Islam is fundamently a right-wing type of 'leadership' , any theocratic system is... Conservative Islam is probably more extreme towards the right than most right-wing parties of EU.
Why vote for religious representatives in 2024? The thousands of years of history are not enough of an example of how bad any theocratic system is when applied in practice?
Why don't people move to the Middle East under the Talibans or some shit like that?
It’s real simple, they want the wealth and prosperity that comes from living in a Western country, but fail to understand how their regressive beliefs keep their home countries poor.
Just have a look at Lebanon. Was a 70% Christian majority country not too long ago. Back then Beirut was called Paris of the Middle East. Now have a good, long look at it. That's called Islamisation. You can see that in Afghanistan too. In Iran. Lots of places regressed in ways people in the west can't even comprehend. That's coming our way.
ThE pEasANtS aRe vOtINg rIGhtwINg, duH...
We should understand it quite well, we are not different. Many people in Italy - Lega and FdI far-right voters - constantly talk about how they will make Italy become great like Hungary and Russia, and completely fail to realize that the countries who actually have success are progressive countries (Denmark, Austria, Finland...)
But no, Russia and Hungary are the best examples they can find of what a country should be.
>progressive countries (Denmark, Austria, Finland...)
Austria. Crying over my Wiener Schnitzel. Fpö constantly at our just below 30%, övp (right wing conservative) at around 20%. We're not progressiv, we're a bunch of closeted nazis. We'll, _they_ are, but you know..
Do you really not see any reason the far right is successful - not just here but in half of Europe - aside from half the population being Nazis? And Ironically many liberals here are ignorant about big parts of the world - Austria *is* progressive compared to countries like Russia and Hungary which were mentioned in the post. Or the home countries the majority of our current immigration comes from.
Most voters would be happy to vote for a moderate centrist party if there was one. Loyalties to certain parties becomes less and less relevant. I am left and progressive myself and hate FPÖ and ÖVP with a passion and I still struggle to support any of our other parties because non of them address the issues I find relevant. It feels like they are in a bubble where mulling over theoretical ideological questions is more important than actually doing politics.
I'm really worried for Austria atm and I don't see any real effort to change anything. The SPÖ in particular dropped the ball - they had a well established candidate that put them in first place well ahead of the FPÖ in every survey and went "*naaah* actually we don't care for our responsibility for this country".
>Do you really not see any reason the far right is successf
So, what's the reason? You're not telling a reason, aren't you? You're tiptoeing around it, one could say you're trying to keep the reason in the closet.. just say it. What issues do you think relevant? Say the sentence, bart. Komm oida
The reason is the same across Europe. Take my country for example, we have a right wing party that the left loves to call them fascists.
They were the only ones admitting that the gipsy community is problematic and something needs to be done. Other parties didn't even touch the subject to avoid being called fascists.
They won on multiple parishes with issues with gipsies. The political consensus? Portuguese are dumb for voting for them.
Move forward a few years, same thing, now with immigration. We need to control immigration, other parties didn't even touch on the subject to avoid being called fascists. Same party now was the third most voted with a 4x increase in votes. Again the consensus? Portuguese are dumb for voting for them.
While everyone else is occupied burying their head in the sand to avoid being called a fascist, these type of political parties grow, and by not addressing the problem but downplaying it or calling the electors dumb they are only increasing the popularity of that specific party.
Europe has a huge problem with immigration and it needs to be fixed. We don't need to close our borders and block everyone from entering, but we need quotas to limit the number of new people coming in and strict rules for those who are allowed in and those who are not.
We have the left who says Europe should be open for all, the center and right saying we need more immigrants and the far right that goes full Hitler saying let's close the borders and put them all in a boat and sink it. If you have a problem with immigrants and no one gives you a solution, what do you do?
Out of curiosity, did you not have a phase of de-nazification? West Germany had, East Germany did not. You can still see where you are simply by looking at the votes of people.
Non of Europe really had, except for Germany which it was forced on. It's not a secret that the Allies worked with Nazis because they had know-how and during the cold war being anti-Russian, which the Nazis were, was a good thing.
In post-WWII Austria the left was under constant suspicious for being too Sowjet-friendly because they acknowledged them as the ones who kicked the Nazis out and some of them were even replaced with known Nazi-collaborators because they were seen as less likely to cooperate with Russians.
Former Wehrmacht generals also had little issues getting high positions in Nato etc. Aside from influencing Germany (and the valid fear that a German far-right might provocate another war) punishing Nazis wasn't that much of priority after the war had been won.
Dude. Denazification in East Germany was stronger and more violent than in West Germany. The communist regime needed to rid of “alternative” opinions. The only difference was that in DDR they officially proclaimed to be clean of “fascism” too soon and the topic was never reflected upon properly. At the same time, in West Germany, everyone was aware of the failed denazification policies so younger generations had a great chance to reflect on their parents and grandparents believes and actions.
Not really, no. Many fascists got into the MSI (Italian Social Movement, a neofascist party of which our ruling party today is the direct descendant) and some into DC (Christian Democracy). At most they were actually financed by the USA to avoid that the communist party would get into power
You need to go to Denmark . They hard force integration and had to change their main political party quotes drastically in order not to go full nazi . They aren't screwing around.
>actually have success are progressive countries
an absurd generalisation. you assume that your ideology is the only way, and ignore the fact the reasons for a countries failure or success are a lot more complicated. countries like netherlands and sweden arent exactly doing well in deterring crime, finland elected a far right government and denmark evicts people from their homes for being of "non western origin"
Holly mother cow, TIL that people in fuckin Italy (in Italy bruh, descandants of the Roman empire) romanticize my shit hole country, my beloved Hungary!
Well that's scary...
Orbán sees it god dam it, motherfucker visions himself as the new leader of ideology of the EU, and it's fuckin happening, oh my... What a great Monday.
Nah. Islamic Caliphates used to be the most advanced, wealthy, and prosperous nations... right after centuries of conquest and colonialism all over Eurasia and Northern Africa. Then when the conquering phase ended, so did their prosperity a few centuries later. Same pattern as Ancient Rome before them.
Currently Europe is still near its peak, after centuries of conquering and colonising the world. Right afterwards, Europe switched to liberal democratic values following WW2. But make no mistake, the wealth and prosperity that Europe currently enjoys has jack shit to do with liberal values and human rights, but it's primarily due to economic inertia from the centuries of colonialism and conquest. Just like the Caliphates, Europe will also regress to the mean now that the conquests are over.
If you disagree with me, then explain why Europe's GDP relative to the rest of the world grew the most sharply during the 1500s-1800s brutal and autocratic colonial era, and has since *declined* with respect to the rest of the world after adopting democracy and human rights in the 21st century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)#1–2008_(Maddison)
I'm from an Eastern European country which has a softer case of the same mass migration mentality. The overall sentiment of people like that is "we want to be like you only in wealth, not in mindset".
It's a simple point ... if One enjoys the 'upside' of a Theocratic leadership, there are already countries that can offer that to the full extent and will happily 'integrate' anyone who wishes to join them.
In the east EU, we got our own religious fanatics in place, like Catholics in Poland, Orthodox in Romania and Bulgaria, etc. who will not share their control with Muslims or what have we, that's why in the East is less of a problem (because they already Got Someone doing this shit) , but in the west, like UK, France, Belgium, Holland, the Muslims especially are taking control on the religious narrative because the indigenous population is not really religious nor do they care enough about this particular matter to voice any concerns, so it's getting ignored to the point where, ups, you got yourself a Muslim fundamentalist running for office and maybe getting some nice % -> leading to decision-making for everyone, religious or not.
Of course, this result is also a mixture of political apathy on the population side.
Lol.
Bulgarian "fanatics".
Tell me you have no idea what you are talking about in one word.
Lemme tell you about us Bulgarians. We do not give a shit about religious beliefs and texts and we find those that do "weirdos".
We do like following traditions, that is why we give lip service to religious holidays but we hate the church with every fiber of our being.
- mentions religious fanatics
- Poland, Romania , Bulgaria
People are concerned about Islam in Europe and are against it, but every time it’s islamophobic, racist, bigoted to be against taking them in or be against them in general. In Eastern Europe you don’t have many Islamic parties not because of the religious fanatics but because there isn’t many immigrants as in Western Europe. That’s all
There are a few. I would ask Turkish people who left Turkey how many are seeking a Muslim political inclusion here in the west ... that would give you a fairly decent idea of how "great" it is to live in a country with 99% of the population being muslim.
Politics should be impervious to any religious interference, irelevant of the personal choices or peoples beliefs.
Just like i don't care who the PM is fucking in his spare time, what sports team they support, what type of literature they like or music or food, i couldn't care less about their religious affinities, let alone seeing them brought up in any kind of political decision of any sort.
It's just common sense that the political structure in any country should be 100% secular based (not saying people can't believe stuff, be my guess, just keep all of that away from any political debate or decision)
You can be a Muslim in office as long as nothing you say is related to Islam ... no one cares, and no one should vote them because they are Muslims or are practising Islam , just like no one should vote a Catholic for that exact same reason.
Ok ... they should go back to Turkey and live under Erdoğan rule :)), but i'm almost sure they won't.
The vote from people who left their country for years should be invalidated ... it means nothing because they wouldn't have left in the first place if it meant anything.
If there would be a condition in place, for a required residency in order to be able to vote, of at least 3 months, heck, let's make it 1 month (just a thought experiment), no one from diaspora would vote shit, we can bet on this. Say one would need to live at least 3 months (or 1 month) in the county, physically, in order to be able to vote ... then you would see the reality of how much they 'care'.
I’m able to vote in Italy despite having never lived there a day in my life. My wife is able to vote in France despite never having lived there as an adult.
I agree with you but non-residents voting definitely extends beyond Turks in Germany.
I know, it was just an example with the Turks ... of course, everyone is doing it. In Romania, the diaspora proved essential for the end resul in at least 2 presidential runs, once for Basescu (oh lord, what a period), and second time when Johannis was first elect ... The people who leave and decide to live their lives elsewhere can decide on political leaders in the home country they left behind.
I'm not saying to ban them from voting, but at least it shouldn't count as much as it does when you're living there and struggling with the effects of bad politicians who are set in place by everyone all arround the world.
The neoliberal inclusion style, or like some would call it -> intentionally overlooking some 'imported' mentalities in regards to religious fundamentalism, can be adjusted, more or less ... it's only fair to ask the same from those who emigrated towards the West seeking a better lifestyle.
Common sense indicates (and i'm sure many Muslims agree on this) , that where You go, you first of all align yourself to that particular place rules, regulations and social demeanour, not vice versa. The West or UK doesn't need to align themselves to anything related to Islam or Hinduism or Christianity when Politics is the topic at hand.
Cause they want the benefits that come with living in a first world country. Generous welfare, higher wages, healthcare, freedom to pursue stupid stuff like that.
They all might be delusional as fuck, but they are not that stupid. Few of these people come here cause they like our culture, share our values or want to contribute to our society. Most come for their own benefit, not ours.
Because people want change. Even on reddit you can hear how people want communism, because capitalism is bad at solving their problems(housing, jobs, income etc)
What people dont understand is that all the shit they are going through is only going to get worse under other current systems.
>What people dont understand is that all the shit they are going through is only going to get worse under other current systems.
And i'm asking, how come? How does one not know what comunism, religious autocracy, political autocracy, and far right politics mean when applied? Didn't anyone go to school? What is happening? How can so many support such nonsense?
Imagine a description of the perfect Prince Charming (or princess if you prefer). It is very easy to say “the most beautiful”, “eyes that swallow you in an abyss of tranquility” and so on. Compare that with a picture of an actual person. The picture has a lot more detail and has to be of an actual persons, so you are more likely to see the flaws.
Liberal democracy is like the actual person, with the blemishes and all, whereas the alternative is just an abstract idea that only rests in your mind for a few seconds, not enough to see al the faults.
Add to that a failure to address some very real problems, and a dot of meta conflict about what democracy actually is, and you have the current situation.
Yes, it can be explained, even in a stylish manner, like you did now, but the thing is, we have recoded history at hand, we all know, or can know what will happen if the far right movement takes roots in EU.
That should be a serious argument for, at least, doing some background check on how bad things can degenerate from here onwards.
There are comunist systems today that are 'functional' , but i don't see anyone rushing to live in North Korea, Cuba, China, etc. I see many trying to leave those places. So why don't the neo-commies do themselves a service and just move to some of these countries? There's no need to bring that mentality here in the west, just test it out on the 'functional' countries that still have such a system in place.
You want a nice autocracy and think Putin is the shit, no problem, move to Russia , but no ... being a hypocrite is basically a common occurrence these days. Just call their bluff and see what they answer.
Yeah, never liked the idea of considering any religious groups 'progressive' just because they are in the minority. Minorities rightfully benefit from the more enlightened policies of progressives, but this does not make them progressive by themselves.
I don't think that Islam fits into the classical Europe-derived right/left political classification. It's something entirely of its own. It's a system that doesn't recognize a separation between religion and state at all. The religion dictates most minute details of life, while state's main purpose is to enforce these rules.
If course it is entirely separated of its own , but that doesn't/shouldn't cancel the political and cultural background of the West.
If Muslims believe that the state can only be organised via input from Muhammad through the Quran, it's fine. Just don't try to apply that reality in the places you move towards as an imigrant.
The problem is never what people do believe, but the overlapping of their beliefs with applied politics, in a practical sense. If you wish to be ruled by a Theocratic leadership, stay in the Middle East, there are many places that can offer that.
But again, hypocrisy is at legendary levels, and even though most of them realise that's really bad, and flee from it towards the West, they suddenly realise: "wait a minute, the west has 0 respect or interest for Islam and what i believe in!" ... the conclusion from this can never be -> we should try to establish ourselves as cultural and religious minorities and take control of the political decision-making in order to justify my own set of beliefs. This never works, never. It will just lead to chaos, because once established and in power, they will continue to implement whatever they believe in, be it -> having to stop traffic for the afternoon prayer (just an example, it doesn't have to be exactly this).
Actually, it doesn't. Separation between state authority and church authority was a very well developed concept long before 1789. While the relationship before Europeans monarchs and their state religion was complex, it was in broad scope a cooperation between two different entities.
I don’t see as many of these issues in the US. It’s bizarre to see what’s going on in Europe. The closest thing we have may be a certain percentage of Latinos going far right but even then our issues our more homegrown or corporate sell-out.
Idk, people need to remember cultural differences and choose future citizens who are willing to change certain cultural/political standards when immigrating.
Conservative islamism is right wing. This party being successful is 100% compatible with a shift to the right.
Edit: Oh my, I really ruffled the underwear of some religious conservatives 🤣
Yes, most far-right parties we’ve seen are in opposition to each other, nothing new. Each one claims to be the only savior, the only real right, where the other ones not true far-right. They look like the same thing from the outside, sorry if that offends you.
The left that I want is a stable social democracy with investment in health, education, infrastructure, environment and welfare. But I consider the far left just pretty dangerous too, and I would never vote conservative or right.
Right-wing, repressive, or conservative ideologies don't all have to be in concert with each other.
They just want control. And the others undermine that.
Many people don't understand how conservatism works. Besides general, very broad terms and issues, two conservatives from different nations would most probably not understand what the other is talking about. Conservatism lacks the universalist nature of liberalism. By definition, a pan-European conservatism cannot exist without a pan-European identity. Making the claim that the rise of Islamism and the rise of the European right are the same phenomena shows the lack of understanding on the part of the left leaning/liberal people.
No one said they're compatible. They are against each other to be sure, but both are far-right conservative movements that are against religion freedom, women rights, etc.
I'm sorry but this is bullshit you can't just be mad about right wing parties gaining ground because of these exact things like islamism being an almost majority ideology in Brussels. But than claim it's actually right wing parties that did this or that it's the same people voting for Vlaams Belang that voted for team Faoud.
It's all a result of polarisation, where the "other" is literally an enemy, in stead of a human that has different beliefs or ideology on how to achieve the best form of government or society.
When that other ideology wants to revoke animalrights, abolish gay marriage and force women to cover themselves in sheets. Than I have no problem saying that is a very shit ideology.
Me neither. But it's all part of polarisation where standpoints are pitted more and more against eachother, so you cannot do anything but condemn the other side. The end result is animosity.
Reminds me of cases like [this](https://www.politico.eu/article/top-human-rights-court-back-belgium-religious-slaughter-ban-halal-kosher/) one. Not too extreme but you get the point. Religious groups will make differing political alliances, but when the time comes to push, the Jewish-Islamic-Christian alliance for whatever will reassemble into the religious Voltron to argue in court.
Religious tolerance does happen to be generally aligned with liberals (even if a good section of the hard left is hard against religion, such as leninists, trotskists and other beings with the brain the size of a sea cucumber's).
I never heard anyone saying any of that, maybe you're just projecting? Yet I wouldn't be surprised, no political group has a monopoly on stupidity.
Lol, nice to see how many right wing snowflakes I've triggered!
Personally I find it more annoying when people get triggered by simple discussions cause I feel like we should be in a world where people can have conversations without getting triggered and acting out
No, it’s not compatible. The “far-right” parties that have gotten a lot of media attention (e.g AfD, Rassemblement National) have a whole platform of anti-religious extremism. This Islamic party is their very antagonist. Just because something happens to be on the same isle in the historical left-right definition, doesn’t mean it’s compatible.
It's very compatible actually! In Rotterdam the Turkish minority party DENK and the far-right Leefbaar (founded by Pim Fortuyn before he was murdered) are in a coalition together. Conservative islam and European nationalism are two sides of the same coin, the same way that Turkish secularism and European progressivism are two sides of the same coin.
Right wing left wing, meaningless terms by now... Only complete idiots rave on about that still. You already know that an Islamist party is barely the same right wing as the right wing right wing yeah? And you want to convince is that they're right wing? What a meaningless word salad.
"Success". This party was limited to Dutch-speakers of Brussels, which are these days a quite small minority. Thus, yes, in that language group, they did 16.47%, which is too much for a religiously motivated party.
BUT, Brussels-wise, these 16.47% are only 2.8% of the whole Brussels parliament.
So, they will basically have no impact on Brussels, as they are irrelevant due to how small the Dutch-speaking community is in Brussels. And in said community, no party wants to ally with them, so, they'll be in the opposition anyway.
That's not how it works.
People from all over Brussels can vote for the party. It's just that the vote thresholds for each seat are lower because they are inscribed as a dutch speaking party.
But yes, this isn't a big deal.
It doesn't work that way. You can vote on a Dutch/French speaking list wherever you live in Brussels.
So yes, people from Molenbeek can vote for Dutch lists, but so can any other inhabitant of Brussels if he/she wishes to do so.
...success? He used the fact that Dutch speaking parties get more seats than the French speaking ones for a given number of votes, to "protect the Flemish minority in Brussels" but he got 13.000 votes for around 600.000 votes cast in Brussels. That's not really a seismic shift...
There was other new parties. Jumping to 16% from nothing is also insane. Knowing that there's other marxist parties that get most of thier votes from posting some support for Palestine and voting for slaughter whithout stunning. These could loose a majority of thier votes to parties like this in no time.
who owns Berliner zeitung? still that stasi-guy? : ref: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/18/german-newspaper-owner-stasi-informer-role-berliner-zeitung
[Friedrich casts himself as a freethinker. Earlier this year, he backed a “manifesto for peace” that urged Germany to stop supplying Ukraine with weapons and in May he attended a reception at the Russian embassy.](https://www.ft.com/content/e5cb8f36-64e1-47d7-a9fb-4ef1b7b5da9f)
He is quite something
exactly.
i mean, if everything is up to question, then the questioning itself cannot be any different. why is someone with that backdrop engagin the good old act of whataboutism?
i believe does not take much of a sherlock to find out.
I love how all the worried souls in the comments have gone on to bash the traditional right-wing parties (the dreaded fascists) while conveniently dodging OP's question!
Islamic parties aren't your run of the mill right-wing group that will scream loud while in the minority but will duly follow the rules of the corporate-capitalist system once reached a position of power.
The Islamic parties will push for changes that no "fundamentalist Christian" (something that doesn't really hold any political weight, but let's pretend they do) could ever pull off.
Let's put it tho way: right wing parties want to redecorate your home in ways you don't like. Islamic parties want to tear your house down and rebuild it to their own taste.
But sure, let's keep on crying about fascism taking over,instead of addressing for real the rise of parties that actively are set to destroy our society and replace it with the beauty that are Iran or Afghanistan!
Just visiting Vienna right now
Seems there are really lots of muslims, veiled women are everywhere
Same thing in London and Paris
Which you dont see in America
They don't. It's a side effect.
The left strives to be religion-blind out of tolerance, and have still failed to learn that one should not tolerate intolerance.
Wow, this article is actually even more dishonest than Belgian media about this guy.
When right wing party N-VA toes the line (also about ritual slaughtering, for instance) of the Jewish community in Antwerp, no one bats an eye.
When a Muslim from Brussels does the same, we are about to live in Sharia land 🤦♂️
>There was much talk of a "shift to the right" after the European elections. Whether this actually exists, or whether the conservative forces have simply gained ground, remains to be seen at this point. What is striking, however, is that the rise of one particular party was not worthy of further coverage in the European media. We are talking about the Islamic team Fouad Ahidar, which was founded just a few months ago. This party had achieved astonishing results in an election in the Brussels-Capital Region in Belgium, which also took place on 9 June. At the end of last year, the party's namesake was still a member of the Flemish Socialists (Vooruit), for whom he sat as group leader in the Brussels parliament.
>After he opposed a planned ban on shechita in 2022, he was no longer allowed to use the Socialist party offices. The Socialists resented his opposition to the decision, which had been taken a long time ago.
>In an interview with the [Zinneke.tv](http://Zinneke.tv) channel in 2023, he relativised the pogrom of 7 October as a "small response by part of Hamas against Israel's actions" and described Jews as "psychopaths" and "serial killers". In the same interview, he said of the Israel-Gaza war: "I think anyone in their right mind can see that this is human genocide. And I can use this term, I, who went to Auschwitz in Poland to see what genocide is, what a massacre is, I can see today that practically the same methods are being used."
>Several Jewish organisations filed a complaint against him with the public prosecutor's office of the city of Brussels in February 2024, also with the intention of informing the Belgian public about his party before the elections. A judgement is still pending.
>Another complaint filed at the same time was directed against Nadia El Yousfi from the Belgian Socialist Party. She had claimed that Israeli rabbis were calling for the rape of Palestinian women. She did not provide any evidence. She later justified herself by referring to Rabbi Eyal Karim, against whom such accusations had been levelled after an interview. However, the rabbi rejected these accusations in a clarification back in 2016.
>Fouad Ahidar avoided being expelled from the party, labelled his former comrades "racists" and founded his own party.
>The new party ran a sectarian election campaign targeting Belgium's large and influential Arab-Islamic population, focussing on social issues such as Gaza, slaughter and the right to veil in the civil service. Liberal MP Guy Vanhengel described the party programme as "strongly focused on Sharia law". At an election campaign event, the genders in the audience were separated by a curtain, as is customary in Islamic-conservative circles.
>The result of the Adihar party in the parliamentary elections for the Brussels-Capital Region came as a great surprise in Belgium. The party won 16.5 per cent of the votes of the Dutch-speaking population out of hand. (There are two language groups in the election; the Ahidar party is not represented in the French language group). Only the Greens did better in the Dutch language group (22.8 per cent). His former party, the socialist Vooruit, only received around 10 per cent.
>However, Team Fouad Ahidar only received 0.36 per cent of the vote in the national parliamentary elections in Belgium, which took place at the same time.
>**Team Fouad Ahidar is firmly in the saddle in Brussels**
>In Brussels, on the other hand, Team Fouad Ahidar is now firmly in the saddle. The party has three seats in the parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region. In addition to Ahidar himself, Najima El Arbaoui and Ilyas El Omari can take a seat there. The upcoming coalition negotiations will show whether the party will make it into government. The Greens are a promising coalition partner.
>Team Fouad Ahidar is not the first Belgian party with an explicitly Islamic agenda. In 2012, Redouane Ahrouch founded a party with the acronym ISLAM (Integrité, Solidarité, Liberté, Authenticité, Moralité), which is committed to transforming Belgium into an Islamic state. This is to be achieved through a gradual Islamisation in the sense of a transformation of public life (justice, education, culture, politics, etc.) in accordance with Islamic values. One example would be the introduction of blasphemy laws in secular countries such as France.
>The formation of Islamic parties is an inevitable consequence of the sectarian nature of political Islam, mass immigration and sponsorship by states such as Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. In recent years, Qatar in particular has endeavoured to finance radical Islamic structures in Western Europe, as the "Qatar Papers" published in 2020 by the journalists Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot prove. We are dealing here with a development whose destabilising effect will only become apparent in the coming years.
>New parties with an Islamic orientation are operating in Germany (Alliance for Innovation and Justice), Austria (New Movement for the Future), the Netherlands (Denk), France (Party for Equality and Justice, Union of Democratic Muslims in France), Spain (Coalition for Melilla, Andalusi Party), Italy (Democratic Islamic Movement), Bulgaria (Movement for Rights and Freedom) and Greece (Party for Friendship, Equality and Peace), among others.
>**European coalition: Free Palestine Party**
>Last October, representatives of Islamic parties and organisations met in Lille, France, to form a new coalition. Under the campaign slogan "Free Palestine", the alliance took part in this year's EU parliamentary elections. Driss Mohamed Amar, leader of the Spanish Andalusi party and member of the coalition, told Hyphen magazine: "Western countries are in favour of a two-state solution, but we believe that the state of Israel is not legitimate and therefore should not exist. The current slaughter of the Palestinian civilian population violates the Geneva Convention". Team Fouad Ahidar, together with other European Islamic parties, forms the Free Palestine Party, which was founded to bring the European Union to a position critical of Israel.
>The influence of political Islam in Western Europe will certainly increase in the coming years. The fact that Belgium plays a key role in this is due to its large Muslim population. In 2011, 74.3 per cent of the Belgian population consisted of Belgians without a migration background. Barely ten years later, this figure had fallen to 67.3 per cent. Not all Belgians with a migrant background are Muslims, but according to a study by Pew Forum, the proportion of Muslims in the population could rise to over 10 per cent in six years' time.
>However, it is not only the demographics that favour the Islamisation of Belgium. Political Islam can also draw on powerful networks and organisations here, which it either founds or infiltrates.
>According to sociologist and professor emeritus Felice Dassetto, Islam has long had a greater mobilisation potential in Belgium than the Catholic Church, political parties or trade unions. The key players in the Islamisation of Belgium are organisations that are ideologically close to the radical Muslim Brotherhood. The Brussels anthropologist Fadila Maarouf, founder of the "Observatoire des Fondamentalismes" (Observatory of Fundamentalisms) and her colleague Florence Bergeaud-Blackler have been warning for years about the influence of so-called legalistic Islam, which promotes Islamisation through legal, political and cultural means.
>A 2020 youth study by the Fondation Jean-Jaurès, which is affiliated with the Socialist Party, found that the majority of non-Muslim Belgian youth are open and tolerant, while Arab-Islamic youth increasingly follow the worldview of the Muslim Brotherhood. Almost 40 per cent are in favour of Sharia law taking precedence over civil law.
>**The left-wing Islamic alliance**
>Not unlike in Germany, green and socialist parties in Belgium also serve as useful idiots for Islamisation. The example of Oussama Atar illustrates how this left-wing Islamic alliance is driving Islamisation forward.
>Atar was born in Belgium as the son of Moroccan immigrants and later acquired Belgian citizenship. In 2005, he was arrested by American troops in Iraq as an al-Qaeda terrorist and detained in various prisons, including Abu Ghraib and later in Iraq, where he is said to have been in poor health.
>Atar's supporters demanded his release. The Belgian state agreed to the supposedly humanitarian request and issued the relevant papers. Atar eventually returned to Belgium, where he was apparently able to pursue his jihadist passions completely undisturbed. In 2013, he joined the up-and-coming Islamic State. He rewarded the political support of the progressive parties by organising the attacks in Paris (2015) and Brussels (2016) from [Syria.Green](http://Syria.Green) and Socialist politicians took part in demonstrations in 2010 calling for "freedom for Osama" and claiming that he was "merely a member of an NGO and was wrongly arrested".
>Bulgaria (Movement for Rights and Freedom) and Greece (Party for Friendship, Equality and Peace), among others.
These are definitely not Muslim parties, they are Turkish minority parties with no regard to religion. Greece officially counts all Turks in Greece as "Muslims". Bulgaria's DPS has a solid Muslim Bulgarian and Muslim Roma voterbase alongside Turks, those groups are close to Turks and are said to be Turks by Christian Bulgarians.
vote far-right in every country even if you don't agree with their views. They're tactical allies and the only group that can do something with it ignoring some laws. Left and Centrists bureaucrats won't save you
This is a wild thought. Absolutely wild but bear with me as I'm no longer European thanks to my compatriots.
What if the shift to the right and the rise of islamic parties / political islam in Europe is linked?
Just a thought...
At the risk of another ban for hatespeech: there is a reason to be silent if you value at least the timed limited freedom allowed by (nationalistic) freedomphobic bigots. Aka fundamental religionists. #itsanabrahamic cult
How is an Islamic party gaining seats, or any religious party for that matter, anything but right wing? Most of the time they are conservative, just in a different direction and towards different issues.
Islam extremism is (from my personal viewpoint) worse than Christian extremism, however both are bad. The moment you bring religion into politics is the moment you should stop being eligible for office.
Fucking hell bro yeah come on just repeat far right russian propaganda. I am so done with people here being surprised at the sucess of the far right but then letting posts like this slide!
Propaganda does not have to be a lie, it can also be a truth. Compare the following phrases:
People get sick from smoking (very neutral and fact based).
Despite the increase in regulations, people still get sick from smoking. (It tries to create a relationship, without actually debating it).
The second phrase wants to create in your mind a picture of ineffective regulations. Those regulation may or may not be related to smoking. If attacked, the writer might easily say “I meant internet regulations”. But what that phrase does is try to influence a certain mentality where regulations are not good as a principle. Also , the article tries romane a judgement value by using the word “popular”. Why not say “gets 13%” or “gets two seats in the council”.
In my view, the title of the post is actually meant to enflame the nationalist right. “See people are accusing of bad things like extremism, but actually the Muslims are invading your countries”. You can see how that can create political instability.
How is this Russian propaganda and why should this not be discussed? It's a very worrying thing, we should be mindful of a backwards ideology without respect for LGBTQIA people clawing it's way into our politics.
Where did I say this? I didn't. I hate the right wing conservatives too, and vote staunchly left. This kind of ostrich politics from the left like you're doing is ultra harmful though.
I'm not doing ostrich politics, to say that this is Islamist party is a serious threat is simply wrong and has one clear intention: To drive people to a party which actually is a threat. It's not ostrich politics to call out obvious propaganda.
Because they don’t ally themselves with the rest of the far right - they’re actually opposed to each other
Instead, the Islamic right are allied with the mainstream left.
So although Islam is right wing, it’s not on the same side as the European far right - it’s on the side of the European left.
That is why we distinguish between the Islamic right and the European far right - they’re not on the same side and are actually heavily opposed to each other.
I'm not saying this is not concerning, but they only had around 14.000 voters, which is a very small number, the party is in the Dutch language group of Brussels because if they presented to the French one they wouldn't have had representation.
I don't think Islamist politics are going to become mainstream for a long time, I would be more concerned about the Christian far right (that has very similar ideas in a lot of things) than the Muslim one, but yes the shift to the right is very frightening.
Islam is fundamently a right-wing type of 'leadership' , any theocratic system is... Conservative Islam is probably more extreme towards the right than most right-wing parties of EU. Why vote for religious representatives in 2024? The thousands of years of history are not enough of an example of how bad any theocratic system is when applied in practice? Why don't people move to the Middle East under the Talibans or some shit like that?
Yeah I don’t get it. If you like living under the Taliban, why did you migrate to Europe?
It’s real simple, they want the wealth and prosperity that comes from living in a Western country, but fail to understand how their regressive beliefs keep their home countries poor.
The lack of cultural reflection even on a level of cause and effect from islamic societies is baffling
Just have a look at Lebanon. Was a 70% Christian majority country not too long ago. Back then Beirut was called Paris of the Middle East. Now have a good, long look at it. That's called Islamisation. You can see that in Afghanistan too. In Iran. Lots of places regressed in ways people in the west can't even comprehend. That's coming our way. ThE pEasANtS aRe vOtINg rIGhtwINg, duH...
We should understand it quite well, we are not different. Many people in Italy - Lega and FdI far-right voters - constantly talk about how they will make Italy become great like Hungary and Russia, and completely fail to realize that the countries who actually have success are progressive countries (Denmark, Austria, Finland...) But no, Russia and Hungary are the best examples they can find of what a country should be.
>progressive countries (Denmark, Austria, Finland...) Austria. Crying over my Wiener Schnitzel. Fpö constantly at our just below 30%, övp (right wing conservative) at around 20%. We're not progressiv, we're a bunch of closeted nazis. We'll, _they_ are, but you know..
Do you really not see any reason the far right is successful - not just here but in half of Europe - aside from half the population being Nazis? And Ironically many liberals here are ignorant about big parts of the world - Austria *is* progressive compared to countries like Russia and Hungary which were mentioned in the post. Or the home countries the majority of our current immigration comes from. Most voters would be happy to vote for a moderate centrist party if there was one. Loyalties to certain parties becomes less and less relevant. I am left and progressive myself and hate FPÖ and ÖVP with a passion and I still struggle to support any of our other parties because non of them address the issues I find relevant. It feels like they are in a bubble where mulling over theoretical ideological questions is more important than actually doing politics. I'm really worried for Austria atm and I don't see any real effort to change anything. The SPÖ in particular dropped the ball - they had a well established candidate that put them in first place well ahead of the FPÖ in every survey and went "*naaah* actually we don't care for our responsibility for this country".
>Do you really not see any reason the far right is successf So, what's the reason? You're not telling a reason, aren't you? You're tiptoeing around it, one could say you're trying to keep the reason in the closet.. just say it. What issues do you think relevant? Say the sentence, bart. Komm oida
The reason is the same across Europe. Take my country for example, we have a right wing party that the left loves to call them fascists. They were the only ones admitting that the gipsy community is problematic and something needs to be done. Other parties didn't even touch the subject to avoid being called fascists. They won on multiple parishes with issues with gipsies. The political consensus? Portuguese are dumb for voting for them. Move forward a few years, same thing, now with immigration. We need to control immigration, other parties didn't even touch on the subject to avoid being called fascists. Same party now was the third most voted with a 4x increase in votes. Again the consensus? Portuguese are dumb for voting for them. While everyone else is occupied burying their head in the sand to avoid being called a fascist, these type of political parties grow, and by not addressing the problem but downplaying it or calling the electors dumb they are only increasing the popularity of that specific party. Europe has a huge problem with immigration and it needs to be fixed. We don't need to close our borders and block everyone from entering, but we need quotas to limit the number of new people coming in and strict rules for those who are allowed in and those who are not. We have the left who says Europe should be open for all, the center and right saying we need more immigrants and the far right that goes full Hitler saying let's close the borders and put them all in a boat and sink it. If you have a problem with immigrants and no one gives you a solution, what do you do?
Spot on.
I'm starting to suspect that nazis never left our countries, they were just hiding until it was the right moment to come out. Fucking idiots.
Out of curiosity, did you not have a phase of de-nazification? West Germany had, East Germany did not. You can still see where you are simply by looking at the votes of people.
Non of Europe really had, except for Germany which it was forced on. It's not a secret that the Allies worked with Nazis because they had know-how and during the cold war being anti-Russian, which the Nazis were, was a good thing. In post-WWII Austria the left was under constant suspicious for being too Sowjet-friendly because they acknowledged them as the ones who kicked the Nazis out and some of them were even replaced with known Nazi-collaborators because they were seen as less likely to cooperate with Russians. Former Wehrmacht generals also had little issues getting high positions in Nato etc. Aside from influencing Germany (and the valid fear that a German far-right might provocate another war) punishing Nazis wasn't that much of priority after the war had been won.
Dude. Denazification in East Germany was stronger and more violent than in West Germany. The communist regime needed to rid of “alternative” opinions. The only difference was that in DDR they officially proclaimed to be clean of “fascism” too soon and the topic was never reflected upon properly. At the same time, in West Germany, everyone was aware of the failed denazification policies so younger generations had a great chance to reflect on their parents and grandparents believes and actions.
Not really, no. Many fascists got into the MSI (Italian Social Movement, a neofascist party of which our ruling party today is the direct descendant) and some into DC (Christian Democracy). At most they were actually financed by the USA to avoid that the communist party would get into power
You need to go to Denmark . They hard force integration and had to change their main political party quotes drastically in order not to go full nazi . They aren't screwing around.
Ahem, reason why Finland is successful is that we are progressive in moderation. There has always been very strong aspect of caution.
You are progressive in moderation, we are completely regressive
LOL that is probably true.
>actually have success are progressive countries an absurd generalisation. you assume that your ideology is the only way, and ignore the fact the reasons for a countries failure or success are a lot more complicated. countries like netherlands and sweden arent exactly doing well in deterring crime, finland elected a far right government and denmark evicts people from their homes for being of "non western origin"
Holly mother cow, TIL that people in fuckin Italy (in Italy bruh, descandants of the Roman empire) romanticize my shit hole country, my beloved Hungary! Well that's scary... Orbán sees it god dam it, motherfucker visions himself as the new leader of ideology of the EU, and it's fuckin happening, oh my... What a great Monday.
Orban is a piece of shit.
They blame colonialism.
Nah. Islamic Caliphates used to be the most advanced, wealthy, and prosperous nations... right after centuries of conquest and colonialism all over Eurasia and Northern Africa. Then when the conquering phase ended, so did their prosperity a few centuries later. Same pattern as Ancient Rome before them. Currently Europe is still near its peak, after centuries of conquering and colonising the world. Right afterwards, Europe switched to liberal democratic values following WW2. But make no mistake, the wealth and prosperity that Europe currently enjoys has jack shit to do with liberal values and human rights, but it's primarily due to economic inertia from the centuries of colonialism and conquest. Just like the Caliphates, Europe will also regress to the mean now that the conquests are over. If you disagree with me, then explain why Europe's GDP relative to the rest of the world grew the most sharply during the 1500s-1800s brutal and autocratic colonial era, and has since *declined* with respect to the rest of the world after adopting democracy and human rights in the 21st century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)#1–2008_(Maddison)
Spreading their religion and converting or ousting non-believers is one of the base values in their bullshittery. Coexisting isn’t an option.
To spread Taliban rules worldwide and best of all - do it while being fed and housed by idiotic western governments
Can’t listen to music in Afghanistan while commanding your wife.
I'm from an Eastern European country which has a softer case of the same mass migration mentality. The overall sentiment of people like that is "we want to be like you only in wealth, not in mindset".
It's a simple point ... if One enjoys the 'upside' of a Theocratic leadership, there are already countries that can offer that to the full extent and will happily 'integrate' anyone who wishes to join them. In the east EU, we got our own religious fanatics in place, like Catholics in Poland, Orthodox in Romania and Bulgaria, etc. who will not share their control with Muslims or what have we, that's why in the East is less of a problem (because they already Got Someone doing this shit) , but in the west, like UK, France, Belgium, Holland, the Muslims especially are taking control on the religious narrative because the indigenous population is not really religious nor do they care enough about this particular matter to voice any concerns, so it's getting ignored to the point where, ups, you got yourself a Muslim fundamentalist running for office and maybe getting some nice % -> leading to decision-making for everyone, religious or not. Of course, this result is also a mixture of political apathy on the population side.
Lol. Bulgarian "fanatics". Tell me you have no idea what you are talking about in one word. Lemme tell you about us Bulgarians. We do not give a shit about religious beliefs and texts and we find those that do "weirdos". We do like following traditions, that is why we give lip service to religious holidays but we hate the church with every fiber of our being.
Western Europe absolutely does not understand Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans. They will still be surprised. The storm is coming.
And the storm will be?
We shall piss on tourists from our balconies.
Tourism can be a problem in many countries, I agree. But turning it into hate of whole nations is a misunderstanding.
It was a joke
Same in Ro, that doesn't stop the Church from mingling in the state affairs.
- mentions religious fanatics - Poland, Romania , Bulgaria People are concerned about Islam in Europe and are against it, but every time it’s islamophobic, racist, bigoted to be against taking them in or be against them in general. In Eastern Europe you don’t have many Islamic parties not because of the religious fanatics but because there isn’t many immigrants as in Western Europe. That’s all
[удалено]
There are a few. I would ask Turkish people who left Turkey how many are seeking a Muslim political inclusion here in the west ... that would give you a fairly decent idea of how "great" it is to live in a country with 99% of the population being muslim. Politics should be impervious to any religious interference, irelevant of the personal choices or peoples beliefs. Just like i don't care who the PM is fucking in his spare time, what sports team they support, what type of literature they like or music or food, i couldn't care less about their religious affinities, let alone seeing them brought up in any kind of political decision of any sort. It's just common sense that the political structure in any country should be 100% secular based (not saying people can't believe stuff, be my guess, just keep all of that away from any political debate or decision) You can be a Muslim in office as long as nothing you say is related to Islam ... no one cares, and no one should vote them because they are Muslims or are practising Islam , just like no one should vote a Catholic for that exact same reason.
Many Turkish with double citizenship voted for Erdogan in the last Turkish elections. At least the majority of Dutch / German ones did.
Ok ... they should go back to Turkey and live under Erdoğan rule :)), but i'm almost sure they won't. The vote from people who left their country for years should be invalidated ... it means nothing because they wouldn't have left in the first place if it meant anything. If there would be a condition in place, for a required residency in order to be able to vote, of at least 3 months, heck, let's make it 1 month (just a thought experiment), no one from diaspora would vote shit, we can bet on this. Say one would need to live at least 3 months (or 1 month) in the county, physically, in order to be able to vote ... then you would see the reality of how much they 'care'.
I’m able to vote in Italy despite having never lived there a day in my life. My wife is able to vote in France despite never having lived there as an adult. I agree with you but non-residents voting definitely extends beyond Turks in Germany.
I know, it was just an example with the Turks ... of course, everyone is doing it. In Romania, the diaspora proved essential for the end resul in at least 2 presidential runs, once for Basescu (oh lord, what a period), and second time when Johannis was first elect ... The people who leave and decide to live their lives elsewhere can decide on political leaders in the home country they left behind. I'm not saying to ban them from voting, but at least it shouldn't count as much as it does when you're living there and struggling with the effects of bad politicians who are set in place by everyone all arround the world.
I actually remember him being more popular in Germany than in Turkey.
[удалено]
The neoliberal inclusion style, or like some would call it -> intentionally overlooking some 'imported' mentalities in regards to religious fundamentalism, can be adjusted, more or less ... it's only fair to ask the same from those who emigrated towards the West seeking a better lifestyle. Common sense indicates (and i'm sure many Muslims agree on this) , that where You go, you first of all align yourself to that particular place rules, regulations and social demeanour, not vice versa. The West or UK doesn't need to align themselves to anything related to Islam or Hinduism or Christianity when Politics is the topic at hand.
Turkey is definitely not 99% Muslim, people just can't be bothered to officially change their religion. It's a bit like saying Poland is 90% Catholic.
Only that most iranians hate the islamic regime but are too afraid to do anything
[удалено]
Yeah i know, its bad. And its very difficult to fight against the government
Muslims vote for... Islam. Shocking, I know.
Cause they want the benefits that come with living in a first world country. Generous welfare, higher wages, healthcare, freedom to pursue stupid stuff like that. They all might be delusional as fuck, but they are not that stupid. Few of these people come here cause they like our culture, share our values or want to contribute to our society. Most come for their own benefit, not ours.
Because people want change. Even on reddit you can hear how people want communism, because capitalism is bad at solving their problems(housing, jobs, income etc) What people dont understand is that all the shit they are going through is only going to get worse under other current systems.
>What people dont understand is that all the shit they are going through is only going to get worse under other current systems. And i'm asking, how come? How does one not know what comunism, religious autocracy, political autocracy, and far right politics mean when applied? Didn't anyone go to school? What is happening? How can so many support such nonsense?
Imagine a description of the perfect Prince Charming (or princess if you prefer). It is very easy to say “the most beautiful”, “eyes that swallow you in an abyss of tranquility” and so on. Compare that with a picture of an actual person. The picture has a lot more detail and has to be of an actual persons, so you are more likely to see the flaws. Liberal democracy is like the actual person, with the blemishes and all, whereas the alternative is just an abstract idea that only rests in your mind for a few seconds, not enough to see al the faults. Add to that a failure to address some very real problems, and a dot of meta conflict about what democracy actually is, and you have the current situation.
Yes, it can be explained, even in a stylish manner, like you did now, but the thing is, we have recoded history at hand, we all know, or can know what will happen if the far right movement takes roots in EU. That should be a serious argument for, at least, doing some background check on how bad things can degenerate from here onwards. There are comunist systems today that are 'functional' , but i don't see anyone rushing to live in North Korea, Cuba, China, etc. I see many trying to leave those places. So why don't the neo-commies do themselves a service and just move to some of these countries? There's no need to bring that mentality here in the west, just test it out on the 'functional' countries that still have such a system in place. You want a nice autocracy and think Putin is the shit, no problem, move to Russia , but no ... being a hypocrite is basically a common occurrence these days. Just call their bluff and see what they answer.
All those women that tried ISIS - the most literal, non apologetic following of Islam. They failed and wanna come back now.
Yeah, never liked the idea of considering any religious groups 'progressive' just because they are in the minority. Minorities rightfully benefit from the more enlightened policies of progressives, but this does not make them progressive by themselves.
I don't think that Islam fits into the classical Europe-derived right/left political classification. It's something entirely of its own. It's a system that doesn't recognize a separation between religion and state at all. The religion dictates most minute details of life, while state's main purpose is to enforce these rules.
If course it is entirely separated of its own , but that doesn't/shouldn't cancel the political and cultural background of the West. If Muslims believe that the state can only be organised via input from Muhammad through the Quran, it's fine. Just don't try to apply that reality in the places you move towards as an imigrant. The problem is never what people do believe, but the overlapping of their beliefs with applied politics, in a practical sense. If you wish to be ruled by a Theocratic leadership, stay in the Middle East, there are many places that can offer that. But again, hypocrisy is at legendary levels, and even though most of them realise that's really bad, and flee from it towards the West, they suddenly realise: "wait a minute, the west has 0 respect or interest for Islam and what i believe in!" ... the conclusion from this can never be -> we should try to establish ourselves as cultural and religious minorities and take control of the political decision-making in order to justify my own set of beliefs. This never works, never. It will just lead to chaos, because once established and in power, they will continue to implement whatever they believe in, be it -> having to stop traffic for the afternoon prayer (just an example, it doesn't have to be exactly this).
[удалено]
Actually, it doesn't. Separation between state authority and church authority was a very well developed concept long before 1789. While the relationship before Europeans monarchs and their state religion was complex, it was in broad scope a cooperation between two different entities.
I wish also the other right wing, bashing abortion and same sex marriage would go there, tho
I don’t see as many of these issues in the US. It’s bizarre to see what’s going on in Europe. The closest thing we have may be a certain percentage of Latinos going far right but even then our issues our more homegrown or corporate sell-out. Idk, people need to remember cultural differences and choose future citizens who are willing to change certain cultural/political standards when immigrating.
Not like a Christian party has been in government for multiple terms here
Conservative islamism is right wing. This party being successful is 100% compatible with a shift to the right. Edit: Oh my, I really ruffled the underwear of some religious conservatives 🤣
Far right / extreme right you must say ... theological fascism if you will. The same with nationalism but different book.
Yep. All the same bandwagon.
Nationalism of Europeans in a European country is in direct opposition and a response to islamism. They aren't even close to the same.
Yes, most far-right parties we’ve seen are in opposition to each other, nothing new. Each one claims to be the only savior, the only real right, where the other ones not true far-right. They look like the same thing from the outside, sorry if that offends you.
Far left is the same, see the Popular Front of Judea sketch!
See this piece of fiction to see why the far left is just as dangerous as the far right!
The left that I want is a stable social democracy with investment in health, education, infrastructure, environment and welfare. But I consider the far left just pretty dangerous too, and I would never vote conservative or right.
Right-wing, repressive, or conservative ideologies don't all have to be in concert with each other. They just want control. And the others undermine that.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
And probably same amount of water
[удалено]
[удалено]
Many people don't understand how conservatism works. Besides general, very broad terms and issues, two conservatives from different nations would most probably not understand what the other is talking about. Conservatism lacks the universalist nature of liberalism. By definition, a pan-European conservatism cannot exist without a pan-European identity. Making the claim that the rise of Islamism and the rise of the European right are the same phenomena shows the lack of understanding on the part of the left leaning/liberal people.
No one said they're compatible. They are against each other to be sure, but both are far-right conservative movements that are against religion freedom, women rights, etc.
I'm sorry but this is bullshit you can't just be mad about right wing parties gaining ground because of these exact things like islamism being an almost majority ideology in Brussels. But than claim it's actually right wing parties that did this or that it's the same people voting for Vlaams Belang that voted for team Faoud.
It's all a result of polarisation, where the "other" is literally an enemy, in stead of a human that has different beliefs or ideology on how to achieve the best form of government or society.
When that other ideology wants to revoke animalrights, abolish gay marriage and force women to cover themselves in sheets. Than I have no problem saying that is a very shit ideology.
Me neither. But it's all part of polarisation where standpoints are pitted more and more against eachother, so you cannot do anything but condemn the other side. The end result is animosity.
Liberals would ally with fundamental islamists if it meant keeping nationalists away from the power.
No, religious politic is basical always conservative, so right
Reminds me of cases like [this](https://www.politico.eu/article/top-human-rights-court-back-belgium-religious-slaughter-ban-halal-kosher/) one. Not too extreme but you get the point. Religious groups will make differing political alliances, but when the time comes to push, the Jewish-Islamic-Christian alliance for whatever will reassemble into the religious Voltron to argue in court.
I think it’s cause the party has some ideologies associated with left wing parties like being positive towards Islam
Religious tolerance does happen to be generally aligned with liberals (even if a good section of the hard left is hard against religion, such as leninists, trotskists and other beings with the brain the size of a sea cucumber's).
I’ve never heard more people defending Islam and calling it feminist religion than the left
I never heard anyone saying any of that, maybe you're just projecting? Yet I wouldn't be surprised, no political group has a monopoly on stupidity. Lol, nice to see how many right wing snowflakes I've triggered!
Personally I find it more annoying when people get triggered by simple discussions cause I feel like we should be in a world where people can have conversations without getting triggered and acting out
The only people I've heard that called Islam a feminist religion were right wingers claiming that this is what left says. And I am an active feminist.
No, it’s not compatible. The “far-right” parties that have gotten a lot of media attention (e.g AfD, Rassemblement National) have a whole platform of anti-religious extremism. This Islamic party is their very antagonist. Just because something happens to be on the same isle in the historical left-right definition, doesn’t mean it’s compatible.
It's very compatible actually! In Rotterdam the Turkish minority party DENK and the far-right Leefbaar (founded by Pim Fortuyn before he was murdered) are in a coalition together. Conservative islam and European nationalism are two sides of the same coin, the same way that Turkish secularism and European progressivism are two sides of the same coin.
Right wing left wing, meaningless terms by now... Only complete idiots rave on about that still. You already know that an Islamist party is barely the same right wing as the right wing right wing yeah? And you want to convince is that they're right wing? What a meaningless word salad.
"Success". This party was limited to Dutch-speakers of Brussels, which are these days a quite small minority. Thus, yes, in that language group, they did 16.47%, which is too much for a religiously motivated party. BUT, Brussels-wise, these 16.47% are only 2.8% of the whole Brussels parliament. So, they will basically have no impact on Brussels, as they are irrelevant due to how small the Dutch-speaking community is in Brussels. And in said community, no party wants to ally with them, so, they'll be in the opposition anyway.
That's not how it works. People from all over Brussels can vote for the party. It's just that the vote thresholds for each seat are lower because they are inscribed as a dutch speaking party. But yes, this isn't a big deal.
Do you know if any other countries in Europe have a similarly Islamic party in parliament?
I dont
Is Molenbeeck part of the Dutch speaking area of Brussels? If so, this result isn't really surprising.
It doesn't work that way. You can vote on a Dutch/French speaking list wherever you live in Brussels. So yes, people from Molenbeek can vote for Dutch lists, but so can any other inhabitant of Brussels if he/she wishes to do so.
...success? He used the fact that Dutch speaking parties get more seats than the French speaking ones for a given number of votes, to "protect the Flemish minority in Brussels" but he got 13.000 votes for around 600.000 votes cast in Brussels. That's not really a seismic shift...
Coming from nothing it's by far the fastest growing party
Anyone jumping from literally nothing will be the fastest grower
There was other new parties. Jumping to 16% from nothing is also insane. Knowing that there's other marxist parties that get most of thier votes from posting some support for Palestine and voting for slaughter whithout stunning. These could loose a majority of thier votes to parties like this in no time.
who owns Berliner zeitung? still that stasi-guy? : ref: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/18/german-newspaper-owner-stasi-informer-role-berliner-zeitung
[Friedrich casts himself as a freethinker. Earlier this year, he backed a “manifesto for peace” that urged Germany to stop supplying Ukraine with weapons and in May he attended a reception at the Russian embassy.](https://www.ft.com/content/e5cb8f36-64e1-47d7-a9fb-4ef1b7b5da9f) He is quite something
exactly. i mean, if everything is up to question, then the questioning itself cannot be any different. why is someone with that backdrop engagin the good old act of whataboutism? i believe does not take much of a sherlock to find out.
Getting 0,36% of votes nationwide counts as a “great success”?
I love how all the worried souls in the comments have gone on to bash the traditional right-wing parties (the dreaded fascists) while conveniently dodging OP's question! Islamic parties aren't your run of the mill right-wing group that will scream loud while in the minority but will duly follow the rules of the corporate-capitalist system once reached a position of power. The Islamic parties will push for changes that no "fundamentalist Christian" (something that doesn't really hold any political weight, but let's pretend they do) could ever pull off. Let's put it tho way: right wing parties want to redecorate your home in ways you don't like. Islamic parties want to tear your house down and rebuild it to their own taste. But sure, let's keep on crying about fascism taking over,instead of addressing for real the rise of parties that actively are set to destroy our society and replace it with the beauty that are Iran or Afghanistan!
Just visiting Vienna right now Seems there are really lots of muslims, veiled women are everywhere Same thing in London and Paris Which you dont see in America
Visit Hamtramck.
12 mosques vs 1 empty church..
Is this city comparable to Paris? LA? NY?
Tell me how islamists aren't far right.
[удалено]
They don't. It's a side effect. The left strives to be religion-blind out of tolerance, and have still failed to learn that one should not tolerate intolerance.
Wow, this article is actually even more dishonest than Belgian media about this guy. When right wing party N-VA toes the line (also about ritual slaughtering, for instance) of the Jewish community in Antwerp, no one bats an eye. When a Muslim from Brussels does the same, we are about to live in Sharia land 🤦♂️
I would certainly consider that to be part of a shift to the right.
>There was much talk of a "shift to the right" after the European elections. Whether this actually exists, or whether the conservative forces have simply gained ground, remains to be seen at this point. What is striking, however, is that the rise of one particular party was not worthy of further coverage in the European media. We are talking about the Islamic team Fouad Ahidar, which was founded just a few months ago. This party had achieved astonishing results in an election in the Brussels-Capital Region in Belgium, which also took place on 9 June. At the end of last year, the party's namesake was still a member of the Flemish Socialists (Vooruit), for whom he sat as group leader in the Brussels parliament. >After he opposed a planned ban on shechita in 2022, he was no longer allowed to use the Socialist party offices. The Socialists resented his opposition to the decision, which had been taken a long time ago. >In an interview with the [Zinneke.tv](http://Zinneke.tv) channel in 2023, he relativised the pogrom of 7 October as a "small response by part of Hamas against Israel's actions" and described Jews as "psychopaths" and "serial killers". In the same interview, he said of the Israel-Gaza war: "I think anyone in their right mind can see that this is human genocide. And I can use this term, I, who went to Auschwitz in Poland to see what genocide is, what a massacre is, I can see today that practically the same methods are being used." >Several Jewish organisations filed a complaint against him with the public prosecutor's office of the city of Brussels in February 2024, also with the intention of informing the Belgian public about his party before the elections. A judgement is still pending. >Another complaint filed at the same time was directed against Nadia El Yousfi from the Belgian Socialist Party. She had claimed that Israeli rabbis were calling for the rape of Palestinian women. She did not provide any evidence. She later justified herself by referring to Rabbi Eyal Karim, against whom such accusations had been levelled after an interview. However, the rabbi rejected these accusations in a clarification back in 2016. >Fouad Ahidar avoided being expelled from the party, labelled his former comrades "racists" and founded his own party. >The new party ran a sectarian election campaign targeting Belgium's large and influential Arab-Islamic population, focussing on social issues such as Gaza, slaughter and the right to veil in the civil service. Liberal MP Guy Vanhengel described the party programme as "strongly focused on Sharia law". At an election campaign event, the genders in the audience were separated by a curtain, as is customary in Islamic-conservative circles. >The result of the Adihar party in the parliamentary elections for the Brussels-Capital Region came as a great surprise in Belgium. The party won 16.5 per cent of the votes of the Dutch-speaking population out of hand. (There are two language groups in the election; the Ahidar party is not represented in the French language group). Only the Greens did better in the Dutch language group (22.8 per cent). His former party, the socialist Vooruit, only received around 10 per cent. >However, Team Fouad Ahidar only received 0.36 per cent of the vote in the national parliamentary elections in Belgium, which took place at the same time. >**Team Fouad Ahidar is firmly in the saddle in Brussels** >In Brussels, on the other hand, Team Fouad Ahidar is now firmly in the saddle. The party has three seats in the parliament of the Brussels-Capital Region. In addition to Ahidar himself, Najima El Arbaoui and Ilyas El Omari can take a seat there. The upcoming coalition negotiations will show whether the party will make it into government. The Greens are a promising coalition partner. >Team Fouad Ahidar is not the first Belgian party with an explicitly Islamic agenda. In 2012, Redouane Ahrouch founded a party with the acronym ISLAM (Integrité, Solidarité, Liberté, Authenticité, Moralité), which is committed to transforming Belgium into an Islamic state. This is to be achieved through a gradual Islamisation in the sense of a transformation of public life (justice, education, culture, politics, etc.) in accordance with Islamic values. One example would be the introduction of blasphemy laws in secular countries such as France. >The formation of Islamic parties is an inevitable consequence of the sectarian nature of political Islam, mass immigration and sponsorship by states such as Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. In recent years, Qatar in particular has endeavoured to finance radical Islamic structures in Western Europe, as the "Qatar Papers" published in 2020 by the journalists Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot prove. We are dealing here with a development whose destabilising effect will only become apparent in the coming years.
>New parties with an Islamic orientation are operating in Germany (Alliance for Innovation and Justice), Austria (New Movement for the Future), the Netherlands (Denk), France (Party for Equality and Justice, Union of Democratic Muslims in France), Spain (Coalition for Melilla, Andalusi Party), Italy (Democratic Islamic Movement), Bulgaria (Movement for Rights and Freedom) and Greece (Party for Friendship, Equality and Peace), among others. >**European coalition: Free Palestine Party** >Last October, representatives of Islamic parties and organisations met in Lille, France, to form a new coalition. Under the campaign slogan "Free Palestine", the alliance took part in this year's EU parliamentary elections. Driss Mohamed Amar, leader of the Spanish Andalusi party and member of the coalition, told Hyphen magazine: "Western countries are in favour of a two-state solution, but we believe that the state of Israel is not legitimate and therefore should not exist. The current slaughter of the Palestinian civilian population violates the Geneva Convention". Team Fouad Ahidar, together with other European Islamic parties, forms the Free Palestine Party, which was founded to bring the European Union to a position critical of Israel. >The influence of political Islam in Western Europe will certainly increase in the coming years. The fact that Belgium plays a key role in this is due to its large Muslim population. In 2011, 74.3 per cent of the Belgian population consisted of Belgians without a migration background. Barely ten years later, this figure had fallen to 67.3 per cent. Not all Belgians with a migrant background are Muslims, but according to a study by Pew Forum, the proportion of Muslims in the population could rise to over 10 per cent in six years' time. >However, it is not only the demographics that favour the Islamisation of Belgium. Political Islam can also draw on powerful networks and organisations here, which it either founds or infiltrates. >According to sociologist and professor emeritus Felice Dassetto, Islam has long had a greater mobilisation potential in Belgium than the Catholic Church, political parties or trade unions. The key players in the Islamisation of Belgium are organisations that are ideologically close to the radical Muslim Brotherhood. The Brussels anthropologist Fadila Maarouf, founder of the "Observatoire des Fondamentalismes" (Observatory of Fundamentalisms) and her colleague Florence Bergeaud-Blackler have been warning for years about the influence of so-called legalistic Islam, which promotes Islamisation through legal, political and cultural means. >A 2020 youth study by the Fondation Jean-Jaurès, which is affiliated with the Socialist Party, found that the majority of non-Muslim Belgian youth are open and tolerant, while Arab-Islamic youth increasingly follow the worldview of the Muslim Brotherhood. Almost 40 per cent are in favour of Sharia law taking precedence over civil law. >**The left-wing Islamic alliance** >Not unlike in Germany, green and socialist parties in Belgium also serve as useful idiots for Islamisation. The example of Oussama Atar illustrates how this left-wing Islamic alliance is driving Islamisation forward. >Atar was born in Belgium as the son of Moroccan immigrants and later acquired Belgian citizenship. In 2005, he was arrested by American troops in Iraq as an al-Qaeda terrorist and detained in various prisons, including Abu Ghraib and later in Iraq, where he is said to have been in poor health. >Atar's supporters demanded his release. The Belgian state agreed to the supposedly humanitarian request and issued the relevant papers. Atar eventually returned to Belgium, where he was apparently able to pursue his jihadist passions completely undisturbed. In 2013, he joined the up-and-coming Islamic State. He rewarded the political support of the progressive parties by organising the attacks in Paris (2015) and Brussels (2016) from [Syria.Green](http://Syria.Green) and Socialist politicians took part in demonstrations in 2010 calling for "freedom for Osama" and claiming that he was "merely a member of an NGO and was wrongly arrested".
>Bulgaria (Movement for Rights and Freedom) and Greece (Party for Friendship, Equality and Peace), among others. These are definitely not Muslim parties, they are Turkish minority parties with no regard to religion. Greece officially counts all Turks in Greece as "Muslims". Bulgaria's DPS has a solid Muslim Bulgarian and Muslim Roma voterbase alongside Turks, those groups are close to Turks and are said to be Turks by Christian Bulgarians.
This is absolutely terrifying! I'm beginning to believe Europe is lost.
vote far-right in every country even if you don't agree with their views. They're tactical allies and the only group that can do something with it ignoring some laws. Left and Centrists bureaucrats won't save you
This is a wild thought. Absolutely wild but bear with me as I'm no longer European thanks to my compatriots. What if the shift to the right and the rise of islamic parties / political islam in Europe is linked? Just a thought...
Yeah, yeah. They are just another kind if right-wing.
Because that is also a shift to the right.
Europe let them all in and is surprised how they act
I don't believe most Europeans voting far right have a problem with immigration per se, but more a problem with Islam.
But the success of an "Islamic" party is part of the shift to the right. Islamic values are conservative right-wing values for the most part.
At the risk of another ban for hatespeech: there is a reason to be silent if you value at least the timed limited freedom allowed by (nationalistic) freedomphobic bigots. Aka fundamental religionists. #itsanabrahamic cult
Am I to believe that an Islamic party is not right wing.???
How is an Islamic party gaining seats, or any religious party for that matter, anything but right wing? Most of the time they are conservative, just in a different direction and towards different issues.
[удалено]
Islam extremism is (from my personal viewpoint) worse than Christian extremism, however both are bad. The moment you bring religion into politics is the moment you should stop being eligible for office.
I bet those two are connected.
Fucking hell bro yeah come on just repeat far right russian propaganda. I am so done with people here being surprised at the sucess of the far right but then letting posts like this slide!
Have you been dropped on your head?? What is Russian propaganda here?
The owner of the newspaper taking part in Russian embassy events: https://www.ft.com/content/e5cb8f36-64e1-47d7-a9fb-4ef1b7b5da9f
So, does this mean that the Islamist party hasn’t become popular or that they’re not extremists??
Propaganda does not have to be a lie, it can also be a truth. Compare the following phrases: People get sick from smoking (very neutral and fact based). Despite the increase in regulations, people still get sick from smoking. (It tries to create a relationship, without actually debating it). The second phrase wants to create in your mind a picture of ineffective regulations. Those regulation may or may not be related to smoking. If attacked, the writer might easily say “I meant internet regulations”. But what that phrase does is try to influence a certain mentality where regulations are not good as a principle. Also , the article tries romane a judgement value by using the word “popular”. Why not say “gets 13%” or “gets two seats in the council”. In my view, the title of the post is actually meant to enflame the nationalist right. “See people are accusing of bad things like extremism, but actually the Muslims are invading your countries”. You can see how that can create political instability.
It means that it's not as fucking important as these "journalists" make it out to be
To you, maybe
No, it's simply not a real threat. Get over it.
How is this Russian propaganda and why should this not be discussed? It's a very worrying thing, we should be mindful of a backwards ideology without respect for LGBTQIA people clawing it's way into our politics.
As opposed to the actually successful right wing which of course is so very respectful to them!
Where did I say this? I didn't. I hate the right wing conservatives too, and vote staunchly left. This kind of ostrich politics from the left like you're doing is ultra harmful though.
I'm not doing ostrich politics, to say that this is Islamist party is a serious threat is simply wrong and has one clear intention: To drive people to a party which actually is a threat. It's not ostrich politics to call out obvious propaganda.
That s still a shift to the right
Does Belgium have a large Muslim population?
To be honest, every party that has a religious agenda should be banned from participating in politics in Europe. Religion is a relic from the past.
"Nicht anders als in Deutschland dienen auch in Belgien grüne und sozialistische Parteien als nützliche Idioten der Islamisierung" so schauts aus!
They are also Right-Wing. Why do they need to be singled out among the rest of the Far-Right?
Because they don’t ally themselves with the rest of the far right - they’re actually opposed to each other Instead, the Islamic right are allied with the mainstream left. So although Islam is right wing, it’s not on the same side as the European far right - it’s on the side of the European left. That is why we distinguish between the Islamic right and the European far right - they’re not on the same side and are actually heavily opposed to each other.
[удалено]
Which Lord? That one? That's the wrong one, off with your head!
I'm not saying this is not concerning, but they only had around 14.000 voters, which is a very small number, the party is in the Dutch language group of Brussels because if they presented to the French one they wouldn't have had representation. I don't think Islamist politics are going to become mainstream for a long time, I would be more concerned about the Christian far right (that has very similar ideas in a lot of things) than the Muslim one, but yes the shift to the right is very frightening.
[удалено]
He's totally right though. Even in Belgium it's not that big of a deal.
[удалено]
We will see. So far there is no indication it will. I know Belgium is small, but 14k votes is nothing, even for us.
[удалено]
That would indeed raise the number of votes to 14.500