Politicians who support Breivik

[Lord Zentei]

A member of France's far-right National Front (FN) party was suspended after penning a defence of Norway attacker Anders Behring Breivik on his blog, the party said Tuesday.

Jacques Coutela, who stood as an FN candidate in local elections in March, "was suspended today pending a party disciplinary committee", FN general secretary Steeve Briois said, describing Coutela as a low-level party member.

On his blog, where he rails against the rise of Islam in Europe, Coutela presents Behring Breivik - the man who has claimed the twin attacks in Norway that killed 76 people - as an "icon" and "the main defender of the West".

Coutela also compares Behring Breivik to Charles Martel, the seventh century military leader who halted Islamic expansion in western Europe.

"The reason for the Norway terror attacks: fighting the Muslim invasion, that's what people don't want you to know", read the post, signed Jacques Coutela read.

Coutela took down the posting after the French Movement against Racism and for Friendship between Peoples lodged a complaint against him for "inciting racial hatred", and on Tuesday denied having written it himself.

"I did not write those things, I found them on the internet and published them on my blog to inform people", Coutela told AFP. He did not condone terrorism, he added, "wherever it comes from, even if it comes from my ideas".

Coutela was a candidate for the controversial far-right party led by Marine Le Pen in local elections in the Yonne department in central France in March. Another FN member, Laurent Ozon, posted several unpopular tweets on microblogging site Twitter on Saturday apparently linking Friday's attacks to a rise in the number of immigrants in Norway.

Ozon told AFP he had not been suspended and that Le Pen had simply reminded him of the party line.

Though it openly opposes immigration, the FN, like other far right parties in Europe, has been quick to distance itself from Behring Breivik.

-AFP

Not a particularly slick political move, I must say.

[Lord Zentei]

Incidentally, here's another article with more on the same:

Norway attacks: National Front member suspended for defending Anders Behring Breivik
A member of France's far-right National Front (FN) party was suspended after writing a defence of Norway attacker Anders Behring Breivik on his blog, the party has said.

Jacques Coutela, who stood as an FN candidate in local elections in March, "was suspended today pending a party disciplinary committee", FN general secretary Steeve Briois said, describing Mr Coutela as a low-level party member.

On his blog, where he rails against the rise of Islam in Europe, Mr Coutela presents Breivik - the man who has claimed the twin attacks in Norway that killed 76 people - as an "icon" and "the main defender of the West".

Mr Coutela also compares Breivik to Charles Martel, the seventh century military leader who halted Islamic expansion in western Europe.

"The reason for the Norway terror attacks: fighting the Muslim invasion, that's what people don't want you to know", read the post, signed Jacques Coutela read.

Mr Coutela took down the posting after the French Movement against Racism and for Friendship between Peoples lodged a complaint against him for "inciting racial hatred", and on Tuesday denied having written it himself.

"I did not write those things, I found them on the Internet and published them on my blog to inform people", Mr Coutela told AFP. He did not condone terrorism, he added, "wherever it comes from, even if it comes from my ideas".

Coutela was a candidate for the controversial far-right party led by Marine Le Pen in local elections in the Yonne department in central France in March. Another FN member, Laurent Ozon, posted several unpopular tweets on microblogging site Twitter on Saturday apparently linking Friday's attacks to a rise in the number of immigrants in Norway.

Ozon told AFP he had not been suspended and that Le Pen had simply reminded him of the party line.

Though it openly opposes immigration, the FN, like other far right parties in Europe, has been quick to distance itself from Behring Breivik.

[Master_Baerne]

That... is impressively dumb, even for a crazy movement like the FN.

[Lord Zentei]

This is coming from the EDL and Italy's Northern League. Good fucking grief:

LUTON, England (AP) - The leader of a British far-right group to which Anders Behring Breivik claims links called the attacks a sign of "growing anger" in Europe against Muslim immigrants, while a politician in a party in Italy's governing coalition called some of the gunman's ideas "great."

Following a wave of near universal revulsion against the attacks, the comments were among the first public statements that appeared to defend the extremist views that drove the Norwegian gunman to carry out the massacre.

Stephen Lennon, leader of the English Defense League, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he does not condone Breivik's rampage but "the fact that so many people are scared - people have to listen to that."

"People should look at what happened in Oslo and understand that there is growing anger in Europe," said Lennon, 28. "You suppress people's rights you suppress people's voices and people will just continue to go underground - but that doesn't make the problem go away."

Backtracking on earlier denials of any link to Breivik, Lennon said he is in touch with regional EDL leaders to find out whether the gunman had contact with members of the group as he claims in his sprawling manifesto.

Breivik has also posted admiring comments about the EDL online and expressed a wish to attend its rallies.

"It could turn out that one of our members met with him but at this point we're not turning anything up," Lennon said.

Meanwhile, Mario Borghezio, a European parliamentarian who belongs to Italy's rightwing Northern League party, told a mainstream Italian radio station that he sympathized with some of Breivik's ideas.

"Some of the ideas he expressed are good, barring the violence, some of them are great," he told Il Sole-24 Ore radio station.

The Northern League, the junior partner in Premier Silvio Berlusconi's government, has caused a stir with its increasingly virulent anti-immigrant, anti-Islamic rhetoric.

Breivik has confessed to the twin attacks on Oslo's government district and a summer camp for the youth wing of Norway's ruling Labor Party that killed 76 people. He said he carried out the massacre to publicize his calls for expelling Muslims from Europe.

The act of right-wing terrorism stunned a continent that has been grappling with a wave of xenophobia and anti-immigrant violence amid faltering economies, rising unemployment, and ongoing fears about Islamic terror plots.

Lennon, also known as Tommy Robinson, said he has recently taken his group touring in Germany, France and the Netherlands, and finds rising European support for xenophobic groups like his.

"They're going to get bigger and bigger," said Lennon, who is missing several teeth from brawls with police. The EDL leader was convicted Monday of leading a football hooligan street fight and sentenced to 12 months community service.

Lennon also claimed that a man Breivik describes in his manifesto as his mentor - "Richard (the Lionhearted)" - is a former EDL member called Paul Sonato, who was kicked out of the group a few years ago.

Sonato, an English right-wing blogger who now goes by the name Paul Ray, told The Associated Press in an telephone interview from his home in Malta that he never had any dealings with Breivik and condemned the massacre.

"Being implicated in this, I just want the truth to come out and it proven that I'm nothing whatever to do with this," he said.

The 35-year-old blogger said he fled England almost two years ago after being arrested for stirring racial hatred and settled in Malta.

Meanwhile, the defense lawyer for Breivik said he agreed to take the case because he felt the tragedy underscored the need to safeguard democratic traditions like the right to defense counsel.

Geir Lippestad said at his first news conference that he considered the case for 10 or 12 hours before finally agreeing to take it.

Later, Lippestad told The Associated Press that he did not know why his client chose him. He once worked in the same building as Breivik and Norwegian media have reported that he has defended neo-Nazis.

"My first reaction was of course that this is too difficult, but when I sat down with my family and friends and colleagues, we talked it through and we said that today it's time to think about democracy," Lippestad said.

He added: "Someone has to do this job, the police has to do their job and the judges do their job." He was speaking in English.

"My job is not to be his friend," he said. "He will get a fair trial, that's my job to secure."

Breivik has confessed to last week's bombing in the capital and a rampage at a Labor Party retreat for young people, but he has pleaded not guilty to the terrorism charges he faces, claiming he acted to save Europe from what he says is Muslim colonization.

Asked at the press conference if Breivik was giving him instructions for his defense, Lippestad said he wasn't and that he wouldn't take such instructions. He confirmed he's a member of the Labor Party but doesn't know whether the suspect is aware. Breivik has ranted against the party, accusing liberals of being ashamed of their culture and betraying Norway in their pursuit of a multiculturalist society.

Breivik made his first appearance in court on Monday to answer the terrorism charges against him.

While 21 years is the stiffest sentence a Norwegian judge can hand down, a special sentence can be given to prisoners deemed a danger to society, who are locked up for 20-year sentences that can be renewed indefinitely.

[Edi]

Meanwhile in the US right wing people who Breivik quoted and admired are scrambling for excuses while holding the same toxic views. Quite typical of the cowards, and I never expected anything better. Worth reading the original article at the source, since it has links to some of the stuff these idiots have spouted.

Monday, Jul 25, 2011 14:01 ET
Right-wingers blame multiculturalism, abortion for Norway massacre
Anders Breivik's favorite American pundits show no shame in blaming liberals, Muslims for right-wing terror
By Alex Pareene

After just about every professional conservative chatterer with a blog or a Twitter account rushed to blame Islamic jihadists for the bombing and gun massacre in Norway last Friday, it was revealed that the actual killer was, in fact, a white, Christian, Norwegian-born man, named Anders Breivik. It was further revealed that Breivik is, politically, more or less a Scandinavian Tea Partyer, obsessed with the imagined threat of the Islamification of Europe, and an avowed opponent of "multiculturalism."

Breivik is a psychopath, but he is a psychopath whose politics are indistinguishable from Pamela Geller's, to name one American right-winger whose work was approvingly cited by Breivik in his extensive writings.

While I don't expect a bunch of Islamophobic pundits to take responsibility for a massacre committed in their name, it would be nice if people maybe apologized a little bit for blaming Muslims, first?

Eh, no. Jennifer Rubin, whose initial post on the attack is a monument to complete, colossal wrongness, followed up with a post in which she absolved herself of responsibility (those damn "early reports" are to blame) and blamed generic "evil" for the attack instead of a specific, dangerous ideology. And, she added, we should still totally be afraid of Muslims: "There are many more jihadists than blond Norwegians out to kill Americans[.]." Since then it's been all debt ceilings and 2012 horse-race bullshit -- I imagine if this crime had been perpretrated by a Muslim, Rubin would've had a lot more to say about it.

Mark Steyn wrote the stupidest thing I've read in at least a month. See, Breivik quoted Steyn, and a bunch of Steyn's friends and peers, in his "manifesto" -- because these conservative writers influenced his thinking -- but Steyn says Breivik doesn't count as Islamophobic because he didn't specifically kill Muslims. Steyn's argument is that because Breivik plagiarized portions of his manifesto, he ... didn't actually mean it? And quoting his writing to explain his motivation is apparently the irresponsible work of the liberal media, looking, as always, to smear conservatives:

So, if a blonde blue-eyed Aryan Scandinavian kills dozens of other blonde blue-eyed Aryan Scandinavians, that’s now an “Islamophobic” mass murder? As far as we know, not a single Muslim was among the victims. Islamophobia seems an eccentric perspective to apply to this atrocity, and comes close to making the actual dead mere bit players in their own murder.

Opposition to Islam was the killer's stated motivation. He targeted other white Scandinavians because he considered them race traitors. He wrote all of this down, too, so we don't even have to make guesses about it! He blamed liberals for enabling jihad by supporting "multiculturalism." (Funnily enough, that is also exactly what Mark Steyn thinks.)

If Steyn's intentionally obtuse response is the dumbest I've read, the Jerusalem Post's editorial is the most shocking. Because it basically says Breivik is right. He probably shouldn't have murdered almost 100 people, JPost says, but now is a good opportunity for politicians to enact Breivik's preferred policies.

Perhaps Brievik’s inexcusable act of vicious terror should serve not only as a warning that there may be more elements on the extreme Right willing to use violence to further their goals, but also as an opportunity to seriously reevaluate policies for immigrant integration in Norway and elsewhere. While there is absolutely no justification for the sort of heinous act perpetrated this weekend in Norway, discontent with multiculturalism’s failure must not be delegitimatized or mistakenly portrayed as an opinion held by only the most extremist elements of the Right.

They want this act of politically motivated violence to ... work.

If there's any humor in this miserable news, it is to be found at Pamela Geller's place, where she compares herself to the Beatles and Jodie Foster. The comparison isn't quite apt, though, as Charles Manson and John Hinkley were notorious for misinterpreting harmless pop cultural artifacts. The Beatles song was about a fair ride, it was not actually titled "There Is a Race War Coming." Breivik seems to have interpreted Ms. Geller's writing correctly -- he just decided to address the "problem" through horrible, violent means.

But right-wingers generally agree that no one should blame right-wing beliefs for Breivik's horrible crime. Instead, as one RedState contributor argues, we should blame the pro-choice movement. And euthanasia. And `... Al Gore. Is it any wonder that people kill people in a world where Al Gore something something overpopulation? No, no it isn't. Ye gods.

To sum up: This tragedy can obviously be blamed solely on one truly evil, insane person, and nothing else. Besides multiculturalism. And abortion. It is disgusting to pin responsibility for this massacre on anything besides one crazy person and multiculturalism and abortion. And Al Gore.

I can understand how the self-preservation instinct would make sober reflection among the professional hate-mongering Islamophobia crowd unlikely, but I didn't really expect everyone to be blaming the liberals for getting shot by a fucking Norwegian Freeper.

[K. A. Pital]

I didn't really expect everyone to be blaming the liberals for getting shot by a fucking Norwegian Freeper.

The right is operating on a "war" mentality. In some ways they are right, because they actually want to wage a war on various people (it is no coincidence that the American right is militaristic and xenophobic). If it is war and there is an enemy, it is natural that killing the enemy is justified and can be blamed on the enemy. Enemies are fair game in a war, the right genuinely believes that.

[Flagg]

The real question is, at what point do we start fighting back? No, I'm not saying liberals should go around shooting rightwingers, but there are laws against inciting violence and other assorted criminal statutes that I'm sure even American prosecutors could make stick if they were so inclined.

[Metahive]

They want this act of politically motivated violence to ... work.

I wonder what they would have said if after 9/11 someone had suggested the US to collectively convert to Wahhabi Islam because that's equivalent to what they're doing here.

[The Romulan Republic]

I didn't really expect everyone to be blaming the liberals for getting shot by a fucking Norwegian Freeper.

The right is operating on a "war" mentality. In some ways they are right, because they actually want to wage a war on various people (it is no coincidence that the American right is militaristic and xenophobic). If it is war and there is an enemy, it is natural that killing the enemy is justified and can be blamed on the enemy. Enemies are fair game in a war, the right genuinely believes that.

I think its going a bit far to suggest that the right as a whole believes killing liberals is justified. Though obviously their are some sick people who think that way.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I think its similar to how after 9/11, a bunch of appologists for radical militant islam stood up and said 'Well in a certain way, the WTC bombing is justified because...'

And for the most part nobody bought that bullshit. Same thing here, someone does something so shocking it HAS to be commented on, and some of those with an agenda are going to try and make political hay out of it. Is there some level of discontent in Europe towards muslim immigrants? Yes. Is this the first shot in a race war? No. But its nice the asshats who are hoping for it have the decency to say stupid shit and come to our attention, so they can be marginalized politically where they can't hurt anyone.

[K. A. Pital]

I think its going a bit far to suggest that the right as a whole believes killing liberals is justified. Though obviously their are some sick people who think that way.

They might not think that they should kill liberals themselves, but they will justify whoever actually does it, and they would also blame the victim.

Note the rethoric of the American right - it is always a "fight" or a "war" with whatever they think is bad; they refer to themselves as ideological soldiers. For example, Pamela Geller said "This is a war with the left" or something to that effect. Malkin says her pen became a weapon. Palin says that you have to "reload" instead of retreating (reloading weapons = war). Beck poses as a "warrior" against "terrorism" in his pathetic 24 wannabe banners.

Influential members of the right treat this as a war. Rank and file may not be ready to embrace the rethoric of violence, but some certainly are.

[ComradeClaus]

With the 9/11 case (& Palestinian terrorists) Americans for years were blind to the harm their government's policies had in the middle east. (arming Israel, backing dictators likle Mubarrak) And simply ignored peaceful attempts at resolution, but, when forces like HAMAS use force to defend their people against ethmic cleansing & Al Qaeda struk political centers like embassies & corporate nerve centers like WTO, it was something that led to them being stripped of the right of due process. (Even serial rapist child killers like Gacy have more rights in the US than Muslim terrorists do.) The militants like those of Hezbollah & Hamas, are demonized, despite them being much like the Militias which helped forge the United States. Or like the Indians who massacred settlers to retaliate against genocides like the Trail of Tears & Wounded Knee Creek. (Such militias would raid british forces, then blend into the local population, they also attacked British loyalist civilians. But we built monuments to them. Of course, we WON. & we eventually expressed remorse for the treatment of Indians)


Naturally, shooting a bunch of children is unjustifiable regardless of the political/ religious issue.


Of course, right-wing Europeans are terrified of the extinction they see comming their way. After all, when Immigrants have a birthrate at least double of the Native Ethnicities & w/ hundreds of thousands of new immigrants entering each year, even a person who can't add 2+2 can see the eventual outcome & with the majority of their fellow citizens embracing their fate, it becomes a case of "I'll take the Race Traitors out first, before we Loyalsits are swept away by the Tide."


Look at how the Native Americans were swept aside by the tide of white europeans, they didn't join to drive us into the sea when they had the chance. Once we had a toehold... it was over. And in Palestine, when Israel was founded, the muslims failed to destroy it, now the natives are lingering in squalid refugee camps, bombed constantly. So the delusional acts of right wingers does have historical context. It's also what tea partiers fear, that the millions of lations, combined w/ their high birthrate/ Catholic disdain for birth control, will sweep away the Dominant Anglo-Germanic WASP Power Structure.

But it is still delusion. (I'm an anti-nationalist anyway so I'm rooting for the immigrants) The killers punishment will be to watch helpless as his fears are realized. That is the fate of all racists & Neonazis. THEY WILL LOSE & Nation-States will someday die out.

[ChaserGrey]

<Snip bits about Israel and Hamas to avoid running afoul of board rules>
Al Qaeda struk political centers like embassies & corporate nerve centers like WTO, it was something that led to them being stripped of the right of due process. (Even serial rapist child killers like Gacy have more rights in the US than Muslim terrorists do.)

"Corporate nerve centers"? Around here, we call them "civilian targets". Or do you subscribe to the view that the WTC was somehow a legitimate target because corporations did mean things to poor people, and some of the people in the building worked for companies (not necessarily the same ones)? Please.

The militants like those of Hezbollah & Hamas, are demonized, despite them being much like the Militias which helped forge the United States.

I strongly suggest that you conduct some additional historical research before making statements like those. The "militias" that took part in the Revolution have a lot of myth built up around them, most of it false, and they were not a uniform body. The majority of them (on both sides, there were a fair number of Loyalist militias) limited their attacks to military targets or rival militia groups, and whatever you think of Hamas and Hezbollah they do not do this.

Or like the Indians who massacred settlers to retaliate against genocides like the Trail of Tears & Wounded Knee Creek. (Such militias would raid british forces, then blend into the local population, they also attacked British loyalist civilians. But we built monuments to them. Of course, we WON. & we eventually expressed remorse for the treatment of Indians)

Oh, dear. I find it needful to point out that the Trail of Tears and Wounded Knee both happened several decades or a century *after* the American Revolution. Traditionally effects come after causes, not before. The tribes that took part in the Trail of Tears by and large did not attack whites afterwards, because they were wise enough to recognize that further violence would accomplish nothing. Neither was there any real retaliation for Wounded Knee, which came at the end of the Indian Wars and ended up with pretty much all the tribes on reservations.

Indians who committed violence against white settlers were mostly worried about preserving their territory, not retaliating for past grievances. Your assertion is false.

Naturally, shooting a bunch of children is unjustifiable regardless of the political/ religious issue.

Glad we got that straight, at least.

Of course, right-wing Europeans are terrified of the extinction they see comming their way. After all, when Immigrants have a birthrate at least double of the Native Ethnicities & w/ hundreds of thousands of new immigrants entering each year, even a person who can't add 2+2 can see the eventual outcome & with the majority of their fellow citizens embracing their fate, it becomes a case of "I'll take the Race Traitors out first, before we Loyalsits are swept away by the Tide."

Look at how the Native Americans were swept aside by the tide of white europeans, they didn't join to drive us into the sea when they had the chance. Once we had a toehold... it was over. And in Palestine, when Israel was founded, the muslims failed to destroy it, now the natives are lingering in squalid refugee camps, bombed constantly. So the delusional acts of right wingers does have historical context. It's also what tea partiers fear, that the millions of lations, combined w/ their high birthrate/ Catholic disdain for birth control, will sweep away the Dominant Anglo-Germanic WASP Power Structure.

But it is still delusion. (I'm an anti-nationalist anyway so I'm rooting for the immigrants) The killers punishment will be to watch helpless as his fears are realized. That is the fate of all racists & Neonazis. THEY WILL LOSE & Nation-States will someday die out.

Are you somehow under the impression that if a different ethnic group comes to power it will lead to the end of nation-states rather than simply remaking the existing state in their own image? How'd that work out in the former Yugoslavia, say?

[ChaserGrey]

I think its similar to how after 9/11, a bunch of appologists for radical militant islam stood up and said 'Well in a certain way, the WTC bombing is justified because...'

And for the most part nobody bought that bullshit. Same thing here, someone does something so shocking it HAS to be commented on, and some of those with an agenda are going to try and make political hay out of it. Is there some level of discontent in Europe towards muslim immigrants? Yes. Is this the first shot in a race war? No.

Yeah, this. I don't think most of the commentariat actually thinks this was a good thing, short of total wackos like the Stormfront crowd. They just need to comment on the issue and are trying to twist it to fit their pet hobbyhorses. "While I cannot condone the actions of the shooter, I can certainly understand his frustration at blah blah blah." Bullshit. I said it on 9/12/01 and I'll say it now.

I think when these folks see how much credibility they've lost over stupid statements like this they'll wish they'd kept their mouths shut. Sometimes it really *is* the smart thing to do.

[Lord Zentei]

I sure as hell don't support anything remotely resembling this hateful bullshit, and I am a member of the European right. As opposed to the American right, which has frankly been creepy for quite a while now.

At least I used to be a member of the European right - these days, with nationalistic and xenophobic parties and rhetoric gaining the upper hand, I almost don't recognize it anymore. This had better put a break on that toxic trend.

[Eulogy]

On the bright side, this exposes the vermin to bright light, where everyone can see them for what they are. The smart ones hide, and the dumb ones outright admit that they support child killers.

[someone_else]

Meanwhile, Mario Borghezio, a European parliamentarian who belongs to Italy's rightwing Northern League party, told a mainstream Italian radio station that he sympathized with some of Breivik's ideas.

"Some of the ideas he expressed are good, barring the violence, some of them are great," he told Il Sole-24 Ore radio station.

The Northern League, the junior partner in Premier Silvio Berlusconi's government, has caused a stir with its increasingly virulent anti-immigrant, anti-Islamic rhetoric.

Northern League party is not right wing. It's a party of smartasses playing on poor morons. They wanted a fictional part of Italy they call "Padania" to secede from the rest of Italy when the party was still worth shit at the elections. They used southern italy and its inhabitants as a scapegoats for the ills of the country, now use immigrants (and "Islamics") in the same way.
Now the leaders of the party are enriching themselves and placing their offspring/friends/concubines in well-payed burocratic jobs.

Borghezio is a total sack of shit when taken alone, but he is more or less the party's dog. They use him as a trumpet to gather like-minded xenophobic morons, but not much more. I'm ready to bet that he knows little more than what papers said about Breivik.
Besides, the Northern League's leaders said yesterday that he was not saying stuff on behalf of the party.
And let's not forget that some time ago he also said "Mladic was a real patriot", and none (of his party) gave a fuck, to the contrary of this situation.

What is scary is that Northern League is supported by 10% of the voters, more or less.

[Teebs]

Northern League party is not right wing. It's a party of smartasses playing on poor morons. They wanted a fictional part of Italy they call "Padania" to secede from the rest of Italy when the party was still worth shit at the elections. They used southern italy and its inhabitants as a scapegoats for the ills of the country, now use immigrants (and "Islamics") in the same way.

The Lega Nord is pretty clearly a rightwing party. Its policies are socially conservative, anti-immigration and pro-free market. I'm not quite sure how that can be described as anything but rightwing.

[Sarevok]

I sure as hell don't support anything remotely resembling this hateful bullshit, and I am a member of the European right. As opposed to the American right, which has frankly been creepy for quite a while now.

Out of curiosity how would you describe the mainstream European right ?

[someone_else]

The Lega Nord is pretty clearly a rightwing party. Its policies are socially conservative, anti-immigration and pro-free market. I'm not quite sure how that can be described as anything but rightwing.

If you call "splitting up Italy in a federation of regions" (after trumpeting for years about a secession of an unspecified part of Italy they call "Padania") socially conservative... I don't.

Being xenophobic does not mean you are right wing.

Also let me laugh when you say that they are pro free-market. Lega Nord made a huge fuss about milk quotas just because the milk-producers are their supporters, with the result that now we are paying fines from Europe because a bunch of less than 2000 milk-producing assholes don't want stop overproducing milk above their quota nor pay the fines for this trespassing. And they keep making laws that allow these guys to not pay their fines until the next law.

They actively oppose imports of various stuff if it damages their supporter's industries by keeping taxes (or asking for them) over such imports, especially in the tissues industry.

And the late ludicrous stuff they made is making new offices for the ministries held by their members (the ministries should have their offices only in the capital), in their territory, for no reason other than spreading the pork as widely as possible to their supporters.

The son of the party's leader suddenly turning up as part of a lega nord-controlled region's council and taking 12'000 euros per month (Renzo Bossi).

Hell, you can't even say Berlusconi's party is rightwing. It's just "the party that does his founder's interests". He likes to call it rightwing so he can call Communist!!!!EVULZ!!!! everyone else but it isn't.

Practically all the best politicians we had were rightwing. But it was a century or so ago...

[K. A. Pital]

Being right wing requires being pro-capitalist. Which, to a surprise, does not require being "pro-free market", it just requires to support whatever bunch of rich fat fucks are paying for your electoral successes this time, be it milk producers or someone else. Spare me this "you can't be right-wing unless you logically support free market to an extent where it destroys domestic capitalists that finance your campaigns". That's just crazy. You don't need to be a frothing Randroid to be a right-winger.

[Teebs]

If you call "splitting up Italy in a federation of regions" (after trumpeting for years about a secession of an unspecified part of Italy they call "Padania") socially conservative... I don't.

No I call their stance on issues such as abortion, stem cells and gay rights socially conservative.

Being xenophobic does not mean you are right wing.

It doesn't but it's suggestive.

Also let me laugh when you say that they are pro free-market. Lega Nord made a huge fuss about milk quotas just because the milk-producers are their supporters, with the result that now we are paying fines from Europe because a bunch of less than 2000 milk-producing assholes don't want stop overproducing milk above their quota nor pay the fines for this trespassing. And they keep making laws that allow these guys to not pay their fines until the next law.

They actively oppose imports of various stuff if it damages their supporter's industries by keeping taxes (or asking for them) over such imports, especially in the tissues industry.

Perhaps saying pro-free market was the wrong way of putting it. My point was that their economic policy is fairly classic rightwing. Lowering taxes, opposing state aid etc. Support for free trade is by no means a universal characteristic of the European right. Wanting to protect domestic producers from the outside world is perfectly compatible with being a rightwing party.

And the late ludicrous stuff they made is making new offices for the ministries held by their members (the ministries should have their offices only in the capital), in their territory, for no reason other than spreading the pork as widely as possible to their supporters.

The son of the party's leader suddenly turning up as part of a lega nord-controlled region's council and taking 12'000 euros per month (Renzo Bossi).

Surprise surprise rightwing parties engage in corrupt behaviour in Italy... Believe it or not moral probity or lack of hypocrisy is not a requirement to be included amongst the parties of the right.

Hell, you can't even say Berlusconi's party is rightwing. It's just "the party that does his founder's interests". He likes to call it rightwing so he can call Communist!!!!EVULZ!!!! everyone else but it isn't.

Practically all the best politicians we had were rightwing. But it was a century or so ago...

There's a much better argument to be made for Forza Italia's lack of ideology. However I think it is still a party of the centre-right in behaviour, even if its support base is not necessarily typical of that. The successor party to it seems more ideologically coherent as a party of the right.

[Lord Zentei]

I sure as hell don't support anything remotely resembling this hateful bullshit, and I am a member of the European right. As opposed to the American right, which has frankly been creepy for quite a while now.

Out of curiosity how would you describe the mainstream European right ?

In essence, the following:

• Pro-individual liberty in as reasonably wide a range of issues as can be accommodated in a functional society.
• Pro-trade.
• Pro civil society and democracy.
• Pro-free enterprise - note that this does not imply pro-corporatist.
• A humble and responsible foreign policy, though still with enough clout for defense of the nation from external threats.
• Emphasis on the rule of law and stable society, though with enough flexibility for innovation and enterpreteurs.
• Pro-family. Note that this does not imply homophobia, merely that the family unit is important to society.
• Anti-radicalism.
  
  Additionally:
• General opposition to social engineering and social change for the sake of change - while avoiding ossification. Hence suspicion of Communism.
• General opposition to overlarge government - hence suspicion of Socialism - but not outright opposition to welfare.
• General opposition to anti-Americanism (gotten more difficult lately than in previous years).
• General suspicion of populism.

Some might want to add "pro traditional culture", which arguably some of its problems stemmed from. For many, that was more of a manifestation to opposition to change for the sake of change.

It didn't always live up to these standards of course. But the standards were there. The right was never perfect. But neither was the left, and this populist, isolationist, xenophobic bullshit is not the way to go for anyone.

[Lord Zentei]

GHETTO: and obviously, pro fiscal discipline.

I didn't mention that because I thought it was obvious. But maybe not so much anymore, heh.

[Simon_Jester]

You'd fit right in on the American left, depending on your notion of "fiscal discipline."