Connect with us

International

EU elections turn ‘sharp right’ as immigration woes wreak havoc in Europe

Published

10 months ago

16 minute read

Plenary chamber of the European Parliament, Strasbourg,                                                                            FranceHadrian/Shutterstock

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

The recent European Union elections have resulted in significant gains for right wing and nationalist parties across major European countries in a signal move against widespread liberal immigration policies.

As predicted by the European Council on Foreign Relations in January, the EU elections have delivered a “sharp right turn” in the major nations of the European Union.

France saw the biggest gains for population friendly politics, with the right-wing National Rally party (RN) securing up to 33 percent of the vote: more than twice that of President Emmanuel Macron’s party. The map below shows in blue where nationalists won:

This 2022 map below shows the sharpness of the right turn in France in only two years:

Macron has announced a parliamentary election in France, to be held within 30 days.

In addition to the 30 seats won by the RN, led in the EU by Jordan Bardella, the Reconquest party of Marion Marechal took another five seats, leaving nationalists in France with 35 against 13 for the governing coalition. Marechal is the niece of the RN’s National Assembly leader Marine Le Pen.

A full summary of the results at the time of writing is available at Politico.

In Germany, Europe’s most solid anti-globalist party the Alternative for Germany (AfD) came second to the “conservative” Christian Democratic Union of Germany, its 15 seats and 16 percent of the vote putting it ahead of all the parties of the “traffic light” coalition of reds, greens, and yellow liberals. The ruling parties have long threatened to criminalize the AfD, as it continues to rise in the polls.

Geert Wilder’s PVV took the most seats in the Netherlands, winning six – with the anti-globalist Farmer Citizen Movement (BBB) winning a further two.

Hard right and nationalist parties came joint first in Belgium, with the Vlaams Belang returning from destruction by liberal lawfare of its immensely successful predecessor, the Vlaams Blok, to secure three seats.

Hungary’s staunchly pro-family and pro-nation ruling party Fidesz took almost 45 percent, its 10 seats edging out the second placed “conservative” Respect and Freedom Party on seven.

No change at the top of the EU

Yet the encouraging results for the reality-based community are tempered by two facts: the “conservative” faction of Ursula von der Leyen remains the largest, and the real power will still be divided among the ruling liberal establishment.

Von der Leyen is seeking a second term in office, and will likely work with red, green, and liberal globalists to get one.

In an early indication of the response to popular politics by the globalist elite, she has recently announced an enormous EU-wide censorship and propaganda effort. Known as the European Democracy Shield, its purpose is to shield the ruling elite she leads from democracy.

Real power in the EU, as in all “democracies,” is not in the Parliament – but lies with the permanent government at the top.

The real power is not in Parliament

The EU Parliament, whose new makeup now includes 157 seats for a divided right-nationalist faction, does not set EU policies.

The positions which decide EU policy are those on the European Commission and European Council. These, as before, will be allotted to members of the liberal consensus: the EPP group – led by the current EU Chief Commissioner Von der Leyen – remains the largest group with 186 seats and is “conservative” in name only. With 720 seats in total, 361 seats are required for a majority.

The EPP is expected to continue to collaborate with the reds, greens, and liberals to achieve this.

The liberal left has 135 seats – eleven fewer than the nationalists – but being a single group achieves second place as a result.

Added to this, the 79 seats of the liberals grants the globalist uniparty a majority in the EU Parliament.

Why are the nationalists divided?

The nationalist bloc – Identity and Democracy (ID) – is led by the largest party, the French RN. It suspended the AfD in May, as the French group sought to distance itself from continued attempts to discredit the AfD in the German press.

As a result, the AfD’s 15 seats join the 10 of Hungary’s ruling Fidesz in the non-aligned group. These 25 non-aligned seats for the politics of sanity are buttressed by the nationalist ID group of 58 seats, and the national-conservative ECR group with 73. A nominal total of 157 right-nationalists emerges, when the single seat from the Niki party of Greece is included.

General elections

Calls were made for a general election in France and in Germany following the decisive defeat of the ruling parties in the two major nations of Europe.

The French National Assembly has been dissolved by Macron, with a parliamentary election to follow within 30 days. With no presidential election scheduled until 2027 it is likely that Macron will remain the head of state over a Parliament firmly opposed to his personal platform which has delivered war, mass migration, and mounting left wing street violence.

In an early sign of rising political violence, left wing rioters marauded through Paris, smashing windows and burning cars in Bordeaux, Toulouse, and other French cities following the results of the EU elections in France.

In Germany, the leader of the right-liberal Christian Democratic Union called for elections after his “conservative” party topped the polls, with the AfD in second place. The current Chancellor Olaf Scholz ruled out snap elections,  promising  instead to crack down on the AfD and propagandize his people into becoming more “modern” and “progressive.”

This was the prescription written for the ruling parties of the elite in the Council on Foreign Relations’ January warning, which said globalist power must be secured by information control:

Progressive policymakers need to start considering the trends that are driving these voting patterns and begin preparing narratives that can cut through them.

With this report in detail from Ireland, narrative control is compounded with another “conspiracy theory” in action: the replacement of the electorate by mass migration driven by war.

Irish elections ‘rigged’? Globalist replacement in action

Ireland has seen the most widespread popular revolt against what Irish natives call the “plantation” of huge volumes of male migrants into their nation.

Yet this popular upsurge was not reflected in local and EU elections, whose results are yet to be fully declared. The talk in Ireland is of migrants bussed to polling stations, and a media blackout on non-mainstream candidates for an Irish Ireland.

Dublin doctor Jane Holland, had this to say: “Imagine a government operated so poorly they had to import an entire nation of new voters because they lost the citizens’ vote.”

Holland sensibly suggested that “Voting should be reserved for citizens only.” Is she representative of a far-right conspiracy theory known as the “Great Replacement”?

Since 2004, non-Irish residents have been permitted to vote in elections in Ireland. An NGO campaigning for increased migrant rights to Irish homes and benefits has been “bussing” migrant voters to polling stations, ensuring they “vote correctly.”

Both the newspaper which reported this fact above, and the NGO bussing migrants to vote for migrants in elections – are funded by the European Union to do so.

The efforts of this NGO ensured “90 percent of asylum seekers turned out to vote.”

They celebrated many victories, including the first Nigerian woman to hold office in Galway.

Former Irish republican party Sinn Fein, now globalist, has been caught “farming votes from Ukrainians” in Ireland, with the promise of housing and accelerated citizenship in return.

Media ‘lockout’ of non-establishment candidates

Irish people simply do not hear of any alternative, according to critics, thanks to media censorship by omission.

“This is very clear after these elections. The national media worked in a deeply unethical manner to shield the general public from conservative perspectives in particular.”

So said independent journalist Eoin Lenihan, explaining, “There was a blanket lockout of non-leftist and non-establishment parties and independents.”

Lenihan’s statement on X (formerly Twitter) referenced another Irish user’s claim that “Irish journalists working for national media are toxic and a threat to democracy in Ireland. There was a blanket lockout of non-leftist and non-establishment parties and Independents.”

Despite regime efforts to suppress native Irish politics, four nationalists were elected to council positions in Dublin. Pro-life Patrick Quinlan won for the National Party, and Catholic Gavin Pepper is one “working class ordinary Irishman” who managed to break through the “lockout” to win a local council seat in Dublin.

“We’re up against the media” he said in his victory speech, “who don’t let us have a fair say.”

Attempted murder of Catholic nationalist

Another breakthrough came with the victory of pro-life Catholic Malachy Steenson, also in Dublin. Steenson, described as the “Plantation resistance leader,” recently addressed a crowd of 15,000 in a mass demonstration against the “plantation” of migrants into Ireland by its globalist government.

The Irish nationalist was attacked in his office last month by an “antifascist thug” who had arrived to kill him. Having announced his intention to assassinate Steenson to Irish police, he was followed to Steenson’s office, where he was arrested whilst attempting to carry out his threat.

Steenson is a strong critic of Israel’s actions in Gaza, and on his election denounced the Irish state broadcaster RTE as a “government propaganda organization.”

Steenson’s message was simple, stating that with his victory, “The revolution has begun.”

The view from Russia

With the mainstream media a component in the consolidation of globalist elite power, the perspective from a so-called enemy nation is perhaps the most sincere appraisal of the European situation.

When asked about the election results – and why EU policies will not change despite them – Chargé d’Affaires of the Russian Mission to the EU Kirill Logvinov said this on June 10 in an interview with Russian news outlet RIA:

The main reason is that protest sentiments have been ignored for a long time. The attempted violation of rights and freedoms during the pandemic, the failed migration policy, rising inflation, the deteriorating socio-economic situation, the urge to equate pro-European and pro-Ukrainian interests – the public grievances piled up and sooner or later had to find a ‘way out.’

And they found it in the European elections.

It is startling to see how the Russians view Europe: a managed democracy which is radicalizing its own populations against itself. Continuing, Logvinov stated:

In a number of countries, voters have virtually passed a vote of no confidence in the parties in power. Contrary to the rules of political life, however, ‘flawed’ national governments are not obliged to learn lessons immediately, which could lead to further radicalization of society.

The Russian diplomat concluded that the EU system will simply neutralize the will of its people:

Despite the voters’ simple demand for attention to their vital interests, the centrist majority will do its utmost to ‘dilute’ views and approaches that go against the political mainstream.

This is all the easier when MEPs are essentially unaccountable to their own electorate.

With a locked down media and the plantation of an imported voting bloc, Ireland is one nation to watch to see how long the politics of elite repression can continue under the European Union.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
2025 Federal Election / 33 mins ago

Poilievre will cancel Mark Carney’s new Liberal packaging law and scrap the Liberal plastic ban!

Business / 3 hours ago

Ted Cruz, Jim Jordan Ramp Up Pressure On Google Parent Company To Deal With ‘Censorship’

2025 Federal Election / 4 hours ago

PRC-Linked Disinformation Claims Conservatives Threaten Chinese Diaspora Interests, Take Aim at PM Carney’s Debate Remark

2025 Federal Election

PRC-Linked Disinformation Claims Conservatives Threaten Chinese Diaspora Interests, Take Aim at PM Carney’s Debate Remark

Published on April 18, 2025

By

 

As polls tighten in Canada’s pivotal federal election, a Chinese-language website has published multiple editorials suggesting that a Pierre Poilievre government could threaten Chinese Canadian interests with so-called “anti-China” policy clauses—claiming it could bring “inconvenience to the lives of Chinese people, such as restrictions on the use of social media, reductions in return air tickets, etc.”

During the 2021 federal election, then-Conservative leader Erin O’Toole and MP Kenny Chiu were widely attacked with similar arguments across Chinese-language news and social media. CSIS reporting from 2022, cited exclusively by The Bureau, warned that Chinese-language media in Canada is effectively controlled by Beijing and weaponized during election periods to spread Chinese Communist Party-aligned narratives.

One of the new articles also criticizes Prime Minister Mark Carney’s debate remark that Beijing poses the greatest threat to Canada’s national security—a comment that prompted the Chinese-language editorial to question whether Carney’s statement was “a gimmick to attract attention.”

The articles, published Thursday and Friday by 51.ca, have raised deep concern among some community members. One longtime Chinese Canadian journalist, who requested anonymity due to fear of retaliation, told The Bureau they were alarmed by the messaging and suspected the coverage was driven by election-interference motives.

One of the pieces claimed that “the Conservative Party has written anti-China clauses into the party platform,” referencing a prior story that quickly circulated on Chinese-language social media and triggered fearful discussion.

Citing WeChat commentary on the same article, the journalist pointed specifically to a politically connected figure previously associated with CSIS investigations into election interference networks in the Greater Toronto Area—allegedly tied to clandestine funding channels linked to the Chinese Consulate in Toronto.

Sharing a WeChat forum screen-picture, the diaspora journalist noted:

“The writer said, according to the Conservative’s campaign platform, China’s definition is ‘enemy.’ So what is the impact on Chinese Canadians’ daily life? Facing more discrimination? Fewer flights going back to China? How about using social media? If there is a war, what will happen to Chinese Canadians—like Japanese people were sent to the concentration camps or deported?”

The journalist said the messaging is not only inflammatory, but dangerously manipulative—casting the Conservative Party as a threat to the civil rights and safety of Chinese Canadians, while exploiting historical trauma to provoke fear.

The same 51.ca article—while quoting from the Conservative Party’s platform documents—shifts sharply into misleading commentary. It contrasts the party’s current positions with historical discrimination enacted by the Liberal government of the 1920s.

One of the recent 51.ca articles warns that the Conservative Party’s stance “can easily cause ethnic tensions and even exacerbate anti-China sentiment.”

A second article delivers a similar critique of Conservative policy while also taking aim at Prime Minister Mark Carney, who, in last night’s nationally televised debate, stated:

“I think the biggest security threat to Canada is China.”

That comment, consistent with assessments from Canadian intelligence services and allied Five Eyes partners, was immediately seized upon by 51.ca’s editorial board.

“Carney blurted out that China is Canada’s biggest threat. Is this a deep-rooted idea or a gimmick to attract attention? It is not known yet. But what is certain is that when other party leaders are talking about how to deal with the problems facing Canada itself, Carney is talking about China being the enemy. I really don’t know what’s going on in his mind.”

Both 51.ca articles strategically focus their sharpest criticism on the Conservative Party, portraying its platform as existentially dangerous, while the second treats Carney’s one-line debate comment as a moment of rhetorical overreach.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Invite your friends and earn rewards

If you enjoy The Bureau, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.

Invite Friends

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Daily Caller EXCLUSIVE: Trump’s Broad Ban On Risky Gain-Of-Function Research Nears Completion

Published on April 18, 2025

By

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

President Donald Trump could sign a sweeping executive order banning gain-of-function research — research that makes viruses more dangerous in the lab — as soon as May 6, according to a source who has worked with the National Security Council on the issue.

The executive order will take a broad strokes approach, banning research amplifying the infectivity or pathogenicity of any virulent and replicable pathogen, according to the source, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about the anticipated executive action. But significant unresolved issues remain, according to the source, including whether violators will be subject to criminal penalties as bioweaponeers.

The executive order is being steered by Gerald Parker, head of the White House Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy, which has been incorporated into the NSC. Parker did not respond to requests for comment.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here. Thank you!

In the process of drafting the executive order, Parker has frozen out the federal agencies that have for years championed gain-of-function research and staved off regulation — chiefly Anthony Fauci’s former institute, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health.

The latest policy guidance on gain-of-function research, unveiled under the Biden administration in 2024, was previously expected to go into effect May 6. According to a March 25 letter cosigned by the American Society for Microbiology, the Association for Biosafety and Biosecurity International, and Council on Governmental Relations, organizations that conduct pathogen research have not received direction from the NIH on that guidance — suggesting the executive order would supersede the May 6 deadline.

The 2024 guidance altered the scope of experiments subject to more rigorous review, but charged researchers, universities and funding agencies like NIH with its implementation, which critics say disincentivizes reporting. Many scientists say that researchers and NIH should not be the primary entities conducting cost–benefit analyses of pandemic virus studies. 

Parker previously served as the head of the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), a group of outside experts that advises NIH on biosecurity matters, and in that role recommended that Congress stand up a new government agency to advise on gain-of-function research. Former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield has also endorsed moving gain-of-function research decision making out of the NIH to an independent commission.

“Given the well documented lapses in the NIH review process, policymakers should … remove final approval of any gain-of function research grants from NIH,” Redfield said in a February op-ed.

It remains to be seen whether the executive order will articulate carveouts for gain-of-function research without risks of harm such as research on non-replicative pseudoviruses, which can be used to study viral evolution without generating pandemic viruses.

It also remains to be seen whether the executive order will define “gain-of-function research” tightly enough to stand up to legal scrutiny should a violator be charged with a crime.

Risky research on coronaviruses funded by the NIH at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through the U.S. nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance typifies the loopholes in NIH’s existing regulatory framework, some biosecurity experts say.

Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act in 2023 indicated that EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak submitted a proposal to the Pentagon in 2018 called “DEFUSE” describing gain-of-function experiments on viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 but downplayed to his intended funder the fact that many of the tests would occur in Wuhan, China.

Daszak and EcoHealth were both debarred from federal funding in January 2025 but have faced no criminal charges.

“I don’t know that criminal penalties are necessary. But we do need more sticks in biosafety as well as carrots,” said a biosecurity expert who requested anonymity to avoid retribution from his employer for weighing in on the expected policy. “For instance, biosafety should be a part of tenure review and whether you get funding for future work.”

Some experts say that it is likely that the COVID-19 crisis was a lab-generated pandemic, and that without major policy changes it might not be the last one.

“Gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens caused the COVID-19 pandemic, killing 20 million and costing $25 trillion,” said Richard Ebright, a Rutgers University microbiologist and longtime critic of high-risk virology, to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “If not stopped, gain-of-function research on potential pandemic pathogens likely will cause future lab-generated pandemics.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X