People who talk about the far right have no idea

There’s a lot of talk these days about “over-entitlement”.

The victory of the so-called Trend in the European elections, and since the early legislative elections in France, where Jordan Bardella’s National Rally has a good chance of victory, we wonder what it represents.

And, while many of them question this ridiculous label of “extreme right,” some adhere to it outright.

A small historical reminder.

Right?

From the early 1980s, European countries began to recognize the problems associated with immigration. It is in Great Britain, but especially in France.

Of course, these problems are not on the scale they are today, but they are already noticeable. It was only by tackling this question that they would emerge – however, they also held socially conservative discourses in reaction to the social changes of the 1960s and 1970s.

At that time, it must be said that the classic right-wing parties also had a very conservative tendency.

Then the world changed from the 1990s and the Cold War ended.

Suddenly, Western societies in general are turning to globalization and its main consequence, mass immigration.

This is at least the choice of the globalist and progressive elite.

Leftist parties fully embrace diversity ideology and the cult of “minorities”.

As for right-wing parties, they are exclusively associated with neoliberalism and a strictly mercantile view of the world.

But many of them felt abandoned by this new society, taking shape around a cult of “inclusion” that ideologically excluded those who did not actually celebrate it.

Since then, populist-branded parties have emerged from the fringes and started to assert themselves.

Some lean economically to the left, others to the right, depending on the country. But that is not the point. They are, collectively, opposed to an accelerated form of cultural and political aggression.

The rhetoric of these parties worries the globalist elites who want to discredit them.

In which way?

By declaring themselves the heirs of 1930s fascism, they have nothing to do with it. By suggesting that protecting one’s borders, protecting one’s cultural identity, or not bending to all the whims of a radical minority has something to do with 20th century terror.^e century

By consolidating them to the extreme right. Which is better than not thinking, and worse, talking stupid things and showing everyone your angry state.

Populism

How to qualify them? For my part, I speak of the national right, generally divided into the national-conservative trend and the national-populist trend.

Both tendencies, let us repeat, are democratic. We can seriously criticize this movement without endorsing anything in its view of the world. But when we demonize it, we become delusionalextreme right.

Cursing your critics is the best way to avoid understanding what they are saying.