Subscribe via RSS Feed Connect with me on Gab

Multicultural Musical Chairs

Ricardo Duchesne | Who are today’s racial extremists?

Contrary to what academic elites, government officials, and the mainstream media tell us, immigrant multiculturalism is one of the most extreme ideological policies ever devised. This strictly Western-initiated policy is bringing an irreversible alteration in the centuries-old ethnic and cultural composition of European nations. Yet the political landscape is so entrapped by the political correctness of this sinister ideology that its proponents are portrayed as moderate and tolerant characters living up to the true spirit of liberal ideals, whereas the opponents of mass immigration are seen as ‘far right extremists.’

Recently I decided to investigate the ideas and policies of some of the political parties designated in the media as both ‘extreme’ and ‘right-wing.’ Since the parties that are so labelled exist primarily in Europe, the main search phrase I used was ‘Extreme Right-Wing Parties in Europe.’ What struck me right away is that the only reason a political party in Europe is called ‘extremist’, ‘xenophobic’, and ‘deeply conservative’ is its opposition to high immigration numbers – irrespective of overall platform. I was also puzzled by the fact that both the left and the ‘moderate’ right-wing media (such as the widely read magazine The Economist) use these inaccurate labels.

Musical ChairsI am not denying that there are few accurately described extremist parties or groups in Europe. The majority of parties that are called extremist, however, generally fit within the Western liberal tradition; they are as varied in their political viewpoints as the other mainstream parties. They include an interesting combination of nationalist, traditionalist, pro-European, social conservative, libertarian, socialist, and environmentalist policies. They advocate a moderate approach to Europe’s immigration problems within the framework of liberal-democratic institutions. These parties are regularly called ‘neo-fascist’ by leftists only because they question the transformation of European nations into immigrant multicultural states.

How has it come about in the Western world, and only in the West, that parties wishing to maintain, conserve, and avoid a radical alteration in the historic identities of their nations are called ‘extremist’ by the standard media outlets, while the forces calling for a permanent revolution in Europe’s heritage, including the rooted European character of Canada, the United States, and Australia, are called reasonable and moderate?

I will start with an overview of the respective platforms of some of the major ‘extremist’ parties of Europe. The National Front in France led by Marine Le Pen came in third in the 2012 presidential election with almost 18 per cent of the vote. The Front is a nationalist party claiming to be ‘neither right nor left’, but simply for the cultural and economic integrity of France, advocating a combination of free market, protectionist, and social welfare policies. The party supports the typical role governments have played in France in health care, education, transportation, and energy, but criticizes the way welfare has become a form of government-assisted mass immigration into France at the cost of French tax-payers. The party’s chief concern is the threat posed to France’s liberal and secular values by Muslim culture. They want to deport illegal, criminal, and unemployed immigrants, and believe that unrestricted immigration from Islamic countries poses a ‘mortal threat to civil peace in France’.

The Party of Freedom in the Netherlands is led by Geert Wilders, and in the 2010 general election it won 24 seats, making it the third largest party. This party, too, is primarily concerned with Muslim immigration; it advocates zero Muslim immigration, banning the Koran, repatriation of criminals of foreign citizenship, and an end to Islamic ‘gender apartheid’. Its other policies are also neither right nor left: a 10-year Dutch residency and work experience requirement for welfare assistance; constitutional protection of the dominance of the Judeo-Christian and humanistic culture of the Netherlands; repeal of anti-smoking legislation in bars; investment in more nuclear power plants and clean coal plants to reduce dependency on imported oil and because coal is cheaper; withdrawal from the European Union; the cutting off of tax money to ‘political left’ organizations; documentation of the ethnicity of people who commit crimes.

True Finns in Finland became the third largest party in the 2011 parliamentary elections. Known as a nationalist party, the party opposes the granting of Finnish nationality through mere migration or by claiming asylum. Their solution to declining birthrates is to encourage young women to give birth to more Finnish children; they are socially conservative, opposing abortion and homosexual marriage. Yet the party endorses left-wing economic policies, is critical of corporate globalism, and strongly supports the Finnish welfare state.

The Swiss People’s Party won almost 30 per cent of the vote in the 2007 Federal Council election. They advocate low taxes and very limited immigration, and oppose increased involvement of Switzerland in supranational organizations including the UN, EEA, and EU. They stand for strict neutrality in foreign conflicts while calling for a strong role for the Swiss army as the institution responsible for national defense. The Swiss People’s Party is known as an ‘extremist’ party because it would like Switzerland to retain its ethnic character, which is already mixed, but for the cultural Marxists the mix is too ‘European’ and ‘White’.

The Denmark’s Peoples Party, the third largest party in Denmark, is socially conservative in its defense of the traditional family, the Monarchy and the Church of Denmark, but also wishes to maintain a strong welfare system for those in need and to protect the environment and natural resources, while promoting entrepreneurship and economic growth by strengthening education and encouraging a work-ethic. On immigration, the party platform states:

Denmark is not an immigrant-country and never has been. Thus we will not accept transformation to a multi-ethnic society. Denmark belongs to the Danes and its citizens must be able to live in a secure community founded on the rule of law, which develops along the lines of Danish culture.

The Progress Party of Norway, the second-largest party in the Norwegian Parliament, is libertarian, a firm advocate of classical liberal principles, small government, low taxes, individual rights, and free market economics. It is against the radical transformation of Norway into a globalized multicultural place; hence the media calls it ‘extremist’.

The Sweden Democrats obtained just under 6 per cent of the vote in the 2010 general election. It describes itself as a ‘nationalist’ party: ‘Keep Sweden Swedish.’ The media calls it a party ‘for anti-immigrant nationalism.’ It acknowledges the value of Sweden’s ‘generous welfare state’ while identifying itself as a conservative party in matters of law and order, advocating life without parole for the worst crimes and repatriation of foreign citizens found guilty of serious crime. It also wants to end funding for multicultural initiatives and strengthen support for traditional Swedish culture. It favours the ‘traditional’ family, stating in its website that every child should have ‘one father and one mother’.

The Freedom Party of Austria had support in opinion polls of around 24-29 per cent in 2011. This party believes that nationalism, liberalism, and social democracy are not only compatible but intrinsically connected. It wants to ensure the survival of Austrians’ German identity. It is neither left nor right in supporting privatization and low taxes combined with support for the welfare state. It maintains that current immigration policies undermine the welfare state; socialism and national identity are impossible together with unrestricted immigration.

Finally, UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party) in Britain currently holds 9 seats of the UK’s 73 seats in the European Parliament, and has recently shown an increase in popular support from around 3 percent in 2010 to about 13 percent in early 2014. Long known for its advocacy that Britain leave the European Union, other policies of UKIP include support for ‘traditional conservative and libertarian values’, cuts in corporation taxes and the abolition of inheritance taxes, a 40 percent increase in defence spending, a five-year ‘freeze’ on immigration for permanent settlement, firm steps for the removal of illegal immigrants, and an end to the active promotion of multiculturalism. Its leader, Nigel Farage, opined recently that ‘in scores of our cities and market towns, this country in a short space of time has frankly become unrecognizable…Whether it is the impact on local schools and hospitals, whether it is the fact in many parts of England you don’t hear English spoken anymore.’ The mainstream liberal media, including The Guardian, found this statement dangerous, claiming that the UKIP is fueled by ‘racism and bigotry’, or, at the very least, that its views ‘overlap with the extreme right’.

It is truly astonishing that all these parties have been so designated by both the left and even the mainstream ‘conservative’ news and opinion outlets: Business Week, TIME, Guardian, the New York Times, Nation, Slate, National Post, Euro News, CBC, CTV, BBC, The Economist, and, in agreement with all these venues, Al Jazeera. Such uniform inaccuracy bespeaks the successful ‘march through the institutions’ carried out by cultural Marxists. The mere wish to retain the ethnic and cultural identity of one’s nation in opposition to unrestricted immigration makes one a xenophobic fascist. In the near past, love of country, loyalty, attachment, and respect for one’s ancestors was normal and accepted by the both the right and left parties. People then did not consider Western civilization to be a mere set of universal values, rule of law, democracy, and freedom, but also a particular set of customs and religious beliefs, a people rooted in a uniquely European historical experience and ethnic identity.

The political landscape has undergone a fundamental shift since the implementation of immigrant multiculturalism in the last few decades. It is hard to believe that during the 1950s and 1960s members of the Labor Party in Britain were making the case for immigration controls on the grounds that Britain could not afford to be the ‘welfare state’ for the whole of the Commonwealth. Labor was then a party that actually represented the interests of the native working class and did not want competition for jobs and downward pressure on wages. Elsewhere in Europe the left also objected to guest workers in the early days of immigration. But times have changed, and today the left looks upon immigrants as a future constituency to promote multiculturalism, government expansion, and the overthrow of the traditional values of the European peoples.

There are no better people to run America than European American people. European peoples should be able to organize and advance their own interests just like every other group.

The American Freedom Party (AFP) supports the right to keep and bear arms. Emancipate yourself from the dinosaur Democrat and Republican parties. Join a National Party that puts America first, The American Freedom Party!

Support and maintain American Freedom Party growth and the spread of Western civilization! The American Freedom Party is the only party that addresses issues concerning European-American communities and all Americans.

Nationalism! Not Globalism! — America First! Not America Last!
Freedom from Republicans. Freedom from Democrats. American Freedom Party!

The American Freedom Party needs your help! Send $10, $20, $50, $100, or any contribution you can via PayPal “Send Money” to or click here:

European-Americans should push back! European-Americans should abandon the Republicans and Democrats. Change your party allegiance to the American Freedom Party. A Nationalist party that shares the customs and heritage of the European American people. We need a Nationalist Party interested in defending our borders, preserving our language and promoting our culture. The American Freedom Party is not beholden to foreign governments, special interest groups, nor Wall Street. The American Freedom Party is for America First!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: American Voice, Establishment News

Comments are closed.