The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Hungary, France, and Britain: “Putinism,” Patriotism, and Populism
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Mixed news from across the pond for Dissident Right types.

  • Hungary

The big downer: the decision by the government of Hungary to ban Richard Spencer’s conference, scheduled for October 3rd-5th in Budapest.

(In fact, on October 3, Richard was actually taken into custody by the Hungarian police—an atrocity that, as I write this on Saturday afternoon, does not yet seem to have made it into the Main Stream Media here in the Land Of The Free.)

Richard is an occasional contributor, former editor of Taki’s Magazine and founder of, now president of the National Policy Institute, a white-identity think-tank, and Editor of its journal, RADIX. I have shared platforms with Richard on a number of occasions over the years, and shall be doing so again at the H.L. Mencken Club bash this coming October 31st weekend. (It’s not too late to register!)

The Budapest conference, titled “The Future of Europe: Its Culture, People, And Civilization,” was outlawed by Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s Prime Minister and leader of the ruling Fidesz party.

Fidesz is variously described as “center-right,” “populist,” “far right,” or “Putinist.” Whatever it is, the party’s leader apparently thinks it outrageous that people would want to gather peacefully to discuss Europe’s future.

Hence the ban, to which Spencer responded by reorganizing the conference as a private gathering.

“It’s true that the government’s actions are going to make our meeting a little more inconvenient than it otherwise would be. But life is full of such challenges,” Mr. Spencer said.

[Hungary Bans Conference by U.S. Group It Calls ‘Racist,’ by Margit Feher, Wall Street Journal, September 29, 2014]

I commend Richard for his cheerfully philosophical approach. But the underlying issue, after the harassment of the American Renaissance conferences here in the U.S. (also ignore d by the MSM) is very grave.

  • France

Better news came from France. Marine Le Pen’s immigration-patriot National Front party won two seats in the Senate, France’s upper legislative chamber, in last Sunday’s election (September 28).

These are the party’s first Senate seats, although in past years they have held seats in the Assembly, France’s lower chamber, where they currently hold one and a half. (Lawyer Gilbert Collard votes with the FN, while being a member of another French right party.) Sunday’s victory comes after the National Front’s sensational success in elections to the European Parliament this May, where they took a plurality—24 of France’s 74 seats.

One of these two newly-elected senators, David Rachline, is just 26 years old, the youngest person ever to be voted into the chamber under the constitution of the Fifth Republic (which began in 1958). The other, Stéphane Ravier, is a comparatively grizzled 45. There is nothing fogeyish about today’s dissident conservatism.

  • Britain

Things are getting interesting in the run-up to next spring’s UK general election. With no offense at all to the Hungarians and the French, Britain is anyway more interesting to Americans because of the Thatcher-Reagan effect—political trends in the two cousin nations travelling roughly in sync.

It has been conference season over there. The House of Commons adjourns for a month in mid-September so that the members can attend their parties’ annual conferences.

This year’s conference schedule was:

  • Labour: September 21-24 in Manchester.
  • UKIP: September 26-27 in Doncaster, South Yorkshire.
  • Conservative: September 28-October1 in Birmingham.

(The Liberal Democrats, currently the third party in the House of Commons, jumped the gun by holding their conference in August, in Glasgow, Scotland. This may have been something to do with the September 18th referendum on Scottish independence, I don’t know. I can’t work up much interest in the Lib Dems. Neither, to judge from poll figures, can the British electorate.)

The UKIP conference, although the shortest, was undoubtedly the most fun to watch. The party leader, Nigel Farage, seems at first glance to have escaped from a Monty Python sketch. When he speaks, however, he is frank, cogent, and patriotic. Brenda Walker reported for us on his interview at the Daily Caller: listen for yourself.

Farage broke off his conference speech on Saturday to introduce the latest defector to UKIP from the Conservative Party. This was Mark Reckless, Conservative Member of Parliament for an outer commuter suburb of London, who announced his defection right there on the conference platform.

The crowd of course went wild. When they had calmed down some,Reckless spoke to the reasons for his defection. Immigration was right up front, and he addressed the topic in forthright terms.

Let me return to those promises that I made to [my voters]. I, like every Conservative candidate across the country at the 2010 election, promised that we would cut net immigration from hundreds of thousands every year to just tens of thousands. Yet the reality is that 243,000 more people came to our country last year than left—back up to the levels we saw under Labour.

Now, I’m not someone who is always and everywhere against immigration. It takes energy and guts to cross half the world to try and find a better future for yourself and your family. And I believe in a sensible amount of legal, controlled migration.

But if we are to ask my constituents, and constituents across the country, to support some immigration, then in return they need to believe and understand that we have control over who comes to our country and in what numbers; and at the moment we do not have any sense of that. [Applause.]

The insanity of our immigration rules means that a second-generation Briton wanting to bring granny over for a wedding—still less if they want to get married to someone from abroad themselves—will face huge difficulties, yet they will see an open door to immigration to anyone from the European Union. [Applause.]

Now does anyone, left or right, genuinely support an immigration system where we turn away the best and brightest from our Commonwealth, people with links and family here, in order to make room for unskilled immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe. [Applause.]

I promise to cut immigration while treating people fairly and humanely. I cannot keep that promise as a Conservative; I can keep it as UKIP. [Applause.]


Well, it’s not the call for a complete moratorium that many would like to hear. Islam was not mentioned, either. That “best and brightest” has a suspiciously Zuckerbergish sound to American ears. And the appeal to the Commonwealth would have been heard in different ways by different audience members: to the over-fifties in Britain it brings to mind white Australians, Canadians, and New Zealanders, while the younger set is more likely to think of Nigerians and Pakistanis.

In the context of what may be said at the conference of a credible political party, though, Reckless was pushing the envelope. His words were a refreshing contrast to the futile arm-waving of the Conservatives and the immigration boosterism of Labour.

Mark Reckless resigned his seat in Parliament following his decision to defect. This was not constitutionally required of him, but it is expected under the circumstances as the decent thing to do. His constituency now having no sitting member, a special election will be held, probably in early November. Reckless’ Labour opponent will be Naushabah Khan, a London PR executive. A Conservative replacement candidate has not yet been named.

The election will not be a foregone conclusion. The constituency has not been much afflicted with mass immigration; UKIP has not previously fielded a candidate there; and local Conservative Party members are angry with Reckless. He could easily lose—perhaps to Labour’s Ms. Khan, thereby reminding Conservatives nationwide of the hazards of splitting the vote.

Reckless is the second Conservative candidate to defect to UKIP. The first, Douglas Carswell, switched on August 28th. Like Reckless, he resigned his seat. The special election for it will be held next Thursday, October 9th. Carswell, who is locally very popular, is odds-on favorite to win, thereby becoming UKIP’s first Member of Parliament. (The party has 24 seats in the European Parliament.)

The defections have brought forth some odd reactions from Conservative politicians. London Mayor Boris Johnson, who is intelligent and ambitious, but the kind of pol journalists call “colorful”—i.e. slightly nuts—told the audience at this week’s conference that Conservatives who defect to UKIP are types who like to engage sexually with vacuum cleaners.

Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron has preferred to concentrate on the dimensions of Mark Reckless’ heinie. He told one group of conference attendees that party volunteers had “knocked on doors, stuffed envelopes, licked stamps to get his fat arse on the [House of] Commons benches, and this is how he repays them.”

To a different group he argued that if Reckless had “got off his fat arse and worked harder he wouldn’t have to defect to UKIP to save his skin.”

Labour politicians have not been forthcoming with references to anatomy or sexual pathology, but they are undoubtedly just as worried as the Tories. Nigel Farage made the point in his conference speech, using poll numbers from, among other places, Rotherham to support his case, that UKIP can take votes from both Conservative and Labour.

Plainly, UKIP has the big parties running scared. And it could indeed be a major spoiler. It’s not likely they could actually win next spring’s general election, though. For all the news they are making, and for all the enthusiasm on display at last weekend’s UKIP conference, they are polling only at 15 percent nationwide. (This is more than looks, however, in the present fractured state of British politics: the two big parties generally poll in the 30s).

As those poll numbers show, the paradox of populism is that it is not actually very popular. In mature democracies people like their big old familiar parties, the ones their parents voted for. They seek a certain gravitas, a dull predictability, in their politicians. New parties come across as amateurish and unserious.

Of course, this is unfair. At the grass-roots level—I speak as a former Conservative Party member who regularly attended constituency meetings in central London—every political party contains a fair proportion of lunatics. There was a fuss last year when an unnamed senior Conservative referred to his own party activists as “mad, swivel-eyed loons.” [Ukip sees surge in interest after Tory brands activists swivel-eyed loons, By Rowena Mason, Telegraph, May 19, 2013] The remark was injudicious, of course; but it returned an echo from the bosom of anyone who has spent much time in politics.

Nigel Farage is a serious man leading a serious party—a party that knows how to speak in terms other than the cold economism of Labourites and Conservatives. Patriotic immigration reformers on this side of the Atlantic should hope for his success in these coming special elections, and in next year’s general.

Who knows? Perhaps such success would inspire imitation over here, breaking the clammy grip of the Republican Party on National Conservatives, bringing us our own effective Third Party—USIP!

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjects for all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimismand several other books. His most recent book, published by com is FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle).His writings are archived at

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Britain, European Right 
Hide 14 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. bossel says:

    “Better news came from France.”
    Seriously? The FN is no better than Orban’s Fidesz, rather (much) worse. They are in good nazi tradition, only with (in recent years) toned-down rhetoric.

  2. Priss Factor [AKA "Andrea Ostrov Letania"] says:

    “(In fact, on October 3, Richard was actually taken into custody by the Hungarian police—an atrocity that, as I write this on Saturday afternoon, does not yet seem to have made it into the Main Stream Media here in the Land Of The Free.)”

    Well, who owns/controls the media in the ‘land of the free’?

    It’s the JEWS!

    Furthermore, who owns/controls the so-called Conservatives in the ‘land of the free’?

    It’s the JEWS!

    Scum at National Review not only fired your ass but go out of their way to suck up to vile scum like Sheldon Adelson and other Jewish snakes who use dumb gentiles to fight and die in more wars for Jews and Israel in the Middle East and Ukraine/Russia. They–nor Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, and rest of the gang–haven’t made a peep about this violation of free speech and freedom of association in so-called ‘liberal democratic’ Europe. (I think the West lorded over by Jewish oligarch scum berates Russia about lack of freedom to distract us from the fact that WE in the West have no freedom.)
    Of course, if a conference of Jews discussing their own power and interests was banned, the Jew-run media would go ballistic and American ‘conservatives’ like Limbaugh and the craven pile of puss Walter Russell Mead would be howling for blood.

    Any conservative who doesn’t call out the Jews has NO credibility.

    Lookie here:

    No freedom of speech and association in Europe. Some ‘liberal democracy’!

    Jews can get together and discuss issues of Jewish power and Zionist domination, but whites better not even band together to discuss their own survival and heritage.

    If Jews get together to discuss Jewish interests, that’s just dandy, but if whites get together. it’s ‘racist’ and ‘far right’.

    And since American establishment ‘conservatives’ are slavish to Jewish Neo-cons, they don’t even show any support to fellow white brethren whose rights have been violated. American conservatism cheers on Jews-for-Jewish-power but join with the Jews and the ‘left’ to attack & demean whites-for-white-power.

  3. This note referencing the HLMencken Club conference is almost tempting. Were it not for the shudder-inducing mention of a “hotel close to BWI airport”, I might go. But, one would have to steel one’s self with quantities of demon rum to even begin to contemplate a trip to Baltimore.

    I trust the price at the door will be discounted heavily.

  4. fnn says:

    The French National Front has become just another group of disingenuous Americanized liberals:

    The National Front under Marine Le Pen has abandoned repatriation and the whiteness of French identity. I am sure both Griffin and Marine would grant that globally, the white race is on the path to extinction. But locally — politically — they have given up the struggle for white preservation. And there is no point in even asking people this crooked for straight answers about the Jewish problem…

    As Jayman always points out, assimilation is more myth than reality:

    • Replies: @JayMan
  5. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    A “a white-identity think-tank”???? That’s hilarious! 😀

  6. the derb wrote:
    “As those poll numbers show, the paradox of populism is that it is not actually very popular. In mature democracies people like their big old familiar parties, the ones their parents voted for. They seek a certain gravitas, a dull predictability, in their politicians. New parties come across as amateurish and unserious.”

    Derbyshire is an idiot. He promotes white rights, which is great. But he dislikes populism, which is stupid. Hey, Derb, whites ARE the majority in the western nations. Derb and his followers see themselves as some sort of elite who are on a crusade to keep the riotous masses at bay. Hey, dummy, you ARE the masses. At least for now.

    The reason the establishment parties still have large constituencies is because 1) in general, women are conservative and are afraid of change. That is built into their psychological makeup via evolution; and 2) in general, older people who are not well-off (most older people) vote for establishment parties because they are not in a position to handle change, what with being old.

    In general, white women and white senior citizens will not turn against the establishment parties until it is too late–until the third world masses and the corporations have turned the West into a Blade Runner scenario. And by then it will be too late.

    Yer still an idiot, Derb, and you always will be. But luckily your readers are idiots, too.

    • Replies: @Ian
  7. Sam J. says:

    “…Conservatives who defect to UKIP are types who like to engage sexually with vacuum cleaners…”

    Better vacuum cleaners than little boys.

  8. Sean says:

    REGRETTABLY, until the Italian people demand it by voting for anti-immigration parties, the lunacy will continue, because all the other parties are terrified of being denounced as politically incorrect. We see this same paralysis in all the governements of Europe except Switzerland (the Swiss remain a people rooted in reality). ”

    The fascinating thing about Switzerland, apart from it being the most sucessfull country in the world despite having nothing much in the way of strong central government, (more Swiss know the name of president of France than the president of Switzerland) is that it has a lot of local contol, yet economic elites have an awful lot of freedom. That seems like a reasonable deal: the rich get to do what they want, including getting ever richer, but the population has more power to restrain them on the things that really matter.

    One thing is for sure, the economic elite are always going to have the very strongest of motives (sufficient resources goes without saying) to defeat any popular movement that might threaten the accumulation of additional wealth.

    The problem, in London especially, is that immigration now seems to be more or less an or even the economic engine for the affluent (house price inflation shows that up very well). So basically the masses are going to have to accept a reduction in their standard of living in return for halting immigration. Otherwise it it is just going to be a continual rerun of the wealthy’s victory against organised labour.

  9. Jack D says:

    Reckless is wrong, wrong, wrong. How is it better for the UK to get a Nigerian or Pakistani from the “Commonwealth” than a Pole or Lithuanian from the EU? Most of the time, it’s not, especially if the Commonwealth fellow is a Muslim.

    He is making an appeal here to “second-generation Britons” who want to bring Granny over “for their weddings” (and then maybe stay a bit, like forever). I assume this is because the UKIP is trying to broaden its voter appeal – “it’s not just for white people anymore!” but it sounds like he’s lost the thread already.

    If you are really looking for the “best and brightest” then test for that. Impose requirements for minimum IQ, educational level, skills, ability to invest in a business, acceptance of Western values, etc. What does being from the Commonwealth or being someone’s granny have to do with “best and brightest”?

  10. JayMan says: • Website

    As Jayman always points out, assimilation is more myth than reality

    I think my post More Maps of the American Nations really cinches that point more than anything, as different Britons (and other Europeans) who have been in America for centuries have failed to assimilate to each others’ values.

    The same in true in Sweden (Danes), Spain (N. vs S., and Catalans, Basque), Italy (also N. vs S.), and Ukraine (obvious).

  11. Rocky says:

    Reckless just won the by-election with 60% of the vote.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
  12. Ian says:
    @leftist conservative

    “in general, older people who are not well-off (most older people) vote for establishment parties”

    UKIP voters tend to be older working-class people.

  13. Hibernian says:

    CARSWELL won with 60% of the vote. (The 1st of the 2 defectors)

  14. Wally says: • Website

    The impossible ‘holocaust’ narrative allows the racist Israeli parasites to get away with slaughtering Palestinians and stealing billions from the US taxpayers every year, and then demand that US soldiers die for their greedy self interests.

    We can live without them, they cannot live without us.

    The laughable ‘holocau\$t’ propaganda is an easily debunked, impossible as alleged Jewish supremacist scam.
    discussion here:

    The ‘holocaust’ storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives
    ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and
    persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists parasites demand censorship.
    Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

    Fight racist Jewish supremacism.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS