Category: Op/Ed 2

The Exploitation of Italian Borders:

Created by: Francesco Sacca

An article form the New York Times tells the story of a Pakistani man who suffered countless difficulties and abuse when trying to find a way from the problems of his homeland. He survived a journey of no less than 18 months across Croatia and Slovenia only to be turned back by Italian guards patrolling the border. The article then goes into detail about the treatment he received by Croatian police, stating that he was beat with “batons wrapped with barbed wire as he lay handcuffed”.

This story, however horrific, is not an isolated incident within the Northern border of Italy. In the year of 2020 alone, it is said that over one thousand people that received this ‘informal return’ upon their arrival at the Italian border.  

This image was taken by Marko Djurica and it is described as a line of migrants waiting in line for food in the northwestern region of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

While the government of Italy has produced explanations for these “returns” as actions to prevent the spread COVID-19 in Italy, the state in which people are found in when rescued by independent NGOs, qualify as conditions that should not warrant a refusal by Italian border control. This statement is reinforced by more recent events that are discussed in the Ottawa Citizen, which discuss the arrival of NGO vessels in Italy carrying people who were rescued at sea. The article states that Italy “has been instructing them [NGOs] to ports, where authorities allow only vulnerable people to disembark. Italian authorities insist the boats must then return to international waters with those not deemed vulnerable.”. To force these “non vulnerable” people (who have experienced such treacherous conditions in the middle of the Mediterranean sea) to re-enter International waters, should not be an option. It should not be up to the Italian border control (whom all act through the directorate of the Italian government) to decide whether or not all rescued people deserve asylum. This statement is also touched on in the article, as “ships are refusing to leave, saying that under international law all people rescued at sea are vulnerable and entitled to a safe port.”.

Image taken from the Ottawa citizen, taken by Camille Martin Juan.

“The far-right-led government of Premier Giorgia Meloni is insisting that countries whose flag the ships fly take on the migrants, and that the burden shouldn’t fall on Italy alone.”. Should NGOs than be forced to take those who are not qualified as (what the Italian government believe to be) “vulnerable” out of Italy to other countries that are more accepting? The refusal for action and responsibility for lives that are at risk should not be classified as a “burden” as Italian politicians like Meloni have classified them to be.

While the argument of this article has shown how forcefully guarded the borders of Italy have been over recent years, the impact of COVID-19 within Italy has not been minimal. Recent statistics have shown that Italy has had over 23 million cases of COVID-19, that is close to half the entire population of Italy, not to mention the almost 180,000 deaths that have occurred within the country. While there are other nations around the world that have had worse results over the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of this impact on Italy should be an important factor when considering the actions of the Italian government. With that said, these articles have shown that the government of Italy has chosen to utilize these results to further press the resistance/refusal of letting migrants into Italy (even those that are suffering from poor physical or mental conditions). In 2020, according to the Ministry of Health in Italy, during the period of August, less than 5% of those infected with the virus were new immigrants in Italy. In fact, most of the new found cases came from “Italians who had traveled abroad, and many others were foreigners who already lived in Italy and were returning to the country”.

In summary, while there are a various array of explanations given by the Italian government for the refusal of immigrants, the reality is quite cruel. The state in which many of these people are in as they are being turned away is fragile and they should not be treated so reluctantly in the face of such desperation.

By Frank

More than eight months after Russia’s February 2022 invasion, the War in Ukraine continues to be waged. Putin and a cast of murderous Russian officials continue to make headlines. But perhaps no figure is as curious as the neofascist Russian “philosopher” Alexander Dugin. His name resurfaced last August after his daughter (herself a far-right journalist) was killed in a car bombing in Moscow.

Relatively obscure in the West before Russia’s pre-February military buildup, Dugin has been a considerable intellectual force in Russia during the last two decades, advocating for a new Russian Empire built on anti-liberal and authoritarian values. But what is perhaps most curious about Dugin is that he was heavily influenced by the Italian fascist and neofascist thinker Julius Evola.

How did this Italian fascist theorist’s ideas reach Russia? How did Dugin use them to form his own political ideologies? Is there a connection between Dugin, his ideas, and Vladimir Putin?

The Evolian Imagination

Julius Evola was a fascist thinker and intellectual of the early-mid 20^th century whose ideas resonated with far-right politicians in Italy, Austrian and Germany, including Benito Mussolini. Avoiding war crimes punishments, Evola became a darling of new-right and neofascism in Europe in the post-War years. Embraced by far-right politicians and intellectuals throughout Europe, Evola’s ideas crossed national boundaries and were embraced by politicians and pundits across the globe.  

Evola’s writings consistently denounced modern progress, liberalism, capitalism, socialism, and communism. It differed from traditional conservatism by also decrying Christianity, democracy, individualism, and the bourgeoisie – epitomized by the neoliberal USA. Evola was also a proponent of mythical Hyperborean histories of European ethnic origins. He even appropriated religious and cultural traditions from Buddhism and Hinduism to promote essential psychic and spiritual differences between “races,” classes, and sexes.

Alexander Dugin and Evola’s Ideas

Alexander Dugin was a Soviet dissident who first encountered Evola’s works in the final days of the USSR: “These readings changed my life,” Dugin said in a 2018 interview, “I had never heard anyone describe the contradictions of the modern world like Evola.” Dugin was expelled from university for “unorthodox activities,” which included the translation and samizdatpublication of Evola’s Pagan Imperialism.

Dugin remained in relative obscurity during the 1990s. But his status as an international far-right intellectual was elevated thanks to his “Eurasia Movement” launched in 2001, which claims to have a presence in 29 countries. Moreover, his ascent to academic respectability was completed through his appointment as chair of the international relations section of the sociology department at Moscow State University in 2009.

As is the case with many far-right intellectuals, Dugin’s political theories are complex and convoluted. Nevertheless, there are some major themes that can be extracted. First stated in his seminal work, The Foundations of Geopolitics (1997), Dugin argued for the revival of Evola’s fascist idea of traditionalism: an eradication of modern, polyethnic, egalitarian, feminist, and democratic cultures, which he reduces to “American Globalism.” Dugin’s vision for Russia is of a vast, Eurasian, authoritarian empire of racially pure regimes in which women are confined to the home and breeding. Furthermore, Dugin also stated in a book to Hyperborean theory that Russia has a theological destiny to leader the “modern day Hyperborean societies” of Eurasia against the American-rule “Atlanticist” civilization.

Dugin and the War in Ukraine

Dugin’s vision for a vast, Russian-ruled Eurasian Empire rejects the idea of a distinct Ukrainian culture and nation. In The Foundations, Dugin argued that “Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, [and] no ethnic exclusiveness.”

Furthermore, Dugin warned Ukraine in 2003 that embracing a pro-Western “Atlanticist model” would expose Ukraine to the menace of “gays, and homosexual and lesbian marriage,” values which he saw as threatening to Eurasian civilization. Here, Dugin applies Evolian ideas to the regional geopolitical situation.

Dugin’s ideas clearly reject Ukraine’s existence, as well as his threats against the country moving closer to the West. But establishing clear links between Dugin’s ideas and Putin is challenging, since the Kremlin is veiled in a shroud of secrecy that makes any decisive claim untenable.

What we can say with some certainty is that he has been advisor to Gennady Seleznev since 1999, who was one of Putin’s top aides from 2012-2019. Moreover, The Foundation of Geopolitics is required reading at the Russian General Staff Academy for every officer above the rank of colonel.

It is also difficult to overlook the convergence between Dugin’s ideas and Putin’s rhetoric, in particular the claims which deny Ukraine as a distinct nation and culture. The February 2022 Invasion and the ensuing brutal war waged by Russia further reinforces the idea that Putin and the Russian Military are acting on the denial of Ukraine’s right to exist under historical, philosophical, and cultural pretexts, which itself constitutes a genocidal practice.

We can glean a few important ideas from the case of Alexander Dugin’s relation to Julius Evola’s ideas, as well as his non-negligible ties to formal Russian Power. Firstly, ultranationalist and neofascist ideas – like the ones espoused by Evola – can travel outside of their original national context. Secondly, right-wing thinkers (like Dugin) in other national contexts (like Russia) absorb and appropriate these ideas to develop their own right-wing and neofascist theories. Finally, under certain conditions and in certain critical moments, these ideas can draw the attention powerful people who use them to rationalize imperial projects and atrocious wars.

By Liam McCrorie

The Far-Right has been around for a very long time but lately we’ve seen a rise in new tactics used by the Far-Right which is leading to the rise of the Far-Right groups and to a rise in Far-Right extremism. The Internet has given rise to the ability for people from all over the world to connect and share ideas and for people who otherwise would never have gotten the opportunity to meet one another to form online groups. This has led to a new wave of Far-Right extremists finding groups on social media and websites like reddit and 4chan. This is leading to a much more dangerous version of Far-Right extremism the likes we haven’t seen before.

The Far-Right are very different from what they were, say 20 years ago. It used to be very easy to see who was a Far-Right extremist and who wasn’t. But gone is the Skinhead look of shaved heads, combat boots and swastikas, now replaced by people who dress just like everyone else, dressed in nice suits or dresses, or regular everyday clothes. Brands like Thor Steinar capitalize on making Far-Right shirts that fit in with everyday life, even if their shirt was hateful its so hard to tell with all the secret coded language like having a shirt with ’88’ on it since the 8th letter of the alphabet is H and so 88 stands for HH which stand for Heil Hitler. The Far-Right is no longer a fringe group on the outskirts of politics they are now front and center and gaining a lot of support all over the world.

The Far-Right wants to be as mainstream as possible and always be in the public eye which is why the Internet and its far reach is invaluable to them. With more and more Far-Right politicians and groups using the internet and other platforms to spread their hateful messages the more normalized it gets in society and especially on the Internet. As the Far-Right tries and spread their message online they use many platforms which will pick up parts of their hate speech and will repost or share this message in other forums through the use of memes and various other means. This makes this type of speech seem normal and for some people especially youths this can be enough to persuade them to come to the Far-Right. This normalization of Far-Right hate speech can be very dangerous as it can and has many times led to hate motivated crimes against women or Muslims or immigrants.

Through the normalization of hate and hate filled speech by the Far-Right they have motivated people all over the world to commit horrible hate motivated crimes, fueled by Far-Right conspiracies. Many hateful groups have begun to spring up online all usually a bit different or targeting their hate towards a particular group but they are all essentially the same just following Far-Right conspiracies and using them to justify committing horrible acts. Groups online like Incels mix their sexual frustration with traditional Far-Right conspiracies, such as the Great Replacement Theory, to spew hate against women and immigrants, who they perceive to be taking women from them. People like Elliot Rodger who went on a killing spree in California in 2014, Rodger went on this spree because of his hate for women since he perceived himself to be the “ideal magnificent gentleman” and couldn’t understand why women did not want to have sex with him. Another notable Far-Right extremist is Brenton Tarrant, the man responsible for killing 51 people in two Mosques in Christchurch New Zealand in 2019. Not only was Tarrant’s attack fueled by hate towards Islam which was fostered in online chat rooms, he then proceeded to live-stream the shooting to further promote the hate towards Islam.

There are so many other examples of Far-Right extremists I won’t get into but it just shows how this hate is growing and is growing fastest online, where small groups of people with fringe ideas can meet and discuss and fuel one another’s hate. It used to take large groups of people all with the same ideas to form a strong group with the power to affect modern politics and society, but that’s what’s so dangerous about today, a small group or even a lone extremist can be motivated by online forums and videos of Far-Right politicians and Far-Right mouthpieces, people like Andrew Tate, and these small groups can do unprecedented damaged through domestic terrorism and hate motivated crimes.

By: Hannah Long

Image Source: Winfield, Nicole. “Woman Close to Vatican Cardinal Arrested in Corruption Probe.” AP NEWS. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/international-news-italy-arrests-milan-vatican-city-3a08a8a41a07aa43ccd985b3d6868bd8.

“There’s no government; there’s no pope.” What better sentence to begin this second op/ed that explores the strained and ultimately corrupt relationship of Italy’s state and religion. While Italy plays a huge role on the global stage many people overlook the country’s deeper history, which has come to shape the place where many only see it as their favourite vacation destination and nothing more. Failing to understand the dramatic shift this society has taken post Second World War, which forced Italy to rethink and restructure their society to meet the new democratic standards. And while many European countries immediately flocked to either progressive or conservative government structures Italy found itself never really finding any permanent footing to begin with. 

Since 1948, the country has had 68 governments, one of the many reasons for this volatility is in large part due to the Catholic Church’s long historical ties to political undertakings within the country, such was the case in 2005 when the Church encouraged voters to abstain from voting, after a referendum was likely to occur. Many Italian citizens have felt this constant shift back and forth, with many stating the consistent failings of politicians and the increasingly out of touch role the Catholic Church has with the public in modern times. By having a society that is so entrenched in tradition the translation to fully hit the mark in terms of having a free uncorrupted state is difficult to obtain, with the main question being how does one progress away from such an ingrained system of religious interference? And is less interference really needed? As many would argue, it has worked so far.

Image Source: Sullivan, Andrew. “Andrew Sullivan: The Corruption of the Vatican’s Gay Elite Has Been Exposed.” Intelligencer. Intelligencer, February 22, 2019. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/andrew-sullivan-the-vaticans-corruption-has-been-exposed.html.

Many sources highlight the complex relationship both the state and Church had with one another under a historical lens, influencing each other and the future they would take during the 20th century, ultimately shaping much of what encompasses modern Italy today. With such a large portion of the population adhering to Catholicism or having some relation to the religion, it becomes difficult to separate the two from each other becoming a common reality in everyday life. While the arrival of Silvio Berlusconi at the end of the century did bring some relative calm to the rapidly succeeding rate of heads of state, much of his party’s philosophy was derived from Catholic rhetoric, which reintroduced conservative religious politics on a majority scale for the first time since the fascist regime. There may be a sense that the Catholic Church’s authority has faded in recent years, as many have become further disillusioned over scandals such as Vatileaks back in 2012 which exposed tax cover-ups, sex scandals and blackmailing towards homosexual clergymen, and also being given the title of most corrupt state in Western Europe in 2021, the reality is that there history with the people and spiritual significance over Italian society still outweighs wrongdoings.

With the recent induction of the Country’s first Fascist party since Mussolini it will be difficult to predict what the future may bring between state and religion, perhaps nothing will and everything will remain the same, or as many sources are already hinting, maybe there will be a better environment for both politicians and the clergy alike to cross paths. As many young Italians may find their priorities aligned with the ideals of an Italy that was once was, like so many others have who find themselves in right wing politics. A longing for a past and a better time is a key thought in the minds of everyone globally as Covid-19 kept the country gridlocked for much of 2020, and with religion providing a comfort in times of uncertainty many young Italians are finding themselves becoming more spiritual. In addition to more up and coming leaders not being shy about their ties with Catholic beliefs, one thing is for certain this new religious Italian landscape remains just as robust and fragile as it once was.

by Kaileigh La Belle

From bans on LGBTQI “propaganda” to yearly debates about kink at Pride, it is no secret that we are seeing an uptick in popular, transnational conservatism about sex. While much of the responding conservation has focused on protecting the LGBTQ+ community, one equally vulnerable group is often neglected: sex workers. Recent attacks on sex workers include a notable rise in SWERFs [Sex Worker Exclusionary Radical Feminists] in England, Spanish attempts to ban prostitution, and votes in Bristol town council to ban strip clubs. However, unlike previous attacks on the industry, these movements are not solely originated from the Right, but also from the Left. As such, anti-sex work movements, grounded in sexist and moralist populist trends, reconstruct Far-Right ‘traditionalist’ views on sexuality and gender, which threaten to bring down the liberation of women, femmes, and queers.

Sexist Populism and the ‘Victim Narrative’

As historian Kate Lister notes, the “Victim Trope”—a staple of anti-sex work narratives on both the Left and the Right—“repackaged [sex workers] as a pitiful victim in an uncaring world” who ultimately need to be saved for their own moral good by non-sex workers. These narratives take on a moral dimension laced with chauvinistic tendencies and situate them within the trend of sexist Populism. Many historians and theorists define populism as a political style that positions the everyday man as ‘pure’ against the ‘corrupt elite’, drawing particularly on emotional reactions against the ‘Other’ and institutions. Yet, sexist Populism takes on a gendered dynamic, presenting ‘traditional’ gender roles as endangered to radicalize ‘the people’, usually with an emotionally-driven paternalistic or chauvinistic flare. ‘Victim narratives’ present (white, female) sex workers exclusively as subjects of male abuse or rescue, upholding a ‘traditionalist’ perspective on gender. In keeping with their Victorian origins, such anti-sex work narratives present the non-monogamous, transactional nature of sex work as inherently ‘damaging’ and ‘abusive’. Therefore, monogamous (often heterosexual) partnerships rooted in love and/or marriage become the safe moral norm, a key viewpoint of Far-Right populism.

When women and girls are placed in this victim role, an abuser must emerge as the “Other” against whom the everyday man must take a stand. It is here that the populist anti-institutional, ‘othering’ process is injected. In modern takes on victim narratives such as this one, consensual sex work is conflated with sex trafficking and, for Dworkin Feminists, rape. In this way, states who have legalized sex work (the majority in Europe) become enablers of abuse who “wash their hands” of blame. Various conspiracy theories have made the rounds on social media, positing that ‘global elites’ are sex trafficking children for “sexual rituals” or “blood libel”. In their evocation of sexual deviancy, ‘deep state’ plots, and blood libel, they push antisemitism. Evidently, the emotionally-charged image of imperilled women and children functions to maintain myths of ‘Otherness’ and weaponize a dichotomy of pure/un-pure.

Populist Threats to Feminism

Many sex workers have voiced concern about this rise in whorephobia. Firstly, they fear that it does not reflect the realities of the industry and ignores sex workers’ critique. For example, many sex workers point out that they are going after the wrong people when making conflations between sex work and trafficking. While, as a high estimate, 1 in 7 sex workers in Europe could be trafficked, sex workers clarify that a total ban would drive the industry further underground, dragging these victims down with it. By ignoring these lived experiences in favour of ‘rescue’ narratives, both Left and Right populists maintain the chauvinistic, sexist populist trend and make things harder for real sex workers and the victims they claim to ‘protect’.

Secondly, these populist narratives endorse ‘purity’-based rhetoric that are fundamentally exclusionary. SWERF narratives often present Suffrage-era feminism as the foundation of the feminist movement. They repeat the First Wave argument that women are morally superior, embodied by the ‘motherly’ image, to men as they’re ‘inherently’ prone to uncontrolled, sexualized violence. Furthermore, in this popular memory, the Sexual Revolution becomes an extension of patriarchy, having “hurt” feminism and women by centring sexuality. With the Sexual Revolution positioned as antithetical to ‘true’ feminism, its emancipatory elements can easily become ‘un-pure.’ Everything—the normalization of casual sex, trans liberation, and especially the acceptance of sex work—becomes a threat to women. As such, by romanticizing earlier, exclusionary periods of feminist history and ignoring the voices of sex workers, SWERFs align themselves with a conservative moral purity argument that has historically been used to deny liberation to those outside the gender-sexual norm.

As these victim narratives leech into the public consciousness through apps like Tik Tok and manifest in mainstream political institutions, we must remember that they do little to protect women. In fact, by identifying the use of populist tropes that misplace anger surrounding very real issues of patriarchal and capitalist violence, we can see how they maintain gender essentialist binaries and drive us towards sexual conservatism. If anything, understanding this process should shed light on why feminism must make room for the voices of all women, regardless of their profession.

By Louis Lacroix

Tensions between Greece and Turkey, two of the oldest NATO’s members, have been gaining attention from the rest of Europe in the past. It is said that diplomacy is going so poorly between the neighbors that a war could break out if the situation isn’t defused. But since the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire following the Great war and the Greco-Turkish war ending in 1922, no military conflict was able to emerge between them even with their history of competition and liberation. While it seems that the two countries are preparing for war, it will never happen as their dispute is about being superior to the other, not their rival’s elimination.

The modern relationship between Greece and Turkey begins with the recognition of Greece independency by the Ottoman Empire in 1832, but the point of focus will be after 1922. Hatred between the Turks and the Greeks never went away, and some events came close to start a new war, but it never happened. One of the best example would be the Istanbul pogrom against Greeks of 1955, as the Turk authorities hindered the influence and wealth of the Greek community in their largest city to provoke their rival and gain more economical autonomy in that region. Although outrage by this turn of events, Athens did not act on it, denouncing the pogrom and helping its Greek migrants. One of the particularly important element of the ongoing conflict is Cyprus. The island was invaded in 1974 and forced the island to split between a Greek and a Turk regime, even though most of the country’s population was of Greek descendancy. While the Cypriots live there in a relatively peaceful manner with one and other of different origins, they got into a political issue between their homelands. The island represents a special case because it embodies the essence of the battle between the two. While they have not taken direct action against the main territories, their nationalist ways have dictated their movements with the goal to humiliate and gain an edge on the other. Since the Turkish side of the island is still not recognized by the world, negotiations with Greece and the other half of Cyprus are still in progress with periods of more stability, with the 2000s having some non concluding attempts at closing the situation peacefully. Yet, direct war has not been declared while menaces of it are looming.

As of today, the tensions are rising once again over the militarization of the Greek side following the arms embargo lift on the Greek Cyprus administration. Furthermore, there has been some discoveries of natural gas and oil in this region of the Mediterranean Sea. The Greek government justifies its more aggressive stance as a mean of defense against Turkish bullying. They made a political calculus; the situation for the Northern Turkish government in Cyprus places them in a corner as they are stuck between the international stage not recognizing their legitimacy and the Greek side arming up. While the world consensus is to avoid war on the island, it would be difficult to impose sanctions on Greece or Cyprus as it will basically be a “liberation” war. Again, if an event like this happen, Turkey nor Greece will push the matter on their territories as the ONU and the United States will condemn the attacker and probably support the invaded. This will only be a blow to Turkish efforts of gaining influence over a foreign territory that has some Turkish individuals, and both of the competitors will go back to finding ways to harm the other.

Realistically, the only way Greece and Turkey are getting into a new war would be through Turkish minority sovereign movements in Greece in the Western Thrace. It would look similar to the situation in Ukraine with Crimea in 2014 and the current invasion, but since Turkey is definitely a lot weaker, they would require quite the mobilization effort from within Greece. Furthermore, after the tragic events of the 1955 Pogrom in Istanbul, there is approximately 2 500 Greeks in Turkey. Since one of the principal arguments to invade a country is justified through “protection” of their cultural population and its getting less and less possible for both sides, there is less interest to conquer territorial parts as the local population would still be very homogenous. It seems that for now that Greeks and Turks will simply continue to hate each other rather than look for the complete annihilation of the other.

By: Cyrus Hutnyk

            Racist thought has been prevalent and an issue of varying degrees of severity over the last century with great frequency, whether you look to the terrible systematic racism in the structure of the United States that continues to negatively impact largely non-white people and people of lower income, or to the most drastic in cases of Nazi Germany under Hitler and the massive killing of Jewish people that occurred throughout World War II, the issue of racism in its different forms remains consistent. This being understood though, shifting attitudes and forms that racism takes are equally present in periods of upheaval for various nations. Sometimes this appears as a change in leadership, as present in post-war Germany. In Christopher A. Molnar’s work “Greetings from the apocalypse” that we analyzed in this week’s readings we see the shift from a case of racism having to do with a genetic level of racism promoted by oppressive government and relentless propaganda, to a racism coming from a cultural standpoint, attitude and regulation coming from a place of fear and social upheaval after the radical changes in Germany post-World War II.

            In a more modern setting, the age of the internet and a culture of capitalism and intense connection to the internet we can see another example of shifting and developing racism. Despite the western part of the world continuing to develop and (hopefully) evolve past this archaic racist thought, there are still many who not only hold these views but are able to use the internet as a megaphone to project them now more than ever.

            As long as the internet has been present there have been individuals using it nefariously. Websites like 4chan or similar message boards are infamous for their knack to amass people with hateful and harmful ideas into one spot, but equally racist rhetoric is alive and well on every popular social media platform, whether it be Facebook, Instagram, or most importantly: Twitter. Hateful and racist behaviour on Twitter has always been a problem, even more so due to a previous lack of moderation. Sometimes this looks like using racial slurs in tweets, but often it can take different forms, like in the case of Twitter accounts owned by influential people who start to promote or incite violence or hate against others, people like Donald Trump, and more recently celebrity figures like Kanye West who started spreading misinformation on the murder of George Floyd and tweeting anti-black rhetoric.

            These social media platforms tend to have a dangerous ability to amplify these messages, they get more traffic, more likes, more replies, more shares. Despite this Twitter was beginning to do some clean up, but have recently been bought out by capitalist Elon Musk, best known for his racist work environments and massive intake of government subsidies on his companies SpaceX and Tesla. Musk promises to unban users like West and Trump and welcome them and their ideas back on to the platform. He tweets often about turning Twitter into a truly free-speech platform. Problem with that is that Twitter already is that the only speech that is against the terms of service is that which is hateful and bigoted. What exactly are his intentions when he says he wants to create free speech on the platform? This is exactly the way that racism begins to shift, instead of how in the post-war Germany example, where racism thought changes its origin and attitude from genetics to culture, racism in the west is moving to a much less manageable digital space, where those in power either hold the hateful ideas, or want to promote the ability of users to spread them.

            If we expect to see positive change and reduction in racist thought massive upheavals in allowance for hateful speech need to be implemented. As it stands now bigoted speech and behaviour is looking to be more prevalent and louder than ever before in the digital space, one that is more impactful than ever before itself.

By Lauren McCoy

Amazon’s flagship series The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Powers has created a lot of controversy since it first debuted in early September. Yet within all this scandal, accusations that the series reproduces racial hierarchies that depict the Irish as biologically inferior have gone notably overlooked. More than discriminatory, these representations reveal troubling connections between anti-Irish sentiment and British fascism.

Proto-Hobbits and Famine Cosplay

Set a thousand years before the original series, the Harfoots (ancestral predecessors of the Hobbits) are the first in the franchise to take on an Irish accent. The depiction isn’t flattering. Where RP-speaking Elves are at the forefront of science and combat great evils, the Harfoots stumble through mud with twigs in their hair, stuffing themselves with berries in what some have called “famine cosplay”. Having not yet founded the Shire, the migratory Harfoots reside in raggedy camps, writing in a rudimentary form of pictographs and acting as the light-hearted interlude between more serious plotlines. With rosy cheeks and dirt under their fingernails, it is hard not to view the lovable Harfoots as undeveloped when compared to other fantasy races.

The parallels between the Harfoots and discriminatory Irish stereotypes are staggering. Irish people were seen as incapable of reasoning, whose mental deficiency was linked to superstition, alcoholism, and minimal emotional control. Much like the Harfoots, the Irish were depicted as dressing in filthy rags that suited their “naturally” pre-industrial character. In this view, the Irish lacked the discipline to work their way out of squalor, reducing them to a ‘child-like’ race unable to achieve civility without Britain’s colonial supervision. What’s more concerning is that these characteristics were considered hereditary – preventing the Irish from being seen as anything beyond “amusing savages”.

The Harfoots’ exaggerated Irish accent reproduces the stereotype of Irish simplicity. With research showing that accents are connected to judgments about social status, the show’s reliance on “Irishness” as a shorthand for “primitive” demonstrates the continued relevance of these discriminatory representations. The Harfoots’ Irish accent is especially suspicious when considering our favourite Hobbits spoke with British accents – creating a dangerous implication that as Harfoots “evolve” into sedentary farmers, they mature out of their Irish accent. The deliberate use of Irish accents reveals the deep hierarchy of whiteness that lay at the heart of Rings of Power, where Irish under-development is counter-opposed by English civility.

Anti-Irish British Fascism

While hibernophobic representations are well-established in British history, these ideas found a new life on the extreme right. Between 1920s and 1930s, British fascists revived anti-Irish sentiments as a point of radicalization for right-leaning conservatives, utilizing ideas of Irish inferiority to garner support for more extreme anti-immigration policies. These efforts were supported by groups like The International Fascist League (IFL), who in emphasizing British identity as heritable and rooted in whiteness, stoked fears of the Irish as a biological threat to the purity of the British race.

Following Britain’s failure to prevent Irish Independence, fascists capitalized on feelings of “national humiliation” to generate anxieties about Britain’s decaying political system and racial vitality. With Irish Independence posing a serious threat to images of Britain’s biological superiority, fears of an Independent Ireland became a gateway to radical anti-Semitic Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracies. Fascist parties like The Britons depicted Irish populations conspiring with Jews to establish a Communist state on Britain’s backdoor, reframing Irish nationalism as part of a global plot to overthrow English civilization.

In light of what was interpreted as Britain’s imperial decline, parties like the British Fascists and The British Union of Fascists positioned themselves as saviours of the empire. For the far-right, the firm hand of authoritarianism was essential to ensure imperial unity and protect the empire. Latching onto understandings of British imperialism as a “civilizing mission”, fascists added a moralistic dimension to their politics. Calls to re-conquer the Irish became tied not only to the reassertion of racial hierarchies, but to global stability itself. The power of their anti-Irish position was immense, appealing to mainstream British citizens by emphasizing British biological superiority and affirming their dedication to the empire.

Anti-Irish Sentiments on the Rise?

While the days of interwar fascism may seem far removed, recent signs indicate that anti-Irish sentiment may be on the rise yet again. From discrimination against Irish footballer to holiday parks blacklisting guests with Irish surnames, concerns of hibernophobic attitudes have prompted an anti-Irish discrimination motion as recently as 2019. In this context, the Harfoots make up one small piece in a larger pattern of anti-Irish sentiments.

It would be alarmist to suggest that Rings of Power is a sign of anti-Irish action to come. However, when we look at historic connections between Irish racism and British fascism, the fact that Irishness remains synonymous with “primitiveness” is worth interrogating. The Rings of Power reminds us of the power these representations hold – prompting us to look backwards, consider how they’ve been manipulated in the past, and question our own prejudices in the present.

By Felix Nicol

Giorgia Meloni speaking to the lower house of parliament in Rome, Italy (2022) Photo: Remo Casilli, Reuters. Source

With the recent rise of populist movements throughout Europe, talks of the dangers of far-right parties have once again become prominent. The rise of far-right parties in Italy and Sweden has made Orbán much less isolated in his far right agenda. This growth is closely tied to a shifting ideology of the Far-Right, which has distanced itself from its racist roots to focus on “right to difference” as a means to justify anti-immigrant sentiments. While this is certainly cause for concern, the actual implications of rising far-right populist movements seems largely overstated. In fact, backtracking and inconsistencies in policy as well as recent failures of populism suggest that the far-right has not quite found its footing.

Though the decision of the EU to suspend funds towards Hungary has proved insufficient, it is hard to argue that Brussel’s financial benefits are hard to resist for populists. Though Italy’s Giorgia Meloni has attempted to pin Germany as anti-European due to their stance on the energy crisis, it has become clear that the benefit of EU funding is simply too important. It incited her to backtrack on antagonism of Germany, instead asking for small policy changes to help keep the prices of energy and gas in check. Though this does not represent a complete shift away from Meloni’s good relationship with Orbán, it shows that the far-right is not as tightly-knit as might be assumed. 

Clashes in the rhetoric of populist parties are not limited to the energy crisis, however. In spite of Orbán’s positive position towards Russia, as well as support of Putin from possible coalition partners, Meloni has kept a pro-Ukraine stance. Once again, this suggests that the stances of far-right populists may not necessarily align as neatly as one might assume. That is to say, despite the assumption that other far-right parties may fully turn towards Orbán for support, the position of Meloni’s Brothers of Italy in the EU has made this difficult.

Liz Truss’ hasty resignation further complicates the situation. Her ineffective tax cuts intended for economic growth, which bear a striking resemblance to Giorgia Meloni’s economic proposals, will certainly create doubts regarding populist policies. The result is almost certainly a reduced willingness of center-right parties to lean on populist rhetoric as a means of garnering support. This suggests that as was the case with Meloni, instead of a shift towards far-right populism, center-leaning parties may look elsewhere for public support.

It is also important to remember that the success of these parties does not indicate widespread support for far-right populism across Europe. Countries like Germany, who have elected “the most boring guy in the world” show us that the success of the far-right has not followed everywhere. Further, the success of populist parties may instead represent the fragmentation of the opposition. This was the case in Sweden, where left-wing Social Democrats won the popular vote, but did not form a coalition. That is to say, while there have certainly been a few far-right parties elected in the EU, it does not represent a larger cultural shift across the region. Even with the rise of populist parties, Hungary lacked sufficient support to block its loss of Cohesion Funds in the European Council. Also of note is the history of the EU, which suggests that crises have actually been beneficial in strengthening the EU.
Though far-right ideology is certainly not harmless, it remains important to stay level-headed in understanding the threat that populist support poses to Europe. While Hungary under Orbán shows no major signs of slowdown regarding the success of its populist illiberal democracy, it is important to recognize that this trend is not true for all far-right populist parties. Meloni’s Brothers of Italy actually provides a strong argument to the contrary, as we’ve seen clear examples of ideological compromise with the EU on both the energy crisis and the war in Ukraine. The further failure of the Tory party in Britain as a result of a populist shift may further halt transitions towards the far-right. These factors, along with the reality that populism has not garnered a majority of support in the EU suggests that populism will not successfully undermine the democratic values of the region, even if the EU is unable to effectively prevent it.