The Pseudo-Left and the Triangulated Far Right Join Forces Against Immigration

https://www.euractiv.com/news/meloni-and-frederiksen-urge-protection-of-europes-christian-heritage/

This exemplifies the kind of power Meloni wields within the EU. This is all the more true given the present political weakness of both France's Macron and Germany's Merz - despite their larger economies. This is not to say they don't wield influence but Meloni is still able to ride pretty high and is viewed as a critical component to holding the EU together, and keeping the Right within a EU-friendly orbit. It's something that the leadership in Brussels loses sleep over.

Those on the right of Meloni are unhappy with her compromises but her success has garnered her a larger and wider base of support. As far as Frederiksen (the Danish PM), what can you say? She's supposedly a Social Democrat but it's clear these parties are shifting Right in order to deal with the populist wave. In fact Frederiksen is something of a black sheep in Europe's Social Democratic circles. In addition to her anti-immigration policies, she's viewed as tepid in her support of the EU, and to the chagrin of the Left, she has tripled military spending.

The immigrants aren't really imposing anything on the people of Europe - but their presence marks a change in culture and a kind of diversity and plurality hitherto unknown. But even such a statement calls for some nuance. Before World War II, Europe was used to greater diversity - maybe not in a place like Denmark, but generally speaking the populations were far more mixed and far less homogeneous as one sees with the modern versions of most EU states.

But it must be granted the diversity did not extend to Muslim populations - with the exception of the Balkans and parts of Eastern Europe - a geographic concept that's not always easy to define.

For that matter Europe itself is not always so easy as the definition gets a bit hazy the further east one ventures. As I've told before, one branch of my family was compromised entirely of Volga Germans. Of all the Eastern German settlements, the Volga Germans were the farthest, on the fringes of Europe - on the Eastern side of the Volga River, on the Western edge of the Steppes of Asia. They were certainly European (Catholic, Reformed, Lutheran, and Anabaptist) but they used Bactrian camels, drank vodka instead of schnapps, and played their folk tunes on the balalaika. They interacted with Russians to be sure but also Tatars and Kirghiz. In reality being on the eastern side of the Volga, they were (by cultural measures) in Asia, or at least on its frontier. Even on today's map, their settlements were less than one hundred miles from the Kazakh border. And yet, the 'official' definition of Europe extends to the Urals and a case can be made that the Urals mark a split - at least with regard to Russian culture.

My point is simply to say, that defining Europe and its Christian heritage is a messy business - and it raises questions that people Meloni don't really want to pursue. The appeal she's making is not technical, historical, geographical, or anthropological. It's political and populist.

Frideriksen demonstrates (again) that her principles of social democracy are bogus - just as they are with her American counterparts who claim to be democratic socialists - a distinction on paper to be sure but in practice, both of these factions use their labels for leverage and yet do not really stand on the principles they profess.

Social Democracy ostensibly is invested in workers and labour movements - which (all the more in the globalist context) requires an internationalist outlook. Frederiksen is instead playing a nationalist card - or rather limiting her 'internationalism' to Central-Western Europe, the EU heartland.

Actual ideological Socialists would offer a more comprehensive critique of the kind of Social Democracy Frederiksen represents. The result is a kind of patronage, a corporate state offering services, limiting profits in the name of social contract and cohesion. Such politicians and movements are rightly labeled as pseudo-left.

There are many in the United States that look with envy at the Scandinavian social democracy model and yet it must be remembered these are relatively tiny states - only Sweden has 10 million people, the size of Chicagoland spread out over an area the size of California. Denmark and Norway have populations the size of Philadelphia or Boston. Would their model work in a country as large and diverse as the United States? Even those who are not principally opposed to the idea, have their doubts.

But there's little doubt as to what's coming in Europe. The next series of elections may push anti-immigration policy from the realm of academic discussion and broad legislation to direct action. What will become of the likes of Frederiksen then? That will be a story that deserves some attention.

And as always because Evangelicalism wants to find a place at the table, these ideas enter the Church. And the idea that as Kingdom citizens we must reject both Social Democracy and the kind of Right-wing nationalist and pseudo-Christendom models of Meloni is something that few entertain, or even seem capable of entertaining. The leadership has not been faithful in teaching the doctrine and ethics of the New Testament and as such the door is wide open, and church members drink deeply from these polluted wells, incorporating the thought of the political spectrum which merely represents the ideas of lost people trying to build a new Babel.