The newest TIME Magazine features a small article on European politics that caught my eye. It mentions 3 far left politicians and 1 far right French politician who are against NATO. The French female politician is also in favour of a better relationship with Russia, similar to Donald Trump. How should one understand these positions?
It’s too easy referring to the alleged Russian financing of European “far right” parties (eg, Economist, Independent, Telegraph). One does not bite the hand that feeds. The confusion starts however with the label “far right”. A distinction between centre and extreme political parties makes more sense. Increasingly, we also see a distinction between an international and a national political orientation.
Today’s extreme national parties are mostly known for being against political issues, like EU, immigrants, Islam. These extreme national parties leverage on the fears amongst voters. A negative stance on NATO and a positive stance towards Moscow is rather new and seems odd.
I think, feel and believe that the extreme national parties do not actually believe in western style democracy. These parties only use – and abuse – democracy to get into power. Once in power their true colours will shine. Their genuine political admiration is for the so called “strongmen”. An open admiration for Turkey would however contradict their anti-Islam position. Russia shares a common religion and is also a geographical part of Europe, unlike China.
Moreover, the days are long gone that Russia was a communist or even a socialist Republic. For some decades, Russia is now run by extreme national political parties. From that perspective, the Left – Right schism is history and even at an international level. What is left are international and national political orientations.
I’m old school as I’ve mentioned earlier in some of my blogs. I was raised with the belief of a left and right political orientation. I’ve always been in the middle as I did not and do not believe in extremes. I believe in compromises that are in the interest of many, and not a few. For the past several years, my attitude led to political scepticism and I even stopped voting. Things are different now. The stakes are much more clear than ever before.
In the USA, there is a fight between an extreme national “party” and a centrist international party that is increasingly uniting Democrats and Republicans. Countries like China and Russia have no regard for international law and are only focused on their national interests. That is the new reality in which we live today. Other countries are following. The Philippines is a striking example of another strongman with a total disregard for (inter)national law.
The difference between an international and a national political orientation might be illustrated by the former nickname of NATO: no action, talk only. Today it’s the exact opposite for countries like China (eg, South China Sea islands) and Russia (eg, Crimea, Georgia, Ukraine). No talk, action only. Voters increasingly seem to like and appreciate a strongman approach.
It’s entirely possible that future strongmen will be able to come to sensible compromises when national interests will eventually collide, and they certainly will. It’s however more likely that we are on a new and unknown international collision course.
Kanye West – Stronger (2007) – artist, lyrics, video, Wiki-1, Wiki-2
Work it, make it, do it,
Makes us harder, better, faster, stronger!
0 Comments