The New York Times has a thumb-sucker about the rise of the European far-right, which would greatly mislead anyone not up with the facts. The picture is one of inexorable advance, citing parties such as “Party of Freedom of Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, the Sweden Democrats and the Reform U.K. party of Nigel Farage.”
The NYTimes doesn’t mention that
The rightwing coalition of which Wilders was part collapsed when he withdrew support and lost the subsequent election. Wilders party split and is competing with two other far-right parties, also in opposition.
The rightwing Swedish coalition which had promised the Sweden Democrats a role was defeated at the recent election, with the SD vote declining
Farage’s Reform party has also split and Farage himself is now massively unpopular
There have been more consequential losses than this. The most successful far-right government in Europe, that of Viktor Orban’s Fidesz in Hungary, was crushed in elections earlier this year. and the party is now splitting. Poland’s Law and Justice Party (PiS), lost office in 2023 and has now also split [1{/
Other successes have turned sour for the far-right. Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party, a successor to various neo-fascist parties, won elections in 2022, and has held together since then. But the government hasn’t delivered much of the far-right agenda, beyond stunts like a recently announced ban on burquas in schools. The Finns Party’s participation in a right government (in Finland, obviously) has seen a big loss of popularity.
Europe isn’t out of the woods yet. A victory for the National Rally in the French election next year would pose some significant problems. But compared to the defeats listed above, the fact that the German AfD migh form the government of a small German state is not a big problem.
It’s important to observe at this point that the rise of far-right parties does not imply an increase in the proportion of voters with far-right views. In almost any country, at least 20 per cent of the voters and maybe more hold far-right views of one kind or another, which will emerge if given the chance. As I observed back in 2016, the neoliberal consensus meant that “mainstream” rightwing parties could no longer rely on the votes of (white Christian) tribalists/Trumpists and made symbolic gestures in their direction, but largely ignored them, particularly if their interests came into conflict with those of big business. After the 2008 financial crisis, this was no longer possible
Finally, it’s true that far-right parties have succeeded in pushing European countries to adopt more restrictive immigration policies. But anti-immigrant bigotry has always been a winning issue for the political right. The UK Conservative party, normally classed as centre-right has advocated and implemented policies far more restrictive than those of any European far-right party, only to be outflanked by the further right Reform and Restore.
And that brings us to the elephant in the NYT room. But I’m going to leave that for Part 2.
fn1. Admittedly a PiS candidate scraped in to win the most recent presidential election, but he has limited power).
Follow me on Bluesky or Mastodon
Read my comic book presentation of The Perils of Privatisation. Paid subscribers get a free physical copy.
Read my newsletter
i should have mentioned that while the Labour government under Starmer ended some of the worst of the Conservative policies, such as proposed deportations to Rwanda, it has tightened others. It remains to be seen how things will change under Burnham.
Thank you for this, John. That they claim Wilders is still a threat here in the Netherlands shows real ignorance--or is it scaremongering? I look forward to your part two, on why the NYT is making this argument about Europe. Do they want to make far-right rule look like an inevitability, for their own domestic purposes?
Wilders is largely a spent force because essentially no one in power trusts him any longer and won't form a coalition with him. He is a lone wolf, officially the only member of the PVV, and shot himself in the foot last term by withdrawing from the governing coalition. Yesterday's man, and it's curious that the NYT doesn't recognise that.
That doesn't mean that the far right isn't a concern here though. The VVD, a coalition partner (and formerly led by Rutte), is ostensibly centre-right, but under Yeşilgöz is pushing further into extremism, while there are smaller far-right parties eager to capitalise on growing anti-refugee sentiment on the fringes. But that said, the largest party here, in terms of membership and polling support, is the left-wing PRO, the recently merged labour/green party, currently in opposition.
In France, there are signs of cracks in the RN, after Le Pen announced she would run for president next year despite her criminal conviction. Apparently the first that Jordan Bardella, the presumptive heir and expected candidate, heard about it was when she made the public announcement to that effect, and he and his supporters are not best pleased. The schism is resulting in her moving even further to the right in the lead-up to the election, and one can only hope that she'll go too far for most right-wing French voters. I certainly hope so. A Le Pen presidency would be a real disaster for Europe.
Disgust with Trump (and the country that elected him twice) is palpable in Western Europe, and he has largely served to do the opposite of what he wants: strengthen European unity. The real threat to Europe isn't within. It's from the US, and I don't expect that to end with Trump's demise.