There’s a very good reason why Norway’s economy could fly off higher than most of everyone’s else in Europe: they have gas and oil and they have lots of them. Denmark too enjoyed the benefits of oil and gas exports while Sweden and Finland’s economic success has a history of industrialisation based on a center-left export-orientated Fordist societal collaborative model. After the Second World War, industrialisation in Europe was the main drive for economic growth, and paired with maxims of social justice and strong welfare states, Western Europe created an affluent period for its workers. The European Social Charter of 1961 read like a socialist manifesto, and this was also a reflection of the Western European economies of those times.
Today, European socialists seem to have a nostalgic idea to go back to Europe of the past and turn everything right. Still stuck with the logic of past ideas, the European left can’t even seem to understand the major and fundamental issues and challenges that we face today.
Take the latest general elections in Spain as a simplistic model for Europe. The center-right could not win a majority of votes due to its association with the far-right party Vox, while the socialists couldn’t win a majority because of their wreckless way in how they are managing the economy by suppressing growth, over-taxing ordinary workers and small businesses, and basically creating a status-quo of stagnant economic growth without any social mobility. Meanwhile, small businesses face the wrath of central bankers who are tightening credit conditions. Socialists of today, are mistaking stagnant semi-feudal-mercantile economies with socialism. Hard-working individuals and small businesses want to see better economic conditions and the ability to participate more in the economy (more jobs, fewer taxes, less monopoly, bureaucracy, and looser credit conditions) and are thus turning to the right, but young people and women don’t want to allow the fascists to control their lives, and rightly so. Europe is in a deadlock with politicians, mainly the left failing to understand the realities of the times. There was a time when New Labour aspired to address this deadlock, but it seems that this ideological spirit has dried up on the left.
To what extent has the right captured European Union policy?
Francesca De Benedetti’s article is factually incorrect on one important aspect. The rise of the far-right in Europe has so far not changed Europe’s main immigration and asylum-seeking policies. Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni wants to impose a naval blockade on Libya and halt altogether migrant crossings at sea into Italy, however, she is being restrained by the EU Commission who as usual, is finding mitigating solutions to the crisis which are consistent with the EU’s policy towards immigration.
Nothing has changed in principle. National authorities are obliged to save distressed immigrants at sea and immigrants have to be hosted by the nation on whose territory the migrants are located before they are processed and sent to other places in Europe or repatriated. In the spirit of human decency and human rights, this is the least a European country can do.
Yet, Europe faces many challenges with its growing migrant populations. Studies show that in places in Europe where there is a higher concentration of immigrants, there is a higher concentration of votes for the far-right. Studies that claim there is no link between crime and migrant communities are overly optimistic because hard data shows otherwise. The personal experience of Maltese people living with a high concentration of illegal migrants (or ex-illegal immigrants) is negative, citing more crime and less security. There are two political extremes in this issue. The extreme of the left wants to at all costs make the point that there is no problem at all with Europe’s current migrant policies, and then there is the far right that is blaming migrants for Europe’s collapse while stoking racism and hatred.
Unless the left becomes reasonable, the far-right will seem to many as the only reasonable voice on immigration. With Europe in recession, it will be harder to have the economic conditions that will result in the uplifting of the social and economic conditions of many migrants and workers in Europe. To keep growing the European immigrant communities in Italy when jobs are also drying up is a recipe for racist conflict, yet this process has been going on for many years. Policymakers can’t expect things will change for the better just by doing nothing and pretending there is no problem. Europe needs aggressive and radical economic policies to create growth, increase industrialisation and foreign capital, and increase innovation. The best way for migrants to live peacefully with us is if we had booming economies and this should be the priority of the policymaker in Brussels, yet this is not happening.
Ursula von der Leyen does not have the vision and resolve to see through major economic reform in Europe. This is why I consider the accusation against von der Leyen for centralising power and pushing a right-wing agenda in Europe laughable. Ursula von der Leyen was appointed EU Commissioner as an exit ticket from German politics amidst serious allegations of corruption. She was chosen as an ideal candidate who would keep everything the same and so far von der Leyen has been exceptionally successful at not rocking the boat. She has done nothing of significance, served Merkel’s aspirations very well, and Europe is suffering with an existential crisis as a consequence. Had Ursula von der Leyen really moved to the right and centralised power, things may have changed radically in Europe, but they didn’t. The only real catalyst for change was the Russian invasion of Ukraine which eventually, forced, after a lot of pressure and infighting, European policymakers to abandon Russian gas.
The interesting case of the non-European immigrant
The left ignores one big issue with immigration and by ignoring this issue, it allows the far right to have a monopoly on the discussion about European values.
In the past few days, I noticed that Jon Mallia made a podcast with Omar Rababah on the topic of racism and multiculturalism. Omar is a Maltese of Syrian-descent living in Malta and also a government employee. Despite being born in Malta, Omar’s strange non-European views are very widespread among the young generations of Muslims in Europe. His views are similar to what I would describe as the non-European immigrant – an immigrant to Europe who is yet not happy with its political and cultural values. Omar is very opinionated and some of his opinions include support for Bashar Al-Assad, anti-American imperialism, and a pro-Islamic approach when it comes to law and free speech, such as for example, being in favour of criminalising “hate speech” against prophet Muhammed, which actually means criminalising any satire on Muhammed. Interesting.
Omar is just being used as an example, but his views are very representative of many migrants in Europe from both the regular and irregular migrant demographic (there are also many legal immigrants to Europe who do not share Europe’s values). Omar and those like him will insist that anti-racism and multiculturalism are mutually inclusive, but this is not the case. Race is not a pre-determinant of culture: on the contrary, the logic by which race can be a pre-determinant of culture is inherently racist. The left does not have the courage to admit that Islamic culture, riddled with misogyny, homophobia, and outright authoritarian principles, is incompatible with European values, and ironically this is a great betrayal to left-wing movements in the Islamic world who have struggled against Islamism for years on end. This betrayal is even greater and more obscene when the oppressive culture of Islam is celebrated in Europe under the guise of “multiculturalism”.
Europe is the world’s beacon of the rule of law and enlightenment. There is nothing romantic in this: until today Europe is the prime innovator and number one in the world when it comes to legislation. We provide the guidance and direction of fundamental legal principles old and new to the whole world which has historically followed, mimicked, or distorted our legal processes. So far, Europe has successfully provided the best ethical and moral legal balance in the world when it comes to migration. It is not perfect and it could be more humane, but ignoring its risks would be suicidal to an ever-increasing political scenario riddled with far-right voices.
https://twitter.com/khaledYousefff/status/1705588045192347764
Website Editor
Historian and Publisher
Leave a Reply