The rise of
the Vlaams
Blok
November 24, 1991. VINCENT SCHELTIENS
T HOSE, like the foreign press,
who look at the results in particular in Flanders, and above all Antwerp) from abroad can hardly hide their stupefaction. And yet, for anti-racists, they are not really a surprise. In the first place, all the ingredients for a breakthrough by the fascist and far right forces have been there for some time. Secondly, many bourgeois and Social Democratic politicians have played with racist demagogy in the hope of winning votes. Without success: for to copy is to reinforce the legitimacy of the original. Will the traditional parties now toughen their position on immigration? Or will they try to "resolve the problems of society" exploited by the far right? No, for a genuine solution more than ever presupposes radical change.
In Flanders, the far right Vlaams Blok increased its score from 3.0% in 1987 to 10.4%, its parliamentary representation being increased from two to twelve deputies. In the senate, the Blok took five seats (one in 1987).
To this is added a small army of provincial councillors. The most spectacular result was at Antwerp, where the Blok became the biggest party. In Brussels, the party was popular with the Flemish electors — only the CVP (the Christian democratic party, with Prime Minister Martens on its list) took a bigger share of the vote. With 10.4% of the vote across Flanders, the Blok has the automatic right to a ministerial post in the Flemish regional government, made up on a proportional basis.
The Vlaams Blok will not be the only far right party represented in Parliament. Brussels elected a representative of the francophone Front National to the chamber. The FN received 33,000 votes in the capital and had some impressive scores in other Walloon towns. This score is remarkable in that the NF, unlike the Vlaams Blok, was not the only far right
191 24 0 party competing in the elections. There is a strong risk that its success could allow the FN to absorb the other fascist groups in the francophone part of the country.
This far right breakthrough is essentially an electoral phenomenon. These are fascist parties, but at this stage in their construction they try to give themselves a respectable image and to exploit simple themes; immigration, insecurity, nationalism and abortion.
An urban phenomenon
The Vlaams Blok are beginning to make gains in the rural areas. But it remains essentially an urban phenomenon, in the big and medium-sized towns, where the sectors of the working class who have been hardest hit by the austerity of the last ten years live. And this is the heart of the problem; the "brown plague" feeds on the crisis of growing social ine-
These elections show that the vote for the Green parties is no barricade against the far right.
The Greens are not attracting the same popular vote. Their social programme is not sufficient. There is a deep void between the legitimate aspirations of the Greens to equality (the right to vote for immigrants) and the means they propose to eradicate racism. The Greens do not see the necessity of mass action against racism. Nor do they see the necessity of social demands which challenge the logic of the free market, the ultimate cause of the fascist upsurge
The Social Democrats have been hardest hit by the far right breakthrough. That is not astonishing. They have collaborated in the management of the crisis, and have been incapable of changing in any way the situation of people in the poorest areas.
Where Social Democracy has failed to give people a perspective, a sentiment of solidarity and identity, the Vlaams Blok
BELGIUM has succeeded. The first reactions from the SP show that they have not understood the message; they call for "a resolute approach to the problem" and "a strong government". From this point of view, the far right breakthrough gives the bourgeoisie an argument for implementing its plans for a reinforcement of state power. Less democratic rights, and more racism, in the name of the struggle against the "brown tidal wave".
For now, the far right has the wind in its sails. This is also the result of the international conjuncture. With European economic and political unification, austerity is on the agenda everywhere. To this can be added the effects of the victory of capitalism in Eastern Europe. In the absence of a socialist alternative, nationalist tendencies are developing. The success of the FN, built on the simple fact of taking the name and symbolism of Le Pen's party in France, shows the ease with which organizations of this type can now win over a section of the public.
Building a blockade against the far right is not easy. There is a huge gap between understanding the necessity for a unified struggle and arriving at concrete and radical demands. In any case, the solution will surely not come from the proposal for a democratic front against the far right. Those who, by their policies, have paved the way for the far right are now calling on others to help them to sort out their prob-
The electorate have said "a plague on both your houses". Many are socially uprooted and ideologically in disarray. The only way to deal with this is to build a radical alternative, aimed at satisfying popular needs and creating jobs for all, coupled with political equality for Bel gians and immigrants.
This is possible if the wealth thai exists for such a programme is taken from those who have it, and if the workers and youth are ther way. or these demands. There is 17 no other way. *
France: The shadow of Vichy
JEAN-MARIE LE PEN, leader of France's far right National Front, has recently published a fifty-point program on immigra-
In a France ruled by Le Pen, families of foreign workers would no longer have the right to automatically enter the country.
Those born on French soil would not automatically be entitled to French citizenship - an imitation of the nationality code of the Vichy government which collaborated with the Nazis during World War Il. Those who have been granted French nationality in recent years would have their status retroactively reviewed - another practice borrowed from the Vichy years. Immigrants would be officially discriminated against in jobs, and a separate (and no doubt inferior) system of social security with separate funding would be established. Subsidies given to families based on the number of children they have would be reserved solely for French citizens. Citizens would be prioritized in the allocation of public housing. Those wishing to enter the country - even as tourists - would be required to post a 100,000 franc bond and undergo HIV blood testing. All of this would be enforced with the aid of detention centers established at airports and sea-ports.
The NF also calls for a review of the French educational system in order to purge school curriculums of "cosmopolitanism". The construction of new mosques and Muslim cultural centers would be halted
Not subject to these draconian measures would be people from other EEC (European Economic Community) countries and those sharing a common "destiny, culture, religion and civilization".
These measures were widely condemned by most of France's mainstream political parties and politicians on the right anc left. But at least one well-known French politician, Michel Poniatowsk, a former Interior minister in the government of Valery
Giscard d'Estaing in the 1970's, found many of these propositions "interesting" and "normal". Poniatowski has gone on record recently as favoring an eventual electoral alliance with the National Front. While the other right wing parties publicly refuse to consider such an eventuality, the logic of their public statements on immigration, such as Jacques Chirac's complaints about the "odors" of immigrants and Giscard d'Estaing's fear of an "invasion", leads precisely in that direction.
In fact, the unveiling of the National Front's propositions clearly annoyed these "respectable" right wing forces who expected a less radical response from a party that is making serious electoral advances. By taking such an openly racist position, the FN clearly hopes to avoid being outflanked by other right-wing forces. Nevertheless, if experience is a guide, more than a few of the FN's fifty propositions will soon become part of the discourse of the French political mainstream -
International Viewpoint #218 • December 9, 1991
BRITAIN / FRANCE war recession. Thatcherism as an ideology was simply the concen-
London. Their campaign theme was
"rights for whites". They used the stabbing
Britain: Wave of racist attacks
THE election of the Conservatives trated essence of free marketism. Society, she said, did not exist, there were only individuals and their families. The welfarist consensus of postwar British politics was rejected as utopian socialism. With the disappearance of much of traditional British industry, the expansion of the of a white youth by young Bangladeshis (after countless attacks of every sort on the Bangladeshi community in this area to win support.
This is a rather more subtle approach than in earlier fascist election campaigns and it served them well. Using the stabbing as a pretext they blamed the inadequate housing and lack of jobs on
(Tories) in 1979, when British fascist groups were at their strongest cut the political ground from under their feet. But now they are making a comeback
LIAM MAC UAID
A T the time Thatcher made a
famous speech in which she spoke of white British fears of being swamped by "alien cultures" and her crony Norman Tebbit wondered whether or not British Blacks and Asians supported the England cricket
This racist undercurrent was accompanied by a barrage of antiEuropean rhetoric in the guise of attacks on the "Brussels bureaucrats". Neither was Thatcher averse to starting a small war when it might help with an election. The Malvinas war was the occasion for an unparalleled display of reactionary nationalism.
But now Thatcher has gone. The politics of the Labour leadership under Neil Kinnock are almost indistinguishable from those of Tory Prime Minister John Major. Unemployment is at least three million and rising in Britain's worst post18
Keith Mann * financial and service sectors and the reluctance of the unions and the Labour party to go on the offensive, a real atomization of British society took place. As the artificial, credit-based prosperity created in Thatcher's later years evaporates. it is the very people who thought they stood to gain the most who are now suffering most severely. All those who took her government's advice and took out loans to buy their own homes or set up their own businesses are now being punished by high interest rates, a steep decline in their earnings and big job losses in former boom areas.