They might have seemed to burst onto the political mainstream in 2024 for some, but for observers of the European far-right parties, this was no surprise. European far-right groups have been riding a long-standing wave of deep anxiety about economic dislocation, waves of immigration, and terrorist attacks. Even without factoring in these variables, one can make an argument that this would have happened one day or another. After all, how much hate can be spewed at each other before perceptions reach critical mass?
Irrational antisemitism, fanatical Islamism, and extreme right-wing populism, among others, are clashing worldviews that have been bubbling over for decades, globally. How could they not have had effects? Ironically, these exclusionary ideologies all serve each other’s interests by fanning the fires of hatred against the ‘others.’ This ‘black or white’ thinking completely downplays any alternatives to the ideology adhered to, which makes them all confrontational—with each other and with everyone else who desires to take a ‘moderate’ path.
Be that as it may, why was 2024 marked by prominence given to the European far-right? For the particular year Gaza has been the tinderbox, with the far-right exploiting heightened antisemitism in response to the war. The deplorable actions of Hamas added fuel to the fire of prevalent Islamophobia, while the pro-Palestine protests served to vindicate the far-right stance through the association of Palestine and antisemitism, often displayed prominently in such protests. Never mind that Hamas does not represent the Muslim mainstream, anti-Israel protests do not necessarily translate into antisemitism, and Gaza is a massive tragedy; these ‘facts’ are conveniently glossed over through vitriolic propaganda by all sides. However, long before Gaza, much had been happening.
Europe has been struggling with issues that have swelled the ranks of far right parties such as the state of economy, a heightened send of insecurity, and immigration, legal and illegal. Europe has seen more than its share of refugees in the past decade, a catalyst for groups like PEGIDA (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamization of the West) to emerge. Founded by Lutz Bachmann in Dresden, Germany, in October 2014, PEGIDA was a grassroots response to the Syrian refugee crisis. Concerned by what they perceived as the invasion of their culture and society by thousands of displaced Syrian refugees, posts started appearing on social media to the theme of ‘Save Our Country.’ Another prominent group that has put Islamophobia at the center of its agenda is Tommy Robinson’s English Defence League (EDL) in the UK.
A common concern of Islamophobic groups is that Islam is eroding European socio-cultural values. Activists often lump Muslims together as a monolithic entity and express concern about Islam eroding European values. They highlight extremism in some Muslim societies, but seldom dissect the nuances of Islamist extremism, projecting this extremism as a prevalent culture onto the Muslim community as a whole. Even though EDL has sometimes expressed that not all Muslims are bad, they tend to portray the Islamic ethos and worldview as being regressive, and harmful to European society and culture. This view is generally shared by almost all far-right groups, even though some nationalist groups tend to disguise their Islamophobic stances under more politically correct rhetoric.
Islamophobic groups like the EDL state that only Muslims (and not all immigrants) are bad at integrating into European society, while ultra-nationalist groups espouse that all immigrants (including Muslims) are bad for Europe. EDL has no problems with other immigrant groups, and indeed quotes examples from successful integration into British society of other immigrant groups, to exemplify how Muslims are the only ones eroding British values and ‘ghettoizing’ Britain.
Most of the far-right groups in Europe were founded on ultranationalist, xenophobic, and anti-immigration agendas in general, rather than Islamophobia alone. These include Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front in France, Nikolaos Michaloliakos’s Golden Dawn in Greece, Herbert Kickl’s Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), the Danish People’s Party (DPP) led by Pia Kjærsgaard and Kristian Thulesen Dahl, and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang. ‘In your face’ Neo-Nazism and glorification of racial identity’ were the foundational philosophies of particularly groups like the FPÖ, Golden Dawn, and Sweden Democrats (SD), even though they have sometimes made efforts to tone down their ‘Nazi like’ rhetoric.
There is the ‘evolving populist’ party model, exemplified by Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s National Front (FN). She treads a delicate line between the far-right, left, and center of French politics, at times denouncing far-right association by expelling her avowedly Nazi father from the party, and by distancing herself from Holocaust denial, his hallmark. On the other hand, Le Pen argues that French citizenship should be “either inherited or merited” and wants to clamp down on illegal immigration. [1] She has also stated that she will clamp down on extremism and “expel foreigners who preach hatred on our soil.” In this respect, she is not too different from the French center, who vow the same thing.
In a party such as Le Pen’s, one has to sometimes read between the lines. Through the FN-led Europe of Nations and Freedom grouping in the European Parliament, Le Pen maintains close relations with the Dutch Freedom Party, Austria’s Freedom Party, Belgium’s Flemish Interest, Alternative for Germany, and the Italian Northern League. These are all far-right populist parties, while Austria’s Freedom Party is explicitly far-right. Le Pen has also taken a hardline anti-immigrant stance, stating that all welfare provisions by the state should go to French nationals before they are offered to “foreigners.”
What drives the Far Right?
Since the Syrian refugee crisis, however, much of the ire of Europe’s far right has been focused on Muslims. This period coincided with a general economic recession in Europe, rising unemployment, and an influx of refugees, which meant many Europeans became apprehensive about what this influx meant for their livelihoods. For instance, when the Syrian migration of 2015 brought a record number of migrants—more than one million—to Germany, this transformed the ideology of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party from Euroskepticism to Islamophobia. The party’s rhetoric turned explicitly anti-Muslim because of the Syrian Muslim migrants; thus, Islamophobia in the AfD’s case is an ‘add-on’ to its anti-immigrant worldview, rather than its foundational ideology. Islamopohobia also served Brexit, because it helped paint a picture of segregation and fragmentation, which was exploited by the far right parties rather well.
Then, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 brought around six million Ukrainian refugees to European shores. In 2023 alone, about 300,000 irregular arrivals were recorded in the bloc. Combining these factors with economic anxieties creates a potent cocktail for far-right indoctrination.
Is immigration really that detrimental for Europe as far right tends to say? Well, Europe might be needing more manpower sometimes soon, as the fertility rates have been dropping dramatically. Europe now has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world , with the number of live births in the EU falling below 4 million.[2] After 1960s this extremely low level of live births was observed only in 2022, with 3.88 million babies born in EU, the first time ever when live births in EU fell below 4 million.[3] Immigration can be one of the ways that this manpower deficit can be rectified, but this also increases far right suspicion of immigration policies that allow, in their view, swelling the ranks of Muslims in Europe.
Examining this through a projection model, the Pew Research Center estimated that if all migration to EU were to hypothetically stop altogether, Europe’s Muslim population would still rise from 4.9% in 2017 to 7.4% by the year 2050. [4] However, this projection is on the lower side and hence illogical, as migration has not stopped. Another model with a low level of migration factored in was postulated, that hypothesizes that Muslims could reach 11.2% of Europe’s population in 2050.[5] Even this in not pragmatic, as there has been steady migration to Europe since the Syrian crisis of 2015, and also ‘peaks’ such as the Afghan migration in the wake of Taliban takeover of the country, and the Ukraine War.
Hence, the most likely projection model is the one that incorporates a steady flow of refugees, which has been observed, albeit at somewhat lower levels that the 2015 Syrian crisis. This higher projection model estimates that by 2050, Muslims might constitute up to 14% of Europe’s population, increasing their current population threefold .[6] This is exactly what the far right parties don’t want. Immigrants might not be unwelcome, such as in case of EDL, but more Muslim immigrants, in their view, are detrimental to the society.
Economic tensions have often been blamed for contributing to the rise of Europe’s far-right. This may be true for rise of Golden Dawn in countries such as Greece, whose public debt is one of the highest in Europe, at about 171% of its GDP in 2023. Spanish youth unemployment remains high at around 25% in 2024, while Italy and Portugal’s economies have been suffering as well. If economic indicators were the main contributors to public discontent, then these countries could be considered susceptible to the rise of the far-right. However, this variable alone fails to explain the rise of the far-right in Germany, which remains Europe’s economic powerhouse with a low unemployment rate (3.1% in 2024). The Netherlands also boasts low unemployment (4.2%) and high GDP per capita, while Sweden sustains a robust economy. Poland is emerging as one of the fastest-growing economies in Europe. Germany, Netherlands, and Poland all have strong far-right parties, so state of economy itself may not explain the rise of the far-right.
One of the explanations could be that democracy has failed Europe, once again. Just as anarchy rose as a viable political philosophy in Russia and Europe in the late 19th century as an alternative to democracy, the far right is gaining traction because democratic institutions do not seem to be working in the interests of common citizens. Anarchism evolved from the ideas of Nechaev and Kropotkin because in the wake of the French Revolution; people expected great things from democracy, but saw little tangible results in terms of the quality of life for the common man. Power still seemed to be in the hands of political elites, and the economy was perceived to function in the interests of high finance, with the divide between the rich and poor continuing to grow.
Anarchy was proposed as a viable alternative, and people rallied to this radical cause of ultimately untenable self-government because it seemed to offer, in common layman’s terms, a better alternative to democracy. Never mind that anarchism was radical and ultimately failed to deliver on all its promises, dying a natural death during the first world war; at least its promise was decipherable to the common man, and echoed a deep resentment towards the ruling elite.
Resentment toward elites and democracy which does not seem to fulfill the aspirations of common citizens is perhaps what is driving the rise of the European far right now. Far-right leadership is more charismatic than the perceived ‘wily politicians of old’, and is perceived to be more ‘in touch’ with the people. Far-right leaders offer simple, easily comprehended calls to action: “Our people are the best. Our way of life is in danger. Stop the foreigners. Give power to the people.” These ideas may sometimes be couched in jargon, semantics, or more politically correct language by them, but essentially, this is the clarion call of the far right in Europe.
Apparently, their message is gaining traction. 2024 saw many far-right parties gain prominence. The Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) secured 29% of the vote in parliament to lead the government, marking a significant milestone for the far right in Europe. This is probably the best performance out of any far-right party in Europe so far in any European national elections, and will be Austria’s first post-war far-right government. To put it into perspective, this is a party formed by ex-Nazis, calls for “remigration of uninvited foreigners” and a “homogeneous” nation through border controls and suspending asylum, is decidedly pro-Russian, and wants to bow out of the European Sky Shield Initiative.[7]
At one time, far-right parties could not fare well even in European elections, let alone hope to lead national governments. Now, they are securing more seats in the European Parliament with every passing election. In 2024, Germany’s AfD secured their greatest-ever victory in the European Parliament. Meanwhile, Poland’s Law and Justice Party (PiS), National Rally (Rassemblement National) of France, Sweden Democrats (SD), Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV), and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang all performed well in the European Parliament elections.
What does this mean for Europe?
Europe is on the brink of change. Perhaps the most marked shift will be tougher immigration laws in countries with a far-right presence, and even beyond. This could take the shape of stricter border controls, reduced refugee quotas, and limitations on asylum rights; it almost seems like writing on the wall. But how will Europe then deal with the ongoing wave of Ukrainian migrants? What if there is another humanitarian disaster generating another migrant wave to Europe? What about the resultant labor shortages, especially since a more restrictive anti-immigrant Europe will produce even fewer European nationals, given declining fertility rates?
Even though parties like Italy’s League and Hungary’s Fidesz would like to prioritize nationals over foreigners in the allocation of welfare resources, this will not be easy to achieve. For one thing, it is against national laws, and would almost certainly run afoul of the European Court of Human Rights.
The far-right has a template for authoritarian rule in Viktor Orbán’s Hungary. He has curtailed press freedom, judicial independence, minority rights, weakened the judiciary, and centralized power. This has drawn the ire of the EU, but to no avail. Orbán’s Hungary may not become the template for governance in other European countries, but it will be tempting to copy from his playbook. EU will object vehemently but emerging far-right leaders in power may not particularly care, especially since many far-right parties share a deep Euroskepticism. Reputation of Europe as the bastion of democracy and human rights might take a hit.
The EU will increasingly face strain regarding the future of European integration. This damage could range from the far right renegotiating EU treaties to reducing the power of EU institutions. In the worst-case scenario, even a Brexit-type exit from the union could be conceivable. This would limit EU’s presence on the global stage in addressing pressing issues such as climate change.
At home, far-right leadership will tend to be protectionist, premised on their “our nation first” worldview. This might mean preference for local industries and subsidies for national industries, while foreign goods may face higher tariffs. This may adversely affect the Eurocentric free trade and single market worldview, pushing Europe toward a more inward-looking economy. Tensions might exacerbate when member states with differing economic priorities clash over trade and fiscal policies.
Would the ascendancy of the far-right normalize discrimination against immigrants, Muslims, and LGBTQ+ communities? Maybe. Before that actually happens, however, this will be a long road filled with mutual hatred and the looming threat of terrorism by disillusioned European immigrants, radicalized through constant discrimination and alienation. Hopefully, sanity prevails, and nothing of the sort comes to pass, as socio-cultural discrimination is the great radicalizer.
Since far-right parties generally favor a more isolationist approach to foreign policy, prioritizing national interests over multilateral cooperation, this could mean less involvement by the EU in global peacekeeping missions, development aid, and climate agreements. That also translates into a decreased EU global footprint, while some far-right leaders could try to steer their countries in Putin’s direction. Whether that succeeds or not is another matter, but it might mean significant geopolitical shifts.
Whatever happens, the rise of far-right parties in Europe might change a lot of things.
[Photo by Vox España, via Wikimedia Commons]
Manzar Zaidi is a security consultant and academic. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
References
[1] BBC News. “Marine Le Pen: What’s Her Strategy to Win the French Presidency?” BBC News. December 14, 2016. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38321401.
[2] Euronews. “Europe’s Fertility Crisis: Which European Country Is Having the Fewest Babies?” Euronews. September 28, 2024. https://www.euronews.com/health/2024/09/28/europes-fertility-crisis-which-european-country-is-having-the-fewest-babies.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Pew Research Center. “Europe’s Growing Muslim Population.” Pew Research Center. November 29, 2017. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Al Jazeera. “Austrian President Tasks Far-Right Leader with Forming Government.” Al Jazeera. January 6, 2025. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/1/6/austrian-president-tasks-far-right-leader-with-forming-government.
Read the full article here