The enemy within

Western societies are confronting an  enemy which thrives on the residue left by populist political parties which instead of  marginalizing  far right discourse have co-opted it in mainstream politics.

In fact Anders Behring Breivik was a member of Norway’s second largest party; the mainstream conservative and anti immigrant Progress Party. The leaders of this party have always denied being racist but they still attracted members like Breivik.  The danger lies in the ambivalence of populist parties who fan the flames of hatred without actually framing their discource in off putting racist terminology.

For liberal democratic societies people like Breivik represent a perverse sort of enemy. People like him  pose as defenders of their societies against Muslim immigrants (sometimes even as defenders of liberal or christian values) while upholding the myth of a golden age were their nations were racially and/or religiously homogenous.

This enemy inhabits a parallel universe inhabited by incompatible weirdoes ranging from Christian fundamentalists who actively deny Christian solidarity   to neo-pagan Nazis who wage war against the meek.  Some still vomit their hatred against the Jews while others go as far as supporting the Israel's own version of the extreme right.  Their antics and eccentricity turns off most normal people.  But they still manage to thrive on the fodder of legitimacy granted by mainstream politicians who have grown too afraid of standing up for the values which make Europe what it is today.

History teaches us that extremists flourish when their discourse is legitimised through the endorsement of more moderate elements in society.  Red terror was only defeated in Italy because of it was marginalised by the mainstream  left. 

Basically when those helping or rescuing migrants are perceived as traitors  to the nations and migrants themselves are spoken of as klandestini and not as human beings, the stage is set for acts of violence. In the Norwegian case we clearly had a loony extremist who believed in a conspiracy between Marxist social democrats and Muslim migrants to erode Norway’s Christian identity.  Christianity is only incidental to this project.  It can easily be substituted by race and even western liberal values.

The shedding of social democratic blood in Norway should also serve as a wake up call for the Labour Party in Malta. Norway’s Labour Party paid the brunt of Breivik’s hate for being soft on immigration. 

In contrast to most European social democratic parties for  the past couple of years the PL has been harping on the “national interest” which is being threatened by the failure of the EU to share Malta’s immigration burden. Labour has also criticised the  government's weakness in not resorting to unilateral actions like suspending international obligations. Privately labour exponents argue that this is their way of nipping the rise of the far right in the bud.  If Labour does not speak on immigration workers would vote far right they argue.

Surely Labour cannot be in anyway accused of stirring prejudice based on racial or cultural identity.  Muscat has always been careful to point out that immigrants are not to be blamed for the government's and EU's faults. The problem with Labour's discourse is that it perpetuates the idea that immigration is a burden and a threat, which we would rather do without. In reality immigration is a reality of any modern society in a globalised world. It also gives a false impression that a future government would make the “problem” disappear by stamping its feet in the European arena.  It could raise expectations which a future Labour government cannot simply fulfill. 

Also lacking is a clear commitment to actively fight the racist rightwing. Absent from the 44 principles on which Joseph Muscat’s movement of progressives and moderates was founded through a programmatic motion in January 2010 was any rejection of racism and xenophobia and defence of immigrant rights.  Whether the omission was deliberate or not is immaterial.  What counts is that Labour has been largely absent in combatting xenophobia and racism on a cultural and political level.

Recently Muscat even had to distance himself from Norman Lowell after the far right leader praised his stance on immigration.  It was an embarassing moment for a social democratic leader.  Hopefully recent events in Norway will push him further in distancing himself from this scourge.

On its part the Nationalist Party surely did not deserve being included in Breivik's list of far right right organisations. But it should stop congratulating itself for saving migrants from drowning (as if any decent human expects it to let them drown) and start working on integration policies for those migrants who  are here to stay.

It also should confront its internal devils. For hibernating in some of its structures are a number of hard right activists known for their  extreme traditionalism and hatred for anything leftist.  They might not be racists but their vision harks back to the myth of golden age shattered by liberalism and cultural marxism.  At university this hatred has often come in to the surface with regards to Graffitti activists and ir-Realta. 

In the meantime it is high time for the media to stop glamorising people like Norman Lowell whose ideology of hate bears a strong resemblance to Breivik’s ramblings.   I  am not saying that Lowell is a potential murderer.  The danger is that his message could trigger acts of madness.  Some years ago a spate of arson attacks against  journalists and people who work with asylum seekers was a terrible reminder of the danger posed by right wing rants.

Sure there are differences between Malta's brand of the far right and the Norwegian mass murderer. Lowell still rants against the Zionist conspiracy while Breivik focuses his hatred against Muslims.  But both belong to the same cultural universe and both express themselves in nausiating manifestos based on historical myths.  Both fit Robert Paxton's definition of fascism as an obsession with  "community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity". The enemy within is also here living in our midst.