“What’s next?”
That’s the question on everyone’s minds across the West. The far Left, as ever, is certain that it will soon have its turn, and that the populist-right wave will soon crest. The centre-left, over ten years into the nationalist revolt, is in denial that any such revolt is even happening, desperately pointing to an increasingly small number of countries which do not have right-wing governments as proof that it’s all just a mirage. The centre-right still does not know what the future holds; some insist upon the grand coalitions, believing that what has not worked and has been totally rejected will somehow come back in vogue, while others cautiously are reaching out to their further-right brothers, believing that they just might be where the future is headed.
Then there’s the populist-right, the nationalists; for them, there is no “might or maybe,” and the answer – for them – is definitive: They are the future. This confidence was on full display last weekend in Sofia, Bulgaria, at the latest Patriots Network conference. Patriots Network is an organisation which brings nationalists and patriots from around the world – though mostly Europeans – together to advocate for their common beliefs: The supremacy of the nation, traditional values, and the promotion of the national interest. Their events include discussions of hot button issues; speakers include MEPs, sitting parliamentarians, economists, think-tankers, and policy analysts (including yours truly).
The conference opened with speeches from parliamentarians from Bulgaria’s Revival party and the founder of the Patriots Network, Enzo Alias; sprinkled between further speeches were a series of panels dealing with – among other things – the eurozone, the issue of terrorism being imported into Europe due to the European Union’s open borders, and the de-Christianization and ethno-demographic changes in Europe (the panel on which I was kindly asked to speak).
The most interesting aspect of these discussions was not just the content itself – which was plenty interesting – but that these discussions were even being held. Take the first panel, on migration and the importation of labour. To publicly broach the issue ten years ago would have been to assure that oneself was cancelled, promptly; the notion that European leaders were importing workers to function as low-wage servants, as opposed to doing so out of the goodness of their morally righteous hearts, was anathema, an unacceptable notion in public discussion.
The second panel, on the Eurozone, was an unfortunate reminder that Bulgaria was recently forced into the Euro by the country’s political elites without the people having any say on the matter, even though polls showed Bulgarians were overwhelmingly against doing so.
The third’s topic, de-Christianization, would likely have been simply unacceptable in the past. There was no hedging from any of the panellists – other than myself, it included one German AfD state parliamentarian and one Slovak MEP – when it came to discussing the severe impact the loss of a Christian-centred society will have on the West.
Special attention, in that panel and throughout, was paid to how to encourage families to have children. Some lauded economic incentives, such as Hungary’s impressive array of policies – from cutting income tax for women with three or more children to putting a church and pub in every village – but I pointed out that was not enough, as even Hungary has had issues keeping their birth rate up.
There’s a point to be made in the birth rate discussion that there really are two types of birth rates: the religious birth rate and the non-religious birth rate. Religious individuals are significantly more likely to have children; while they do not have children at a rate which will keep population numbers stable, there’s an open question as to whether keeping population numbers stable is a necessary goal. Convincing people that we need more people without getting them to have more children will inevitably result in the importation of more people to make up for a certain loss in population.
Which led into a point echoed by many participants: That the goal of the populist-right should be to inspire citizens to believe in their civilisation. Several panellists spoke of children being taught to feel guilty about their past instead of inspired by it; after 18 years of being barraged with such thoughts, it is no surprise that young people increasingly do not wish to play a role in continuing a civilisation they have been taught is evil.
And this point is where the meeting truly shined: Instead of hawking platitudes, speakers deigned to actually suggest solutions to these problems. Thierry Baudet, founder of the Dutch Forum for Democracy party, spoke on this at length, urging participants – and the wider Western right – to stop talking about theory and to actually consider how to use and wield power, a particularly important task for those who are still plurality or even minority parties. While we have seen some parties do this successfully – such as Bulgaria’s Revival, which only has 33 out of 200 seats, successfully passing a bill which made the country’s paedophile registry public; taking the effort to actually convert, or eliminate, institutions heralded by the establishment as necessary for the security of the state takes the ability to withstand immense pressure. For example, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico’s dismantling of the Special Prosecutor office in Slovakia, or the Trump administration’s attempt to eliminate the myriad of internal dissension from establishment-supportive individuals. These efforts have received immense pushback, and will continue to, because they demonstrate that the nationalists are jumping from words to deeds – a terrifying result for the establishmentarians.
The battle has now shifted from social media to parliaments and the halls of power. As demonstrated this weekend in Sofia, the populist-right is increasingly united, confident, and ready to take power. Whether they will depends entirely upon two things: Their ability to convince centrists who have, as of yet, been unable to bring themselves around to voting for nationalists, and their own readiness to put their ideas into practice.
The former is yet to be determined. But if Sofia is any indication, the latter is clear: The nationalists are ready to get started.
Why Rubio can’t be bothered to talk to Kallas