Elites are Terrified by Europe's 'Pre-Revolutionary' Trajectory

Voter turnout in the German state of Saxony-Anhalt reached its highest point since 1990, when the first free elections took place. This elevated participation is a universal indicator of a desire for significant change among the electorate. Similar patterns of popular discontent and increased engagement have been observed in recent election results in countries like Hungary and Austria, reflecting a broader European trend.

Following significant populist electoral gains, established political parties are now attempting to negate the results of these elections wherever possible. Authorities have moved to exclude Alternative for Germany (AfD) members from running for office, often without providing credible legal reasons. Concurrently, efforts are underway to amend state constitutions to prevent AfD from chairing parliamentary sessions, demonstrating a political class prioritizing power preservation over democratic representation.

The term 'our democracy' is increasingly used by political establishments to define themselves as the sole legitimate actors within the democratic framework. This framing often accompanies anti-democratic labels applied to political opposition, serving primarily to antagonize rather than engage. Establishments typically avoid outright banning parties like the AfD because their allegations of anti-democratic practices often lack sufficient legal substance for such extreme measures.

Political elites are utilizing a dual psychological strategy to discourage undecided voters from supporting right-wing parties. Voters are told that their vote for such parties would be ineffective, essentially a wasted effort. Simultaneously, these parties and their supporters are stigmatized as 'neo-fascists,' invoking social shame. This dual narrative is designed to steer undecided voters back towards traditional parties like Labour or the Conservatives, ultimately aiming to prevent any disruption to the existing political order.

Ralph Schoellhammer points to the AfD's consistent opposition to phasing out nuclear power for nearly two decades as a concrete example of its differentiated policy positions. He argues that maintaining or expanding nuclear capacity would have significantly benefited the German economy. This specific policy stance contrasts sharply with criticisms that the party lacks credible or distinct policy alternatives to mainstream parties.

A primary driver of the AfD's growing appeal stems from a pervasive feeling among German citizens that political elites prioritize everyone and everything except Germans themselves. This sentiment fuels support for the AfD, even among voters who may not fully align with all aspects of the party's platform. Schoellhammer attributes this policy failure and the resulting discontent to the leadership of both conservative and social democratic parties.

Western politicians across the spectrum increasingly campaign and speak as if their own citizens are the lowest priority. Historically, the focus of political action was to improve the lives of domestic taxpayers. However, the current political climate often prioritizes issues such as protecting foreign borders, like Ukraine's, while seemingly neglecting domestic border concerns. Neil Oliver notes this shift creates a perception that British people, for instance, are consistently last in line for consideration.

Defending the fundamental distinction between long-term citizens and recent arrivals is increasingly labeled as radical in Western discourse. This creates a hypocritical situation when compared to arguments for national sovereignty, particularly in conflicts like the one in Ukraine. Accusations of 'racism' are selectively applied, often targeting Western nations for basic assertions of national identity that are readily accepted elsewhere.

Western governments are increasingly framing geopolitical interventions as moral necessities rather than in terms of national interest. This approach, exemplified by the discourse surrounding Ukraine, often replaces arguments about what is strategically beneficial for the nation with claims of moral obligation. Schoellhammer argues that a government's primary duty is to its own citizens, and approximately 90% of policy should prioritize the domestic population.

This is evidenced by contradictory standards applied to national sovereignty, such as those seen between Ukraine or Israel and Western nations. Labeling national pride as 'right-wing extremism' further contributes to this cognitive dissonance, ultimately aiming to strip individuals of their national identity and reduce them to a mere 'population' rather than a distinct 'people'.

Europe stands alone among global powers in having significant portions of its university, academia, and political environment dedicated to arguing that its citizens are not a distinct 'people' but merely a 'population.' Unlike nations such as China, Turkey, or Israel, which confidently assert their national identities, Western institutions actively promote this project of self-negation. This systemic erasure of national identity is identified as a primary driver of the current widespread demoralization across Europe.

Drawing parallels between current geopolitical situations and the 1930s, particularly events like the Munich Agreement, is deemed dangerous by Ralph Schoellhammer. While acknowledging historical concerns, he stresses that the existence of nuclear weapons introduces a fundamentally different strategic calculus. The presence of nuclear parity radically alters the potential consequences of conflicts, raising questions about whether issues like the status of Crimea are worth the risk of a nuclear world war.

Paradoxically, the political establishment increasingly labels parties like the AfD, often described as 'radical right' or 'far-right,' as extremist for advocating caution on rearmament and promoting diplomatic solutions. While the establishment pushes for a shift towards a war economy, these so-called 'radical right' parties are the primary voices questioning rapid militarization and calling for diplomacy. This creates a contradiction where historical pacifism is discarded by mainstream parties in favor of militarization, while the 'far-right' assumes the role of advocating for peace.

Political elites often mistakenly treat issues such as the Ukraine war, migration, and demographics as isolated concerns, failing to recognize their interconnectedness. However, citizens are demonstrating their intelligence by successfully linking these seemingly disparate issues to their daily realities and lived experiences. This disconnect, where elites underestimate the public's ability to connect the dots, places the established political order at significant peril.

The working class is increasingly shifting its political allegiance towards the right, a trend evident in Germany where 61% of the working-class vote in Saxony-Anhalt went to the AfD. This pattern is also visible in the UK and other European nations, suggesting a broader movement among employees. Conversely, support for left-wing parties is becoming concentrated in more affluent urban areas, indicating a growing correlation between financial well-being and alignment with left-leaning ideologies.

This phenomenon occurs because the left's uncompromising nature actively pulls institutions towards its worldview, rendering passive neutrality insufficient. The constant pressure from one side means that, without an active counter-force, institutions gradually adopt left-leaning perspectives, requiring periodic re-normalization to restore balance.