Winners in EU Elections Were Nationalist Parties

The leader of Italy’s right-wing League Party, Matteo Salvini, said populist and nationalist parties will control at least 150 seats in the new 751-seat European Parliament.

ECFR (European Council on Foreign Relations) published results of surveys that show most Europeans believe the EU could fall apart within the next two decades.

Salvini told RAI state television that his League, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally in France and Nigel Farage’s Brexit party in Britain together should control 90 seats. He says other populist parties in the Europe of Nations and Freedom Group could bring that number to 150.

Le Pen and Salvini are joining forces to try to reform the EU.

Salvini’s League gaining in strength in Italy to nearly 34% of the vote, a huge boost over the formerly regional party’s 6% support in 2014.

Matteo Salvini’s League was the big winner in Italy. Salvini has a coalition of businesspeople who want to cut taxes, to voters hostile to migrants, to fierce opponents of gay marriage.

SOURCES- AP, CNBC, the Guardian, France 24

44 thoughts on “Winners in EU Elections Were Nationalist Parties”

  1. me too. we’re going to have another election in October, let’s see what happens, but the prospects aren’t good.

  2. Yes of course. The irony is that I’ve BEEN to Portugal 7 times, and at one time dreamed of retiring there. The whole EU list is…

    Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK, with SWITZERLAND not being either in the EEC or EU, Technically. 

    Just saying,
    GoatGuy ✓

  3. There is unfortunately 5000 years of history that we can trawl through to come up with the bit that we claim is repeating.

    For example in the 3rd and 4th century AD the Roman empire welcomed many foreign refugees into their lands from the North. These “Germans” “Goths” etc. were originally hailed as a solution to the Empire’s need for more labourers given the population decline in the native populations.

    However the new comers tended not to assimilate into the Roman population, but remained as separate ethnic enclaves, with their own local rulers and customs… and eventually their own military forces.

    We know how this story ended.

  4. “Winner” is quite often used to describe the parties that have increased the most, not necessarily the parties that have gotten the largest number of votes…

    And I agree with Laszlo that this is a very misleading way to use the word. Especially if the article doesn’t go on to elucidate the exact situation but leaves the casual reader with the incorrect impression.

  5. Nomenclature by any other name would still refer to the same thing. What would be gained if one were to arbitrarily substitute any potentially scary name with “fuzzy bunny wabbit”. It’s wishful thinking to expect “fuzzy bunny wabbits” to suddenly be able to make competent decisions that tend to lead to beneficial results just by playing games with nomenclature.

    Grandparents concerns about deeply shared history may cause them to support the “fuzzy bunny wabbits”, there is no material difference between the two. Certain things cannot be compartmentalized, as it is with representatives, it’s all or nothing. To this day, there exists +650k “fuzzy bunny wabbits” that will claim -with a straight face- that they didn’t support the child rapist part of their representative, they only choose to supported the part of him that was for free school lunches or some such mendacity.

    No, rational people should never expect change among the “fuzzy bunny wabbits”, they are thoroughly irredeemable; The turnover that comes with time is only solution to that problem. Until then, it’s up to civilized people to try as best they can to minimize the harm perpetrated by the “fuzzy bunny wabbits” and all those that support and suborn them(a distinction without a difference).

  6. Very true. Ordinary conservatives in America are closer to the 1960s conservatives than the party leadership. The party leadership are socially left mostly and cater completely to the globalist mentality. Any republicans (like Trump) that say anything that is on the side of populism is immediately branded by both parties as “hateful” or “racist”. My fear is that when Trump finally goes the Republicans will be as crazy and empty as the left.

  7. Well Jan, in America blacks have been around for centuries and have not assimilated at all, if anything they’re getting more violent due to endless liberal indoctrination in school and TV about how white people are responsible for all their ills. Studies have been done here on blacks raised by white families and the results are not favorable to your culture theory. All the standard markers of lower academic performance and higher incidences of crime remain.

  8. Spot on, it’s the same thing in France. People are so eager to bust racism that they completely ignore the fact that the issues are mostly cultural.

  9. Well this kind of validates the ‘repeating history’ theme – the rabidly nationalist governments of 120 years ago lead us through 2 world wars and 50 million dead the next 50 years were pock marked with ‘wars of independence’ or ethnic cleansing or resource wars or all 3 all generally greater in destruction the greater the proximity to nationalist ideals (fear of other) – and the idiots voting them in/ supporting them will watch as their society marginalises them (because they are poor or women or some specific religion or ethnicity and feeds their children to the next war

  10. Governments in Eastern Europe would probably get lynched if they imposed mass Third World immigration on their peoples. There is very little political correctness in Eastern Europe compared to the West (Eastern Europeans suffered from that for four decades post-war and don’t want it back), so people are free to speak frankly about the obvious problems that open borders immigration brings and has brought to Western Europe.

  11. Almost certainly if the leftist/liberal elite continues to ignore the concerns of the ordinary people. It’s the historic norm for most countries in Europe to vote in right wing dictators eventually anyway. Given that the EU/elite has been forcing mass Third World immigration onto these countries, even when it’s apparent nobody has a clue how to integrate the ‘new Europeans’ and regular and barbaric terrorist atrocities has been the result, it’s almost inevitable that the EU will soon be dominated by real fascists. I wonder if some of you guys will be so keen on the EU then?

  12. My “indeed” was referring to the fact that ppl don’t just vote on brexit, and old loyalties count as well. You didn’t see conservatives/labour going to zero, right? My point is that whoever cares strongly about brexit moved to Farage’s, as shown by the collapse of UKIP and some of the conservatives. I doubt that there’s much reservoir left, and obviously you can make the same argument about the anti-brexit, with libdem and green being the only parties really pushing for a second referendum.

  13. So does “indeed” in your reply mean that you agree that the basic tenement in my comment is correct, i.e. that the Brexit party vote underestimates the brexit percentage?

  14. This is true, but people don’t vote *exclusively* on the basis of Brexit. They also vote based on the perceived “goodness” of the party, old loyalties and other issues as well. So, if a third are willing to overlook all other issues to vote for a completely untried party, you can be pretty sure that there is another slice of the voters that would want Brexit, but not at “the expense” of voting for “populists”, “racists” or “amateurs”.

  15. Well, if they have increased their share of the votes, they too are winners in the election. But have the greens and the liberals generally increased their share of the European votes? Me thinketh not.

  16. Agreed: a unnecessarily clickbaity title.
    Also, while Farage’s party got many seats in the UK, it ate almost exclusively from is (former) own UKIP and the conservatives, which have massively mismanaged brexit (not that he could have done better).

  17. Well, you should look the results more precisely. In this manner the winners are the liberals and the greens. If we see share growing.

  18. “Winner” is quite often used to describe the parties that have increased the most, not necessarily the parties that have gotten the largest number of votes…

  19. It is so funny to see a black person that has been raised by a swedish family. You know within three seconds that this person is a Swede and not an african. It is about the body language, the speech pattern, the values, the small omissions, kinks and hangups that make the swede the swede. An black man with african parents in Sweden will be completely different from the adopted black man, even though the latter will also speak swedish without an accent.

    And it shows that being swedish or european is absolutely not about skin color and absolutely about culture. The culture of immigrants don’t just “evaporate” on arrival, but persist over decades and are in some cases even strengthened over time. It could even be that these cultures will remain non-european for centuries to come..

  20. Brian, let me quote your words. “The leader of Italy’s right-wing League Party, Matteo Salvini, said populist and nationalist parties will control at least 150 seats in the new 751-seat European Parliament.

    It is obviously means that that the Winners in EU Elections Were NOT Nationalist Parties.
    Why do you give so misleading title for this article? Wishful thinking?

  21. It is interesting that for all the talk about immigration, very few European countries have actually reduced their immigration. Mainly, it is the former eastern european countries, Greece and (lately) Italy that have reduced the rate of immigration. Already, a majority of the citizens are against this immigration, but the leaders keep the gates open for ideological reasons.

    So if you walk in a mall in Romania and Sweden, the mall in Romania will be more european looking. In the demographics 0-44 years, foreign borns make up about 30% of Sweden, and immigrants tend to “hang around” in public spaces more than swedes. So perhaps about half of those you meet will be arabs or africans. And if you look at commercials and bill boards, they are about half african/arab models, which is more than their proportion of the population (23% foreign born). Because diversity…

    Contrast this with Romania where billboards are all european looking. And the people in the street are almost all european. The contrast is really striking… To think that this change has been taking place mainly in the last 30 years…

  22. Some american conservatives have a difficult time understanding european resentment to immigration because they believe that our immigration must be like their immigration a hundred years ago.

    But of course it isn’t. The USA took in allmost exclusively Europeans and had no wellfare state. That is, those europeans that didn’t like the “fend-for-yourself” culture of the USA went back (and about 50% did). This resulted in the famous melting pot, where immigrants basically forgot their original culture and assimilated to their new country. And even the immigration of today into the USA from South America is culturally closer than what the arab and african world is to Europe.

    In Europe, very little assimilation is going on. Immigrants have vastly different cultures, with – in general – higher crime rate, lower school performance, lower economic performance and a completely different view of women. They live geographically separated and second generation immigrants harbor resentment towards their new country, since they believe that they are being oppressed by their hosts.

  23. It is absolutely, positively racist and xenophobic to want to carry the cultural torch of a civilization that has existed for thousands of years.
    Submitting to the waves of barbaric, backwards hordes that has spent more time trying to conquer the West than it hasn’t is the only way forward.

  24. But providing the double-plus-goodthink people keep insulting them, calling them scary names, and pretend that their issues are purely ones of racism and hatred, then eventually they will change their minds and stop voting in ideologically unapproved ways.

  25. Yea, a group of people valuing their social and cultural identity and not wanting to see it swarmed by a bunch of Islamofascists being called crypto-fascists.

  26. not at all. we have a far left extremist government with a pro emigration, pc culture, identity politics agenda and people still vote for them, the ones that voted anyway, we had almost 70% abstention.

  27. People will vote for whomever they feel represents their interests better, unless the options they seek are outlawed. And this regardless if some end of the political spectrum finds their choices morally reprehensible.

    And so far, the nationalistic, my-land, my-people first discourse hasn’t been outlawed.

  28. Is it really necessary to take the obviously well publicized bait and regurgitate it whole?

    Europe has a large, stable, older (and inexorably advancing) population of born-there, lived-there, have octuple-generation -grandparents there.  

    As an example, France isn’t just France, but it is an amalgam of scores (if not hundreds) of at-times quaint, at-times thriving, at-times sleepy, at-times outrageous, at-times boring, at-times joyous regions, “departments”, which under a common tongue and an uncommon shared ideal of what To Be French means, are a nation-state.  

    She, along with her equally proudly autonomous German neighbors, her Italian relations, her cheeky Greek, Scandinavian, British, Dutch, Belgian, Spanish and Polish, Hungarian, Austrian, Swiss and Romanian brothers and sisters, is a marvel-of-the-modern age, called The European UNION.

    Her peoples, united by their wealth of history, their shared travesties, their dalliances with death, totalitarianism, fascism, scandal, pogroms, The Church, baronies and suzereignties, all this … and more, they are provoked by their changing demographic, their greying, their decreasingly sufficient fixed incomes … all that … wonder-of-wonders, they are not JUST becoming more conservatıve on the whole, but far less open to the disruptive influence of their HUGE experiment with wide-open borders.

    And funny thing that.

    The conservatives, quietly idolizing their shared history, their DEEP history, are growing restive.  

    Funny thing.

  29. Could the penetration of the crypto-fascists into the EU likely to extend well beyond 20%?
    Surely decent human beings still makeup the majority of each individual country.

Comments are closed.