but I'd guess that the electoral logic tells them that those kinds of things are 'embarrassments' to be avoided in the future, if they want to succeed – rather like the way it serves the interests of a virus to evolve into less lethal variants. History may prove me wrong.
As for Britain (and Canada & the US), electoral reform is up against political habits that don't die easily. Keir Starmer is on record saying FPP encourages people to "put down local roots" or words to that effect.
Really dislike the uncritical use of the term far right. Seems to have become an almost meaningless term used merely to slander anyone on the right.
Are the RN ideas as you described them—"RN is a populist nationalist party. Its policy is to reduce net immigration and to crack down on illegal immigration. It’s no longer anti-EU, but seeks to reform the EU from within, to defend French interests."— really "far right"? Barak Obama had quotes on immigration which could pass as an RN politician's.
Additionally you say that "For the sake of electoral success and political pragmatism, these far-right parties have chosen to be less extreme"... so if the party has moderated and is not extreme, they would simply just be right wing rather than far right, no?
Can you explain how you use the term "far right" and how it applies to these parties? I admit, I am not the most educated about Euro politics, but am increasingly disillusioned by the way terms like "far right" or "x-phobic" are used. Seems to me it's essentially the left-wing version of Right-wing terms like "groomer" for LGBT activists
Agree - if you've read "The Coddling of The American Mind" or similar you'll be aware that Western civilisations are going down the rat-hole of extreme rhetoric and us/good vs them/evil thinking.
The political classes here in NZ and in the west in general have morphed over the years into technocratic elites, captured by essentially the military/industrial complex, removed from concerns of ordinary people and refuse to self-reflect on why the proletariat have become disillusioned with them.
I don't really see UK swinging to the left, France/Europe swinging to the right. Look more closely and they are simply voting their incumbents out. They're sick of the hawkish approach their govts have taken to the Ukraine war, support for genocide in Gaza, cost of living, unaffordability of housing caused by Covid, war and neo-conservative policies in general. Who'd have thought that the neo-cons in the US would have so successfully convinced the west to support their objective of "full spectrum dominance" - a policy that is coming home to roost for the US empire and western civilisation in general.
I agree that "far right" may be too crude a label for these morphing right-wing parties, and would be interested to hear Grant's answer. Are we partly seeing a generational clash, in which the youngest part of the voting population - particularly young men - are in reaction against the left-wing views of their parents' generation?
That's partly what's going on, Kai, but remember that the voting populations are now weighted towards the older people. And I'd like to be able to concede Brandon's point, but it will depend on how these parties perform. RN and FdI both have some fascist origins, if you look at the history. But it makes little sense to compare le Pen to Petain or Meloni to Mussolini – and the socio-economic conditions that produced fascism in the 20s and 30s simply don't exist at present. The logic of politics in the present is to pursue the middle ground, and I'd have some faith in even right-wing French and Italians that they're not going to vote for anything extreme in large enough numbers. That may turn out to have been wishful thinking...
We might want to be bit more cautious when we apply the term fascist to what is loosely seen today in Europe as the 'far right'. Not only are there differences in support for Ukraine (eg Meloni supports the EU position while the AFD is opposed) but it is misleading see facism as being about Hitler and the Nazis and Mussolini and the Fascists. Both these countries were responding to particular historical circumstances. If we look at British Facism in the 1920s and 30s we would see views shared by many of the wider population (both then and now): A commitment to high taxes and redistribution of wealth to 'the people', anti-capitalist and a support for a top-down, state controlled economy that served 'the people', a view that democracy was chaotic and inefficient, a reluctance to participate in international wars (many British fascists were ex-military from WW1 - they were disillusioned with the 'peace' of the 1920s and 30s and wanted no more war) and opposition to expanding imperialism (Britain already had the largest Empire the world had ever seen and didn't need to invade anyone). British fascism enjoyed considerable support among the aristocracy between the wars and while they shared the racist and anti-semitic ideas of their European associates there were clear differences with the Nazis. So what we loosely call the 'far-right' today shares an opposition to immigration from non-European countries, there are differences between them and am not convinced that lumping them all together captures what is actually happening.
Great comments, thanks Mark. It really is important to recall the historical complexities before we resurrect old accusations. And France's RN party increased its popular vote in the second round from 31 to 37%, but I have yet to see that reported anywhere in the media. It was only due to manipulation of district elections that they were relegated to 24% of seats.
How on earth are you measuring "right" when you call RN "far right"? We really seem to be at a point where "far right" just means anyone disliked by establishment elites.
From what I can see RN policies (welfare, economy, etc) are socialist. They can't even be described as socially "conservative", even being pro-abortion now.
So French voters are really choosing between two competing socialist movements - nationalistic or globalist.
It's a fair critical comment, thanks Alister. It could be said I'm just using 'far right' because so many others do. RN, FdI and AfD all have some roots in a fascist past, but they do seem to be moderating, as I mentioned, in the interests of electoral gains. On the other hand, the conservative welfare regimes in continental Europe (especially Germany's) were originally intended to combat socialism and to tie workers' loyalties to the state. In NZ, we tend to associate welfare with socialism, for good historical reasons. Cheers. Grant
How on earth are you measuring "right" when you call RN "far right"? We really seem to be at a point where "far right" just means anyone disliked by establishment elites.
From what I can see RN policies (welfare, economy, etc) are socialist. They can't even be described as socially "conservative", even being pro-abortion now.
So French voters are really choosing between two competing socialist movements - nationalistic or globalist.
I arrived back in NZ from France yesterday. My host was so concerned about the far right he drove for five hours to and back from his voting district twice (for the EU and French elections). I would suggest that many in France shared his commitment knowing what was at stake.
It seems that he and many others produced the desired result in the second round.
Marine Le Pen & Giorgia Meloni might come across as "reasonable centre-Right". Their rank-&-file, not so much.
https://www.thelocal.it/20240628/italys-meloni-breaks-silence-on-youth-wings-fascist-comments
https://www.politico.eu/article/marine-le-pen-party-france-national-rally-holocaust-nazi-vladimir-putin-racism-xenophobia/
This may be wishful thinking on my part, but I'd guess that the electoral logic tells them that those kinds of things are 'embarrassments' to be avoided in the future, if they want to succeed – rather like the way it serves the interests of a virus to evolve into less lethal variants. History may prove me wrong.