The European Nationalist Threat
Vol: 67 Issue: 20 Friday, April 20, 2007
The various states of the European Union are turning back the clock in a direction some fear will bring Europe back to the ‘bad old days’ of European ultranationalism that produced the likes of Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler and Generalissmo Francisco Franco.
In France, polls show Jean-Marie Le Pen’s platform of “France First” resonates with one in five French voters.
Le Pen preaches a kind of xenophobia not heard since the pre-WWII era. He regularly rails against immigration, France’s role in the European Union, traditional Roman Catholic culture, and the high rate of unemployment in France, which he blames on unrestricted immigration.
Other planks in Le Pen’s platform include immigration restrictions, compulsory military service, and state censorship.
In May 1987 he advocated isolating those infected with HIV (whom he calls “sida ques”) from society by placing them in a special “sidatorium”.
In 2005, he claimed that the occupation of France by Nazi Germany “was not particularly inhumane”.
Last year, he complained that the French World Cup soccer team had “too many colored players” and therefore, “were not an accurate reflection of French society.” Over the years, Le Pen gained widespread popularity among neo-nazis and white nationalists throughout Europe and North America.
A poll published last December by TNS Sofres found that 30% of French voters said they agree with Le Pen’s positions.
Le Pen’s brand of ultra-nationalism is not confined to France, however. In the Netherlands, a powerful nationalist movement sprang up around charismatic Pim Fortuyn before he was assassinated in 2002. Fortuyn championed policies that would reassert the primacy of Dutch culture by demanding citizenship tests, language proficiency and tougher immigration rules. Thanks largely to Fortuyn, the Netherlands adopted both the citizenship tests and a policy of deporting asylum seekers.
Denmark’s “Danish People’s Party” is the third-largest in Denmark’s parliament. Like the French and Dutch, they favor tighter immigration policies, oppose EU encroachments on Danish sovereignty, and oppose multiculturalism in Danish society.
A party spokesman, S ren Krarup, explained that Muslim immigration is a way for Muslims to conquer us, just as they have done 1,400 years past.
In Austria, Joerg Haider has risen to become one of Austria’s most prominent and controversial political leaders. His father was a member of both the Hitler Youth and the Nazi SA (storm troopers) who traveled to Munich with Adolf Eichmann and Alois Brunner in 1933 as a member of the Austrian Legion. His mother was a member of the Nazi Party’s League of German girls.
Haider lives on a 38,000 acre estate he inherited from his parents. The estate had once belonged to Jews — until the 1938 annexation of Austria by Germany.
When asked to comment on his parents’ wartime activities, Haider remarked: “In retrospect one is always wiser. As a descendant, one should not be so arrogant as to say, ‘I would have known better.'”
Haider has a long public record of defending the policies of Nazi Germany and of justifying individual actions during those years. Upon his election to the leadership of the Freedom Party, Haider rejected comparisons with the German Nazi Party, saying “The Freedom Party is not the descendant of the National Socialist Party. If it were, we would have an absolute majority.”
Even Great Britain is beginning to re-examine some of its most treasured liberal policies. Tony Blair campaigned in 2005 on the slogan, “Your country’s borders protected.” Despite Blair’s domestic unpopularity over his country’s support of the US and the Iraq war, that slogan won him re-election.
Blair’s opponents went even further, demanding HIV and tuberculosis tests for prospective immigrants. Blair is now on his way out, and they are in their way in.
In Germany, far-left ultranationalism parties remain on the political fringe, but they hold three legislative seats in what used to be the Communist East. But among the German population, crimes against foreigners, and in particular, Jews, is up by sixteen percent over last year.
The biggest problem facing the EU is that is purports to speak with one voice, but nobody is sure which voice to listen to. Who speaks for Europe?
Is it the French? The Germans? The UK? “Old” Europe? “New” Europe? The European Union? The Western European Union? NATO?
At some point, each claimed they speak for a unified Europe, but each dances to the beat of its own drummer. France speaks for what is best for France. The same goes for the Germans and British.
The EU speaks for Europe’s economic interests. The WEU speaks for Europe’s security interests. And NATO ‘s voice has a distinctly American accent.
The end result is that nobody takes the EU very seriously. Washington seldom holds substantive talks with Brussels, preferring to deal with the French, Germans and British directly. It is easier to negotiate one-on-one than with 27 simultaneous and conflicting voices clamoring to be heard.
One of the EU’s Founding Fathers was Paul-Henri Spaak, former Belgian Prime Minister and President of the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe. Speaking nearly fifty years ago, he addressed the very situation that threatens European unity today. Too many voices.
We do not want another committee. We have too many already. What we want is a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all people, and to lift us out of the economic morass in which we are sinking. Send us such a man and, be he God OR THE DEVIL, we will receive him.
The Bible outlines the same scenario for the last days. Both Daniel and the Apostle John predict a revived form of the Roman Empire will arise in the last days. Daniel identified the antichrist as being a “prince” of the people who would come and destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. (Daniel 9:27)
Six hundred years later, in 70 AD the Roman legions under future Emperor Titus, slaughtered more than a million Jews in Jerusalem, burned the Temple, and dismantled it, brick by brick.
The Roman political Empire collapsed, but its power was temporarily transferred to the Vatican’s spiritual empire. No European king could hope to ascend to his throne without a papal blessing.
It wasn’t until the 20th century that the Vatican’s political influence began to wane, at the same point in history that Europe began restoring its political empire, which still lacks a Ceasar to lead it.
John further confirms Europe’s identification as the final form of world government, describing it as the “city on seven hills” — a geographic feature so indelibly linked to Rome that it is still one of the city’s nicknames to this day.
Daniel interpreted Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of an image with a head of gold, chest and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, two legs of iron, and feet of clay as being four successive world empires; Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome.
Rome was depicted as two legs of iron. By the third century AD, the Roman Empire had become so large it split into two separate empires at Rome and Constantinople (modern day Ankara).
The ten toes of the image, Daniel described as being ‘iron mixed with clay’ — partly strong, and partly weak — a letter perfect word picture of the modern EU.
“And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.”
But, Daniel said, “in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed . . .” (Daniel 2:42-44)
Daniel also records that, out of this union will arise a ‘little horn’ with “a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows,” whom Daniel identifies as the antichrist.
The EU has but two possible future courses — continue on the one it is on now and crumble under the weight of growing European nationalist sentiments, or united under a single, powerful leader whose charisma can bridge the gap between Europe’s nationalist minority and the surpra-nationalist European Union.
Henri Spaak reflected Europe’s continuing frustration with the lack of a unified central leadership, one so desperate that Spaak joked that even the devil would do.
According to Bible prophecy, the devil is exactly who they are destined to choose.