Austrian election could produce EU's first far-right head of state

Austria could elect the European Union's first far-right head of state on Sunday, with support for Freedom Party candidate Norbert Hofer buoyed by a migration crisis that has heightened fears about employment and security.

Opinion polls suggest the presidential run-off between Hofer and former Greens leader Alexander van der Bellen will be close. A far-right victory would resonate across the 28-member EU, where migration driven by conflict and poverty in the Middle East and elsewhere has become a major political issue.

Support for groups like the eurosceptic, anti-immigration Freedom Party (FPO) has been rising in various countries, whether they have taken in many migrants in the recent influx, like Germany and Sweden, or not, like France and Britain.

Most are still far from achieving majority support. The FPO has been in government before, serving as a coalition partner in the early 2000s when it was led by the late Joerg Haider.

But whoever wins the presidential election, it is likely to be a new high-water mark for Austria's and Europe's far right, all the more significant for being in a prosperous country with comparatively low, albeit rising, unemployment.

As I’ve already explained, the party itself doesn’t attack Jews. The party leader, Heinz-Christian Strache, is pro-Israel. He has visited Israel and has expressed his belief in the Jewish state

O rly? Strache doesn’t attack Jews?

Every leftist on the planet talks up Israel’s “right to exist” while slamming them for defending themselves against the “Palestinians”. Lots of Israel’s enemies visit there on diplomatic jaunts, from national socialist to international socialist to Islamic socialist. This is nothing new.

And, apparently, by your definition (any questionable members taints the whole party) you consider the Libertarian Party in the U.S. to also be a Nazi party

Putting words in people’s mouths is a bad habit; please don’t engage in it. However, the LP actually believes tenets of Islamic propaganda:

Al-Qaida stated clearly, even before 9/11, that their plan to attack Americans was a response to three ongoing US policies: (1) the stationing of US troops in Saudi Arabia, (2) the embargo of food and medicine that had so far killed over a million Iraqis, and (3) support of Israeli persecution of Palestinians. …

Further in that foreign policy platform, their stance on Islamic terrorism is too dovish and encourages its proliferation.

Sorry, but having something of a social welfare safety net is not socialism, unless you are really arguing the United States today is a full-fledged socialist nation. Are you planning on sending back your Social Security check (if or when you get it)? The point of that party, as of Geert Wilder’s in the Netherlands, is that these sort of programs that people have come to rely on to survive will collapse under the weight of the new migrant floods.

The fact of the matter is, regardless of its negatives, the FPÖ is clearly and undeniably more conservative than most European parties. They are for smaller government and lower taxes. Why don’t you list all the mainstream European parties that actually have a chance at winning that advocate the repeal of the social safety nets their countries already have? It is political suicide for a party to do that regardless of where it stands on the political spectrum. That doesn’t make all the political parties in Europe “socialist,” unless you are using a very broad definition. But even if they were, shouldn’t we support the more small government, free enterprise, and anti-Islamist of the “socialist” parties?

The party’s current presidential candidate Hofer’s slogan is “putting Austria first.” How extraordinarily different from Trump’s so much less jingoistic “America First” saying (one might almost think Hofer was trying to copy Trump). No, Trump isn’t socialist, and neither is the FPÖ—at least not by European standards at any rate. They want to preserve certain government protections, but if you haven’t noticed Trump has said the same thing about Social Security and Medicare. That doesn’t make him a socialist either.

The party is trying to make the best of the situation they already have with the EU and the Euro to try to protect their people’s financial interests. Once more, the party is one of least pro-EU parties in Austria. Try thinking of things in context.

Deiner meinung nach, was denn ist die Definition von “Heimat”? “Homeland” is a common translation, and by the way, it’s still used in Austria among regular people, just like “Mother Russia” is used in Russia without thoughts of Stalin. (Your comments about the DHS are pretty off topic. My point was we use a translation of that word too officially, just like the Austrians do. That doesn’t make the DHS “Nazi” because it uses an arguably nationalistic/patriotic term.)

We still have a chance to save Western Civilization. I find it sad that there are still so many people who throw about the label of Nazi so easily (and, yes, they are usually on the left) against anyone who wants to save their nation and put their people first. I understand why you find the FPÖ’s past and at least one of its members to be troubling, but it’s current policies are what matters (within context and without distortion). The alternative here are the Greens, far more to the left than even our Greens, who will flood little Austria with “refugees” until it is drowning in them. And to answer your first question: no, most combinations of nationalism and socialism (like the truly left-wing nationalist parties in Scotland, Catalonia, and Denmark) have nothing to do with Nazis. And by the way, “anti-Zionist” also doesn’t automatically equal Nazi either under any rational definition (or many, many Nazi-hating lefties would really be actual Nazis too, which is comical), and I say that as a strong supporter of Israel.

“Sorry, but the FPÖ is who hates national identity.”

LOL. You really do have a “world-turned-upside-down” view of things.

Sorry, but having something of a social welfare safety net is not socialism, unless you are really arguing the United States today is a full-fledged socialist nation

Are you arguing the opposite? Never mind your use of weasel terms like “full-fledged” versus more precise terms such as de facto to distinguish from de jure, the latter meaning openly socialist.

The existence of any government-sponsored social welfare system (falsely called a “safety net” and always posited against private faith-based charities) is socialism. Calling it “not socialism” is mendacity, with all due respect. The availability of jobs (whether working for others or for oneself) is supposed to be the actual safety net against privation and squalor, in concert with society’s support of strong family units and private morality, and of course the Founding Fathers’ concept of people’s militia versus standing military.

The fact of the matter is, regardless of its negatives, the FPÖ is clearly and undeniably more conservative than most European parties. They are for smaller government and lower taxes

Nobody can be for smaller government and lower taxes while being for social welfare at the same time; it is oxymoronic. And it is not “more conservative” when those disparities exist in policy.

The other negatives cannot be ignored, since they go with these particular negatives. Just the same old difference between national socialism and international socialism once more.

Why don’t you list all the mainstream European parties that actually have a chance at winning that advocate the repeal of the social safety nets their countries already have? It is political suicide for a party to do that regardless of where it stands on the political spectrum

Another defense of socialism.

The party’s current presidential candidate Hofer’s slogan is “putting Austria first.” How extraordinarily different from Trump’s so much less jingoistic “America First” saying (one might almost think Hofer was trying to copy Trump) …

The actual quote from Trump is this:

My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people and American security above all else. It has to be first. Has to be.

Insinuating the exact same context as what Huber would use is presumptuous.

BTW, Norbert Hofer bragged that his party was “to the left of the US Democrats” recently. What to believe out of these people?

OK, if you believe that Social Security and Medicare are “socialist,” fine. No candidate in this country would get far advocating their elimination. And yes, the Republicans have already proven that a party can exist that supports programs like Social Security, as well as smaller government and lower taxes, so no that is not an oxymoron. Obviously, by your definition the United States is a socialist nation and both it’s major parties are pro-socialism. In reality, however, we are a mixed economy (like all the Western nations are) and a democratic republic.

It’s strange that you criticize the libertarians so harshly, because you sound like a radical libertarian to me (and least on the issue of the role of government). And by the way, the FPÖ is not for “more” social welfare, but for protecting what they already have from the burden that massive numbers of third-world immigrants are placing on their system. I’m sorry, but Trump has used the words “America first” a few times now, not that the meaning is much different from your quote. I’ve heard him myself, and I’ve seen it in print. Many in the media, by the way, have been calling Hofer the “Donald Trump of Europe.”

The choices are hard-left, Marxist, radical environmentalist, open borders, pro-EU, anti-Western Civ Greens vs. low taxes, pro-business, anti-Islamist, pro-gun, questioning if they should leave the EU, patriotic FPÖ (that, yes, does have a questionable past). These are the only two choices right now in Austria. It doesn’t matter if neither are perfect.

OK, if you believe that Social Security and Medicare are “socialist,” fine. No candidate in this country would get far advocating their elimination. And yes, the Republicans have already proven that a party can exist that supports programs like Social Security, as well as smaller government and lower taxes, so no that is not an oxymoron

That’s a whole lot of blue state propaganda. The GOP has proven no such thing. Rather, the GOP has proven that they are just as far left as the Democrats and are just as enthusiastic about growing government.

Obviously, ~~by your definition~~ the United States is a socialist nation and both it’s (sic) major parties are pro-socialism. In reality, however, we are a mixed economy (like all the Western nations are) and a democratic republic.

Putting words in people’s mouths again?

The USA was founded as a republic and not a “democratic republic” (as a plethora of socialist countries like to call themselves). There is no such thing as a “mixed economy”, only economies either based in socialism or forced into transition to same by ideologue politicians. The EU, according to its own constitution, is a “social market economy” (an oxymoron, since it is merely another permutation of Lenin’s New Economic Policy). The FPÖ is no opponent of same.

I’m sorry, but Trump has used the words “America first” a few times now …

Yet you wish to rip it out of the context he used it in. Hofer is a say-anything candidate, and he cannot say “Austria first” on one hand and “(the FPÖ is) to the left of the US Democrats” on the other and have it come out in any way honest much less meaningful.

One thing I agree with is that the EU, as far as their politicians go, have nothing but bad choices.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.