During a recent debate on immigration in the Second Chamber (Lower House) of the Dutch parliament, MPs were asked to comment on a 500-page report on the issue. Thierry Baudet went to the very heart of the matter. His first point was that, contrary to what liberalism pretends, people are not interchangeable. They are not just numbers on a spreadsheet. Instead, they are bearers of a particular culture and identity. It is not neutral if a Dutchman is replaced by an African. The second is that mass migration is causing the very structure of society to change: native Europeans are being replaced by non-Europeans. Soon, the natives will be a minority in their own country. This is what is correctly called ‘the great replacement’ and it is truly happening. Third, unless it is stopped and reversed, it will be irreversible.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/shorts/KhcmHX1U6i8">People are NOT interchangeable!</a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5K4N3Qnabbo">Becoming a Minority in our own country</a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HQusGN14cLg">The Great Replacement is NOT a theory!</a> &nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-qw.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXfTlSLBIdVyKAzMbuVoykj5NIxfcsJ7Dr_-YUFYm-k7mXTUj8nZrzEetsYbwE3zHopjhDHfO8fH0J0qmXT1l5dPOACrUPfl3VNGBwkfMBBZ8UkaauBkop1YKWYtO70xEEqTtpOleg?key=p1oQXEVVtPVkX-whrqGi4ZZH">Iem al Biyati, leader of FVD’s youth wing, gave a lovely speech in El Salvador during the recent Patriots conference there. Iem laid out in a few clear sentences the glories of Dutch history - and then said that the modern trend is to denigrate all that by pretending that the past is nothing but oppression and reaction. Not only is the past being erased, the future is too – by mass immigration, a deliberate project to change Dutch and European society radically. Iem remains both optimistic and ambitious: Europe can recover from this once it liberates itself from the pernicious legacy of the French Revolution and the Enlightenment.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEgfq_P_2NM">Watch Iem’s speech here</a> &nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-qw.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXeO8EiQcUM8LwAmyJ-rWX6tZlc975EUy6ncBEXpONJos4khfubuzyg4ghQJFpBp2Yr19wrtGdGMO8BLPsFSDxq4tKWcB7eFo5OfzEAEc2vG71jY35UjvpjLGgwOE9oSw3XnkY9Uqw?key=p1oQXEVVtPVkX-whrqGi4ZZH">The EU is well known for ignoring the results of elections. It famously ignored the result of the Dutch referendum on the Ukraine accession agreement, organized and won by FVD in 2016. But so far it has never actually cancelled one, as it now has done in Romania, after the well-known and respected public figure, Calin Georgescu, unexpectedly came first in the first round of presidential elections. The vote has been retroactively cancelled, just days after simultaneous parliamentary elections were validated! Bertolt Brecht’s old joke has lost none of its sad piquancy: it is time to dissolve the people and elect another. An FVD friend in Bucharest, Kees Cramer, has sent us an analysis of this full-frontal assault on democracy. It is nothing less than a coup.<a href="https://fvdinternational.com/article/the-coup-in-romania-a-struggle-for-sovereignty">Read Kees Cramer’s article here</a> &nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-qw.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdBDVYFl4PtHzT2gN1K5zfRW-nOa0-I658L3QvPGyTtxdCnaCh1nk_sIBFXPxihoMXA0xIeF1I4Jl2fg3x2y44SCcnT3yn68eJ4UoyzbdzqHcMYOcuC9yuI7UBR7HCJ6CGiD9a8?key=p1oQXEVVtPVkX-whrqGi4ZZH">We discussed the fall of Syria on The Forum this week. Mark Sleboda gave us a superb analysis of the collapse of the Assad regime while Vanessa Beeley, who had quite literally fled the revolution for Lebanon, told us her harrowing first-hand experiences.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MTz_0aWr2U">Watch the Forum &amp; Friends here</a>

large_The Forum 13 december 2024.png

medium_The Forum 13 december 2024.png

small_The Forum 13 december 2024.png

thumbnail_The Forum 13 december 2024.png

The Weekly Forum - 13 December

Since Sunday, November 24, 2024, Romania has been on an unprecedented political rollercoaster, with events escalating rapidly. The tightly packed election calendar included three key dates: the first round of the presidential election on November 24, the parliamentary elections on December 1, and the second round of the presidential election scheduled for December 8. However, what began as a relatively normal election cycle quickly turned into a fight for Romania’s very sovereignty.On the night of November 24, exit polls shocked the political establishment. Calin Georgescu, an independent candidate, was unexpectedly in third place. By 9 PM, the globalist powers that be began to realize that their carefully laid plans were at risk. As the night progressed, Georgescu surged to second place by 11 PM, and by 2 AM, he was in the lead. This was a major surprise and a clear sign that the Romanian people were waking up to the need for change.But this wasn’t going to be a simple election. The next day, the so-called "globalist jihad" was unleashed, echoing the same kind of forces that worked against figures like Pim Fortuyn in 2002. One of the most significant attacks came from Cristian Terhes, a Romanian MEP, who had previously been aligned with the AUR party before defecting. Terhes appealed to the Constitutional Court for alleged fraud in vote counting, aiming to derail Georgescu’s momentum.The court, however, upheld the election results on December 2 and allowed the second round of voting to proceed as scheduled. This decision, though, was just the beginning of a much larger political battle.Georgescu, who can be compared to figures like Thierry Baudet or Robert Kennedy Jr., has emerged as a charismatic nationalist voice in Romania. Much like Baudet, Georgescu’s intellectual background does not hinder his connection to the Romanian people. His direct, no-nonsense approach resonates deeply with those frustrated by globalist influence and the erosion of national sovereignty. Georgescu's views on the environment and globalism, especially his criticism of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, reflect a deep desire to return to a more rooted, natural way of life. His platform focuses on the core issues of water, food, and energy—areas he believes the globalist agenda has corrupted. This message of self-reliance, wrapped in the framework of Orthodox Christian values, is one of the reasons why he found a groundswell of support, particularly among the youth on social media platforms like TikTok.This popularity did not sit well with the powers that be.&nbsp; By December 6, Romania’s Constitutional Court took the shocking step of annulling the first round of presidential elections, declaring they needed to be rerun. The decision came when voting for the 2nd round already started in the diaspora; Australia and New Zealand. The move to cancel the results was an outrageous act of political interference, clearly aimed at stopping a candidate who represented Romanian sovereignty.This was not a decision made in a vacuum. Behind it lay the influence of President Klaus Iohannis, whose intelligence services reportedly hastily compiled a dossier accusing Georgescu of Russian interference in the election—an accusation that was unsupported by any real evidence. The timing of this dossier, just days after Georgescu was poised to win, is deeply suspicious. The facts are clear: the Constitutional Court acted outside its legal authority by making a decision that was retroactive, rejecting its own previous ruling that had validated the election results after a recount of the 1st round results. It became increasingly clear that this was not an independent judicial process but a political manoeuvre orchestrated to eliminate a strong nationalist candidate.Georgescu’s political vision is one of national renewal, focusing on the reclamation of Romania’s natural resources and energy sovereignty. His promise to nationalise Romania’s oil and gas industries and to withdraw from the EU’s globalist policies aligns him with a broader movement of countries that seek to break free from the stranglehold of international financial elites. His position is clear: he will not bow to foreign powers or allow Romania’s wealth to be looted by global interests. This stands in stark contrast to the current leadership of Romania, which has allowed foreign corporations to plunder the country's resources, including its fertile agricultural land, natural gas, and rare metals.As the political situation in Romania escalates, the globalist forces are desperate to maintain control. The European Union is in turmoil, with its economic system teetering on the edge of collapse, and Romania’s rich resources are increasingly seen as a key prize. There is speculation that the EU, led by France and Germany, is willing to sacrifice Romania’s sovereignty to secure access to these resources. This is particularly alarming given Romania's strategic importance, not just in Europe, but also in the wider geopolitical context.The power struggle in Romania is part of a broader global battle for control. The European elites, including figures like Klaus Iohannis and his NATO allies, are pushing Romania towards greater involvement in NATO’s military operations, especially in the context of the war in Ukraine. Georgescu, however, has been outspoken in his opposition to NATO’s expansion and Romania’s role in the conflict. His vision for peace in the Black Sea region, and his calls for an immediate halt to all payments to Ukraine, have made him a target for those who want to drag Romania into a war that serves the interests of foreign powers, not the Romanian people.The sudden cancellation of the elections has triggered widespread outrage in Romania. Social media is ablaze with messages of defiance, and many prominent political figures have come out against the coup. Even some within the globalist camp, like Georgescu’s opponent Elena Lasconi, have condemned the actions of the Constitutional Court and called for accountability. This is a crucial moment for Romania. The coup against Georgescu is not just an attack on one man, but an assault on the democratic process itself.Despite the enormous pressure, both Georgescu and George Simion, the leader of Romania’s largest sovereignist party, AUR, have urged their supporters to remain calm and avoid street protests. The political battle has shifted from the streets to the courts, and the stakes have never been higher. Romania’s future as a sovereign nation is on the line.Georgescu’s calls for a return to Romanian nationalism and sovereignty have struck a chord with a growing number of Romanians, who are fed up with foreign interference and the erosion of their cultural identity. The globalists, however, are determined to prevent this shift from taking hold. The political establishment, with the backing of powerful international interests, is willing to go to extreme lengths to preserve its grip on power.The events of December 2024 represent a pivotal moment in Romania’s history. Will the Romanian people allow their country to be dictated to by foreign powers, or will they stand up and reclaim their sovereignty? The outcome of this struggle is far from certain, but one thing is clear: the Romanian people are ready for change. And Calin Georgescu, despite the globalist opposition, remains their best hope for a future free from external control and influence.

medium_calin_georgescu_facebook_0.jpg

small_calin_georgescu_facebook_0.jpg

thumbnail_calin_georgescu_facebook_0.jpg

The Coup in Romania: A Struggle for Sovereignty

large_d2ff41bc-07ce-4a0a-89cb-a03cb6612d66.jpg

medium_d2ff41bc-07ce-4a0a-89cb-a03cb6612d66.jpg

small_d2ff41bc-07ce-4a0a-89cb-a03cb6612d66.jpg

thumbnail_d2ff41bc-07ce-4a0a-89cb-a03cb6612d66.jpg

The hopium Austrian

Thierry Baudet was summoned to the police once more this week for questioning about two campaign videos FVD produced during the November 2023 elections. Might they have offended someone?&nbsp; Might they have encouraged discrimination? These could be criminal offences!&nbsp; The videos deal with LGBT issues, especially trans ideology promoted in schools, and immigration – the two big flagship policies of what we should call the ideology of ‘dissolutionism’ - dissolution of the nation by changing its ethnic base, dissolution of the family by pretending that two people of the same sex can have children. The fact that the Dutch equivalent of P.C. Plod is on the case recalls the numerous knocks at the door which have occurred recently in Britain and Ireland to arrest perpetrators of so-called hate crimes, ‘hate speech’ being one of the main pretexts for censorship. Yet if a political party cannot campaign in favour of the nation and the family, without being intimidated by the police – which is anti-constitutional in many countries - then there is no democracy left at all.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhlALNc40CU&amp;ab_channel=FVDInternational">Watch Thierry's video here</a>&nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXcWl1wFWCSNH4jSEv2KV9Nvj0scn0Y8PQwq7q46y8VlBuKuTuPDWyFCbWFCdb9AxHKgSLcZaT4cAXxphwAZg2V4PPIVlM3jD4op5cN646b2-Rbm8eEyrIJAau8OkQicJDi0JvZN?key=Os1yQt4EGM0vZgZtMbH5pn8K">FVD International director, John Laughland, was a guest on RT’s Crosstalk last week, to discuss the decision taken by ‘Sleepy Joe’ Biden (subsequently filmed nodding off during a summit meeting in Africa) to attack Russia with American cruise missiles guided by America. How would America react if Russian guided missiles were targeted at Texas from Mexico? John emphasized two points: the extreme difficulty of knowing what will happen next, because history is often made on the basis of split-second decisions, and the equally immense difficulty of envisaging any negotiated outcome to the current conflict, the enmity between Russia and the West having now reached what appears to be a point of no return.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH9GVNvJ3F8&amp;t=2s&amp;ab_channel=FVDInternational">Watch the interview here</a><img src="https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdnjK9BG65R1dCPVrqbglyxvufhVtro6YUeJb8uApz1VixWjmaCwZycT_WjwbadeOyskROdyTHhS02qJH3m_IBn5BevuDFlAL5eFGbbbOGscH-nItZUvxYKSX5ELs1_rAJGLYH9?key=Os1yQt4EGM0vZgZtMbH5pn8K">We are once again honoured to publish the indefatigable Vaclav Klaus, this time on the world order. Klaus correctly points out that a new world order is emerging and the old one disappearing. But what will that order be, and what is meant by ‘order’ anyway? Klaus’ response is that the key to any new arrangement will be pragmatism. He rejects absolutism and urges compromise. This is because the notion of ‘order’ is itself misunderstood. Klaus does not quote Hayek or Oakeshott but his thinking clearly draws in these two great philosophers who explained precisely that order is about habit and custom and that it does not have, and should not have, the illusory certainty claimed by rationalism.<a href="https://fvdinternational.com/article/notes-for-montenegro-a-world-order-under-threat-is-there-any-chance-to-change-it">Read Klaus’ article here</a><img src="https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXcbd1C4ddbpN0voAdzTlYD-_EcEftaxnCUR5S2ziqibUTiDvfhdlwRGpsAnSyBTyNy_Y_km3EzwajgLjFWzbjs6ycESu0Ri-ZH0vmhwYaSlXFI3ZORjCeuQvsEHaw0M2qFfaGtABg?key=Os1yQt4EGM0vZgZtMbH5pn8K">We discussed the Ukraine war on The Forum this week with Professor Glenn Diesen, professor of politics at the University of South-East Norway, and Dr Rainer Rothfuss, a member of the German Bundestag and a former professor of political geography at the University of Tübingen. You won’t find many debates like this anywhere else.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/live/ItlL1ekWlUo">Watch the Forum &amp; Friends here</a>

large_The forum 6 december 2024.png

medium_The forum 6 december 2024.png

small_The forum 6 december 2024.png

thumbnail_The forum 6 december 2024.png

The Weekly Forum - 6 December

Montenegro, 26 November 2024It is great to see good old friends after such a long time and to get a chance to discuss with them the topics we all consider crucial and fundamental. We may have different views on some of them, but the friendly and free exchange of views is absolutely irreplaceable. There is no alternative to it.The Covid hysteria brought about an involuntary and frustrating break in our contacts and in our discussions. We hope it will not return, at least without much stronger public resistance than was the case at the beginning of this decade. Even the politicians have, hopefully, learnt something.I would like to express my gratitude to The Boris Mints Institute, Tel Aviv University and the University of Donja Gorica and especially, personally, to Boris Mints for organising this event and for bringing us together. An additional benefit, at least for some of us, me included, is the very rare opportunity to visit the beautiful country of Montenegro.&nbsp;I was asked to open this morning’s session with my remarks on the topic&nbsp;“A World Order Under Threat”. It is a great but extremely difficult topic. To discuss it comprehensively is beyond my very limited capabilities. Nevertheless, I accepted this task. Let me make, therefore, as I stressed, at least a few remarks on it and let me try to elementarily structure it.&nbsp;I share the feeling of the author of the invitation letter to this gathering that&nbsp;the world is finding itself under real threat or even stronger “the world plunged into one of the darkest moments in modern history”.&nbsp;I see it very similarly but I have to admit that the mere fact that we are meeting again – after so many years – could be taken as a signal that the world is coming closer to some sort of rationality and order. The unexpected results of the American presidential elections also indicate that something – even for us, pessimists – is in the air.&nbsp;The reelection of Donald Trump as U.S. President – an election outcome that is dividing America and the world – is for me&nbsp;a proof that even the unexpected can happen. I don’t hide that I see the Trump’s reelection as an extremely positive outcome. A hope for many of us. I don’t overestimate it, however. The party which lost the elections is not – I am afraid – willing to take it in a friendly way. We will be witnesses of a merciless clash between two blocks&nbsp;representing widely different world views. It is not only political. This result will define the content of the forthcoming era. Not only in the United States.An elementary structuring of the topic: a geopolitical oneI am not a geopolitical theoretician, I have not been able to find any theoretical concept or background behind it. Without such a backing, we are on thin ice. All our reasoning is inevitably rather soft. With all these reservations,&nbsp;there is no doubt that one of the important aspects of the existing world threats is geopolitical.&nbsp;We don’t live in a world of perfect competition of small sovereign states. We don’t live in a Metternich-like post-1815 European order. We don’t live in a bipolar world of the Cold War era either and there are many signs that we’re leaving the unipolar world of American hegemony, which started after the fall of communism. This is something the Americans are not ready to accept. This will be leading to a growing instability, I am afraid.When I look at the current world, we are&nbsp;somewhere in-between&nbsp;all these hypothetical models of world order. This “in-between type” of situation is very dangerous. The current Russia-Ukraine war and the not less destructive tragic conflict in Gaza are, for me, an undeniable evidence of the coming of the end of one “world order” and of the difficult birth of a new one. The new order will reflect the new distribution of power in economic and military sense. The old one doesn’t reflect existing realities. This is, however, only one dimension of the whole problem.Another world order: a more implicit oneThe other, not less important, dimension of the current world problem can’t be measured by GDP or the size and strength of armies. It is the ongoing breakdown of&nbsp;another order,&nbsp;the breakdown of&nbsp;the dominant system of believes, of habits and traditions, of culture, of behavioural patterns. These create another, perhaps more implicit than explicit world “order”, but it is not less important. It keeps the world together. This “second” order is also under a fundamental threat now. Some of us often speak about the self-destruction of the West. This may lead to an even more tragic state of affairs.I expect protests from the audience that I did not mention another dimension –&nbsp;international law, pacts and agreements, United Nations and similar organizations.&nbsp;I have not forgotten them. I am well aware of them. I am convinced, however, that the institutional or legal arrangements are&nbsp;the consequence of the existing reality both of the power relations in the world and of the implicit order of beliefs, habits, traditions and of cultures in a broader sense.&nbsp;Not the other way around.Methodologically, I take the term “order” only as a habit or a custom. Talking about order is an overstatement. I prefer to talk about “arrangements”. Let’s use the word order only with a small “o”. There has never been in international relations an order with a capital “O”. Only on paper. An order of that kind can only be a normative ideal, not a descriptive notion.&nbsp;Even in the best of times, “the order” was a fragile, temporary construct. I don’t see anything like that now.&nbsp;Do I have any suggestions what to do with it?As someone coming from a small country which for most of its history was not a sovereign – we were a part of the Austro-Hungarian empire for centuries, a part of Nazi German “Reich” luckily for years only, a part of Soviet imperium for four decades, and now a part of the European Union – I don’t feel justified to propose&nbsp;strategic responses&nbsp;to the existing international threats or challenges, as you put it in your invitation letter. Who should be the receiver of these proposals?There is, nevertheless, one fundamental “strategic” response to all these problems and this is to&nbsp;choose between peace and war, between fighting and negotiating, between absolutist stances and realistic compromises, between attempts to mastermind the world and to accept a dialog, between results 10 to 0 and 6 to 5 (or 5 to 6).&nbsp;The discussion about them is long overdue.For someone like me, who lives in the Czech Republic, in a country which has on its territory the highest number of Ukrainian refugees (per capita) in the world, in a country which was liberated by the Soviet armies at the end of the Second World War and in a country which was – on the contrary – occupied by the Soviet Union (and some Central and East European countries) in 1968, something which is a living memory for some of us,&nbsp;the main issue of the current world is the Russian-Ukrainian war in all its consequences, especially the indirect ones.&nbsp;I am frustrated not only by what Russia did on the 24th February 2022, but also by what the world, the world superpowers and international organisations, allowed to happen. No international organisation reacted. Some of them even added fuel to the fire. Not just after the 24th February, but – what was more important – before this date. Madame von der Leyen praised herself recently for being in Kyiv eight times since February 2022. My question would be: “How many times was she there before that, both before 2022 and especially before 2014?” All the evidence suggests that this was the moment when it all started. Everything else is a consequence.I see a potential way out of this puzzle in accepting reality and searching for a compromise solution.&nbsp;The world missed this opportunity in 2014. It missed it in March 2022 when the Istanbul talks offered a solution. We don’t have the right to miss it again in a new situation after Trump’s election victory.&nbsp;We shouldn’t be passive observers. That’s the main reason why we are here, I suppose. We all must help. In this case, as in other similar cases. As in Gaza.

medium_Vaclav-Klaus-2005.webp

small_Vaclav-Klaus-2005.webp

thumbnail_Vaclav-Klaus-2005.webp

A World Order Under Threat: Is There Any Chance to  Change It?

Thierry Baudet and other senior figures from FVD attended the Patriots conference in El Salvador last week. El Salvador has hit the news recently, ever since its rock star president, Nayib Bukele, transformed his country from the most dangerous in the world to the safest by imprisoning the gangsters who had taken over the state and destroyed society. In his talk, Thierry said that patriotism was an idea whose time has come, and which is therefore unstoppable. He repeated his scepticism about free trade and of course his opposition to multiculturalism, but added that Europe’s history and civilisation are the greatest in the world. Pride in our past is exactly what our enemies want to take from us by promoting ‘oikophobia’, hatred of one’s own country. We must be in favour of our civilisation and do everything to nourish it, Thierry insisted - and not just be stuck in opposition to things we do not like.<a href="https://x.com/thierrybaudet/status/1861051165107945909">Watch Thierry’s speech here</a><img src="https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXd9v196oC1H2dDT_QolIEOMr6S_cfdGTXemaNnEdL4WxLzlWRPvyNrt0OfRNY43zuuk89VityZ59OG8gn2wQiVnyZ5-l-QgEp5Mb7wuNNBQj2GIlmxMAajQoSdIGd6RKACIAyPljw?key=DkpyPN4_U0N4mSEODXowZOCd">Ralf Dekker is back in parliament! As Pepijn van Houwelingen takes paternity leave for a few months, ‘the godfather’ has returned to the Second Chamber. Naturally, he has hit the ground running, with a masterclass speech on the war in Ukraine which we have translated using AI. According to Ralf, the war is unwinnable for the West and is the consequence of the provocations of NATO which transformed Ukraine into a vassal state and a battering ram against Russia. Ralf believes that Olaf Scholz’s telephone call to Vladimir Putin, the day after the US elections, and the German Chancellor’s firm opposition to helping Ukraine to attack targets deep inside Russia itself, mark a turning point which the Netherlands should embrace. Only this would be in the national interest - instead of the country currently playing splendid second fiddle to decisions taken by others.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAtr7UnNFZc">Watch Ralf’s speech here</a><img src="https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXfkkTWZAo0dvGK6-n9wrO7YI47Os7QaaVgZY-bmVnq9vib0fTjCwKcHAwlcpLhVtlpLMkCfdmZs-nCtoiOsHTdITxj47fnne17LPEu_2YoXUFzm2Dko8jELpcTqnhrwyPPsVzrGRQ?key=DkpyPN4_U0N4mSEODXowZOCd">How deep does the rot go? FVD is surely unique among political parties in digging further than anyone into the challenges presented by the decline of the West – a decline which, according to FVD International’s Vincent Vos, began with the Enlightenment and the French revolution. Those movements were, at bottom, a rebellion against God, which both ancient Greek (Icarus) and Christian (Lucifer) mythology have warned against. Today’s Western civilisation, which draws heavily on those movements but with the addition of 19th century materialism (the brother-enemies, liberalism and Marxism) is but the ultimate paroxysm of this rebellion which, like the others, will end in destruction.<a href="https://fvdinternational.com/article/norms-and-values-give-me-a-break">Read Vincent Vos’ article here</a><img src="https://lh7-rt.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXf3ftKzntLAuKf-HAnK-LQLRVHMN9cjNwrL6CoOM-xD1Ew6E8Mhl5Mlw8JP03MD4r3kRvcwOWhRwrZeIgptEz_WE6Dootuwu98yezJMzPJZXpa_xifrKD4Zup3lCmMOrDPCyj7r?key=DkpyPN4_U0N4mSEODXowZOCd">We had a fabulous discussion on The Forum this week with Daniel McAdams and Catherine Austin Fitts on the Trump administration. Appointments or disappointments? Click below to find out.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oltZlYg8lP0">Watch The Forum &amp; Friends here</a>

large_the forum 29 11 2024.png

medium_the forum 29 11 2024.png

small_the forum 29 11 2024.png

thumbnail_the forum 29 11 2024.png

The Weekly Forum - 28 November

This article was written for the Yearbook of the Association of Clerks.&nbsp;With the debate on integration alive and kicking again, the big question arises: what is the culture in which to integrate?An analysis of a degrading cultureWhen I was asked to contribute to this unique Yearbook, I was surprised. In current times, political tensions are rising so much that there is little room for dissident opinions. However, it has never been more important to provide a full analysis of what is going on, both in the Netherlands and in the rest of the world.&nbsp;We live in times of uncertainty and uprooting. Globalisation, the fading of traditional family structures, immigration and large-scale information flows are upon us. These social phenomena are all consequences of conscious political choices.&nbsp;Therefore, I will first describe in a nutshell the moral decline of the West. Before I do so, I will first explain what I believe moral decay and the resulting norms and values mean. This essay aims to introduce the reader to the world of reactionary traditionalism.Moral DecayWith his best-known work, ‘The Decline of the West’, Oswald Spengler analysed the so-called cycle of empires. In his analysis, he found common factors in each historical example which could be seen as predictors of the rise and fall of societies. His analysis can be most easily summarised with this sentence: ‘Strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create bad times, bad times create strong men again.’ In other words, material prosperity has a negative effect on strength of mind. Man becomes increasingly alienated from himself.We see this reflected in the modern West. We have lost connection with our roots. This is what moral decay is at its core. Norms and values are based on a certain morality. This morality has to be based on a certain core, a core that is at the beginning of our cultural-historical outlook and human view. Morality can only emerge when a group of people is in touch with this core.&nbsp;The traces which eternity has left in all cultural-historical traditions we know prove this. A grounded human being is embedded in his nature, history, environment and metaphysics. A grounded person is also a humble person in the face of the inexplicable.This is no longer the case in the modern West. In fact, the West is in the midst of an identity crisis. This crisis has to do both with the individualistic, universalistic nature of Enlightenment thinking and the lack of meaning. Enlightenment thinking is seen as the very cause of Western dominance in the world today. The paradoxical nature of this phenomenon therefore requires not only some explanation but also a historical analysis. It is a story which begins with the Enlightenment and the ensuing French Revolution.Enlightenment and RevolutionLiberty, equality, fraternity - it all sounds so beautiful. The idea of the dawn of the French Revolution was that we were moving towards a new world, a world where the individual would no longer be oppressed by the pettiness of traditions. Rooted, traditional structures would no longer stop us from reaching our full potential. Man would be freed from the dogmatic thinking that had oppressed him for so long. A very positive attitude emerged with the new focus towards certain civil rights, the separation of church and state and the split of science and metaphysics. Whereas before this, scientific thinking had a spiritual dimension, after the Enlightenment developments, science focused only on the materialistic domain. Through induction and deduction, it had become man's task to figure out reality and, if possible, improve it. The advent of this new thinking was a fundamental reckoning with ‘old Europe’.The changing society was also accompanied by a different social division. Where previously there was a class society, these classes were shaken up.&nbsp; A new merchant class emerged. Capitalism soon reigned supreme and caused tremendous social growth in many areas. People actually became more prosperous. The advent of the industrial revolution obviously played a fundamental role in this. In addition, the 20th century was the scene of the great struggle of the three ideologies that emerged from Enlightenment thinking: liberalism, Marxism and fascism.To make sense of the practical impact of Enlightenment thinking on our norms and values, I will discuss the course of these ideologies over time.The Battle between IdeologiesLiberalism places an emphasis on individual freedom. Ultimately, the fundamental idea of liberalism is that traditional structures (the complementary nature of the classes/social groups, state structures, family and faith) are restrictive of the individual. These structures stop the individual from being able to develop. It should be the task of the modern individual to pry himself loose from the chains of these structures. Liberalism arose in conjunction with the rise of capitalism. Many people became richer because of the liberal outlook and capitalism. However, this was not the case for everyone. The ‘winners’ during this time were factory owners, through industrialisation, and these factories had to be manned. From this, the working class then emerged. While these factories were still mainly focused on making profits for the factory owner, there were deplorable conditions for the workers. This phenomenon was the breeding ground for Marxism.Marxism mainly emphasised another value of the Enlightenment, equality. Marxism argued that the worker was disadvantaged compared to the factory owner. This was wrong because the promise of the Revolution was that everyone would become equal. Marxism was therefore a clear reaction to the rise of capitalism. According to Karl Marx, man was essentially a social being. The redemption that the Enlightenment would bring to man - the promise of the new just world - could only be achieved if a transformative process was fulfilled to achieve a new collective. Liberalism and Marxism did share with each other the belief that man is inherently benign, that history is progressive (mankind is capable of improvement) and that man is at his core a rational individual.In response to both theories, fascism emerged. Fascism denounced the universalist nature of both liberalism and Marxism. According to fascism, paradise - what the Enlightenment had promised - could only be achieved when it assumed an exclusive character. Fascism is paradoxical in this, given that fascism itself is also modernist and has some of the same materialist assumptions as both other ideologies.National Socialism argued that only its own people (the German) had the ability to reach this new world. Other ideologies would therefore aim to break down German strength and undermine Germany. This resulted in World War II.After World War II, an international community was created and spread around the world by the winners of the war. Under the guise of ‘never again’ and of the American thinking prevailing at the time (the United States gained enormous political military economic and cultural influence in Western Europe after World War II), various international organisations emerged which were supposed to promote international cooperation along the American model. Globalisation really took shape from this point onwards. Meanwhile, the communist power bloc that had now taken over Eastern Europe still existed. The Cold War had begun.The United States continued to develop itself into an economic Powerhouse. The years that followed saw the emergence of a veritable consumer culture, which, combined with ever-increasing globalism, continued to expand. In 1989 with the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Soviet empire came to a definitive end. Classical Marxism collapsed and liberalism, led by the new world order of the United States, triumphed. A new era of optimism dawned in which the culture propagated that there would be eternal growth and that the liberal ideals of the American Dream would become available to everyone and thus also to people in the Netherlands.The United States' gains ensured that its model of society was spread around the world. This happened not only through military might but also through culture and economics. At the same time, however, liberalism had already undergone a strong transformation and had now reached a synthesis with Marxism.&nbsp;The Current Degradation CultureThe current culture of degradation is a consequence of the flight of great Marxist thinkers to the United States. In the United States, a new form of Marxism, called cultural Marxism, emerged in the intellectual world. The classical idea of the oppressor and the oppressed class of Marxism was applied to culture with this new movement. Gradually, (especially after the May ‘68 revolution of student protests), a new culture emerged here in Europe as well. For the most part, our current norms and values still reflect that change that started then. This brings us to the philosophy of the Frankfurt School.The Frankfurt SchoolThe Frankfurt School is the name of a group of Marxist thinkers who tackled the major problem of communist thought. Communist revolutions sprang up in the East but not in Western Europe. On the contrary, workers sided with fascism in the run-up to World War II. The members of this philosophical school were Jewish and saw this as the great betrayal of the working class: after all, fascism led to the Holocaust. They argued that this was because of the still-present aspects of traditional pre-Enlightenment Europe which would present people with a false consciousness which caused them to allow themselves to be oppressed. Philosophers of this school made the absurd analysis that the entire history of Europe was be a straight line. This line runs from the beginning with the stories of Odysseus to the gas chambers at Auschwitz. The aim of the Frankfurt School was therefore to analyse these - in their view, erroneous - elements of culture and then systematically to demolish them.The Frankfurt School analysed the institutions of power in society which ensured that ‘the worker’ was manipulated. They called the idea that the workers had been made to believe things by the capitalist elites ‘false consciousness’. This idea was elaborated by the Italian Marxist, Antonio Gramsci,.According to Gramsci, capitalist elites not only dominated the economy alone but also owned the culture. This propagated culture became dominant because elites used their cultural institutions to spread these patterns of thought over the populations of countries. These cultural institutions could include education, the media, Hollywood and the rest of the structures that hold a society together, such as the judiciary and the illusion of freedom of choice within parliaments.The ideas of the Frankfurt School were soon picked up by the already existing cultural institutions. This led to the emergence of the cultural revolution of the 1970s. Young people were pitted against the generations before them through universities and pop culture. According to the famous ‘hippie generation’, anything and everything had to be possible, because the freedom of the individual to set himself against traditional dangerous structures had to be unlimited.The young people of the ‘hippie generation’ of the time who were imbibed with these ideas, then entered society armed with them and took up positions of power. This period is known as ‘the march through the institutions’.At the time, institutions were already highly liberalised. Cultural Marxist thinking fitted well with already existing liberal thought. The individual could best flourish when he managed to pry himself loose from the chains of the old world. As a result, this cultural revolution went very easily.At the same time, capitalist domination from the United States continued unabated. Besides the synthesis which emerged from liberalism, on the hand, and Marxist cultural thinking, on the other, a synthesis also emerged within economic thinking. This is how the welfare state came into being in Europe. From this point on, in the Netherlands, but also in the other Western countries, only a very marginal change of power could take place within parliaments. The struggle took place only between the branches of the ideologies of Marxism and liberalism (the socialist and liberal democratic parties) while the larger frameworks remained unchanged. These larger frameworks were, on the economic level, based on increasingly globalised consumerism and, on the socio-cultural level, on the synthesis between liberal and Marxist thinking. From then on, we can speak of a progressive liberal hegemony in the West. This is how we have arrived at the current situation.The West TodayCultural Marxism has caused the West to suffer definitively from an autoimmune disease. In today's culture, all attempts to re-root people are decried as wrong. At the same time, the last vestiges we have left from our traditional core are under full attack (see the current gender debate). The current emergent culture says that the individual should not be held back by the gender categories which were so normal before. According to cultural Marxism, the gender division is just a social construct which is part of the oppressive false consciousness of the worker. However, this is not true. Whereas it is quite possible to say that, on an individual level, you can have some masculine women and feminine men, there is a fixed core behind the concept of gender - a fixed core which reflects the eternal, the reproductive function of human beings, the categories that are carried from our collective subconscious already with us from conception. These are categories which, whatever what we as humans think of this, will always remain. They are categories which have an important function in a functioning society.As Herbert Marcuse of the Frankfurt School described, minority groups are a tool to bring about norm blurring. This is what is happening now. The power institutions of cultural Marxism use minority groups to break down the self-evidences of majorities. This effectively cuts the roots from under society.The Enlightenment revolt (in present times in the form of cultural Marxism/progressive-liberalism) against creation, nature and eternity is the main problem of humanity today. We must ask ourselves whether we have gone too far in our drive to dominate nature. The past shows what this Utopian thinking leads to. Both other Enlightenment philosophies (Marxism in the Soviet Union and fascism in National Socialist Germany) led to the greatest massacres in history.Man in our modern age thinks he can play God.&nbsp; But man is not God. It is the classic story of the tower of Babel. There too, mankind tried to reach heaven from earth and was mercilessly punished for not knowing his place in the hierarchy of things. Perhaps, then, it is time to start seeing the Enlightenment in a different context. Above all, the Enlightenment brought us the normalisation of capital sins. It cannot be denied that sins (pride, greed, lust, gluttony, revenge and laziness) have become our current norms and values. Family structures have completely collapsed, the street scene has completely changed and there are hardly any differences between Amsterdam, Paris or Washington anymore.Obviously, we have improved materially but this materiality has also made us close our eyes to what is spiritually higher. It was also Satan who thought he knew better than God. Satan's revolution towards God is beginning to look more and more like modern man's revolution towards nature. So was the flame of Enlightenment given to us by Lucifer after all? Is this drive to achieve paradise on earth not part of this destruction agenda we have been warned about so many times in history? Has not the material gain of the past hundreds of years come at the expense of our spirit? We have never reached such high levels of prosperity in our current society, but at the same time, never were so many people on antidepressants. So does matter actually make us happy?Under the guise of ‘liberation’, we have emancipated ourselves away from our affluence. What is the end of this thinking? That through transhumanism humans will emancipate themselves away from being human? That humanity will voluntarily abolish itself? That would be (if we remain in Christian terminology for a while) Satan's ultimate revolt. &nbsp;

politie_voert_charge_uit_op_dam_tegen_demonstranten_6577fdbde6.webp

large_politie_voert_charge_uit_op_dam_tegen_demonstranten_6577fdbde6.webp

medium_politie_voert_charge_uit_op_dam_tegen_demonstranten_6577fdbde6.webp

small_politie_voert_charge_uit_op_dam_tegen_demonstranten_6577fdbde6.webp

thumbnail_politie_voert_charge_uit_op_dam_tegen_demonstranten_6577fdbde6.webp

Norms and Values? Give me a Break!

Even the "far right" was asleep at the switch.The first-round result in Romania’s presidential election has shocked the European political class.&nbsp; Calin Georgescu, a candidate from the “extreme right,” who was ignored in pre-election news broadcasts or polls, just won first place with 23% of the vote.&nbsp;&nbsp;The candidate favored by the media (and pollsters), current Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu, came in third with 19% rather than the predicted 26%.&nbsp; In the second round, Georgescu will compete with another media favorite, Elena Lasconi, variously described as “liberal” and “center-right” (ideological labels are flexible in Romania) and an “ardent backer of Romania's membership in NATO and the EU, as well as a vocal supporter of Ukraine” (in the description of Radio Free Europe).Romania has long been known as a traditionalist and Christian country, like most of East-Central Europe.&nbsp; Governments in Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia reflect their populations’ preferences, but many assume that Romanians are too passive and apathetic about politics to challenge the Western-dominated liberal elites in the government, media, universities, think tanks – and polling firms.&nbsp; It turns out that our image of Romanian passivity reflects the preferences of those elites themselves.The image is reinforced by incumbent President Klaus Iohannis, an obedient servant of NATO and the European Union who reliably supports the Ukrainian government according to instructions but who also avoids a profile on the war or much of anything else.&nbsp; Epitomizing today’s European politicians-on-the-make, who disdain their own people as they chase after European sinecures, he demeaned himself in the eyes of many Romanians earlier this year by openly – and unsuccessfully – angling for the post of NATO Secretary General.&nbsp; In this election, the candidate from Iohannis’ National Liberal Party (PNL) scored below 9%.Even the party usually dismissed as “extreme right” by the media, the Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), was caught off-guard.&nbsp; The big unknown had been whether AUR would qualify for the second round against Ciolacu.&nbsp; In the event, neither qualified.&nbsp; Led by George Simion, AUR espouses a nationalism advocating reunification with the Romanian-speaking (but partially Russified) Republic of Moldova, an agenda that neither country wants and that serious analysts understand is both unlikely and undesirable.&nbsp;&nbsp;AUR also distances itself from the dissenting politics of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, reflecting long-standing friction over the Hungarian-speaking minority in Transylvania.&nbsp; Georgescu, by contrast, expresses admiration for Hungary.&nbsp; He invokes peculiar new-age rhetoric and seems to have built his career pushing fashionable trends like “sustainable development” at the United Nations and similar places, but his “nationalism” hardly seems xenophobic or belligerent.Contrary to the media narrative, Georgescu did not “emerge from nowhere”.&nbsp; (He held prominent positions in AUR.)&nbsp; He was quite deliberately ignored by the media and polling firms.&nbsp; As recently as October, pollster Inscop listed him under "other" with less than 0.4% support (as reported in Reuters).&nbsp; Earlier this month, it ranked him 6th with 5.4%.His following was apparently built entirely through TikTok, at almost no cost, and it is overwhelmingly young.&nbsp; One “takeaway” from this election is therefore that the mainstream media’s monopoly of information still works in places like Romania.&nbsp; Informed and connected Romanians – including some who sympathize with Georgescu’s views – have either never heard of him or paid no attention.&nbsp; On the other hand, the shift to social media for political information among the young has gone further than most of us realized.Equally striking is that Georgescu polled a huge 43% among Romania’s important diaspora.&nbsp; The “mainstream” candidates competed fiercely for the diaspora vote, because it is large, young, affluent, educated, and informed politically.&nbsp; Their mistake was to assume that it is also liberal-left.The last time the diaspora mobilized for a political cause was a few years ago, when Norway’s feminist child-protection gendarmerie seized the children of a Romanian couple for the “abuse” of raising them as Christians.&nbsp; All five children were put up for adoption in separate homes.&nbsp; Romanians amassed such determined protests at Norwegian embassies all over the world that they succeeded in getting all the children returned to their parents.Significantly, Romania does not really have a left.&nbsp; The Socialist PSD, who succeeded the former regime’s Communists and have dominated Romanian politics since that regime collapsed, are socially moderate and in some regions even the favorite among traditionalists.&nbsp; But the PSD/PNL duopoly will certainly close ranks in an effort to exclude Georgescu from office, much as the center-left did in France with Marine Le Pen. (Romania’s political culture, like its electoral system, is strongly influenced by France.)&nbsp; Whether they succeed will depend in part on the parliamentary elections on Sunday.But AUR’s failure makes clear a larger “takeaway”:&nbsp; This election was foremost about the war in Ukraine (plus some Euroscepticism).&nbsp; Though identified with Germany’s AfD, AUR has refrained from vocal criticism of the war.&nbsp; One high party official told me early on that AUR fears being identified as “pro-Russian”.&nbsp;&nbsp;This fear in fact led them to expel Georgescu when he became too outspoken.&nbsp; He has called for ending aid to Ukraine’s government, and he expresses doubts about NATO’s reliability to defend its member states.&nbsp; He said that the election result shows that Romanians had “cried out for peace”.The runoff in two weeks will be a clear referendum on the war, with the two candidates’ positions at polar opposites.&nbsp; The result could be pivotal, because of Romania’s strategic importance and because Romania’s president has important powers in foreign and security policy, as well as judicial appointments.Georgescu’s appearance on the political scene comes as hostility between Russia and the West reaches its&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42g5RDVm-fY">most dangerous point ever</a>, surpassing even the Cuban Missile Crisis.&nbsp; “We are closer today than we have ever been…to nuclear weapons being used,” respected&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zU1lOcgrI0">commentators</a> now believe.&nbsp; “We are literally at the threshold of a nuclear war.”&nbsp;&nbsp;Yet under the feckless Iohannis and the diffident AUR, Romania has been conspicuously both silent and ignored in discussions about a horrendous war so close that drone debris regularly falls on Romanian soil, and Russia has declared that NATO bases supplying the war from Romania are fair game for Russian attack.Georgescu’s election and diminished Romanian support would further strain the Biden administration’s efforts to prolong the war (and even escalate it) past Trump’s inauguration and lock his presidency into open-ended military commitments.Romania may finally be finding its voice, and it could even be decisive. Stephen Baskerville is Professor of Politics at Collegium Intermarium in Warsaw and author of<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Who-Lost-America-United-Communist-ebook/dp/B0D7SXKYS8/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;qid=&amp;sr=">&nbsp;Who Lost America? Why the United States Went "Communist” — and What to Do about It</a> (2024).&nbsp; He lives in Romania.&nbsp; The author wishes to thank Bogdan Stanciu for assistance in preparing this article.

large_Romania.png

medium_Romania.png

small_Romania.png

thumbnail_Romania.png

Romanians Are Not So Passive as We Thought

The recent attacks against Israeli football supporters in Amsterdam have rightly shocked the world. Whatever the provocations by the Maccabi fans, the fact is that the attacks were committed by local youths from immigrant families – the second or third generation young Arabs who are so prominent in the national crime register and who make people’s lives hell all over Europe. How can anyone not see that European states have imported into their cities populations who continue to identify with their parents’ or grandparents’ country of origin and who perpetrate acts of violence based on this identity? Politicians in Europe have been saying this for decades – Pim Fortuyn was shot dead for it over 20 years ago – and yet nothing is done to attack the problem at its root. Instead, immigration has continued at vertiginous levels and native Europeans live with the consequences every day. In a recent speech in parliament, Thierry Baudet predicted that crocodile tears will be shed because of the anti-Jewish nature of the recent attacks but that nothing will be done about it - except to ramp up police surveillance powers against local national dissidents like FVD.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4S6VZ68WXI">Watch Thierry’s speech here</a>&nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-qw.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXfbCHrZpyNaAN0K0hZ4mH4Tn9iG6Rt7L-5fTcZ_7ZVWLx_lNpwf_ewc0KN5Nmep7l6mOMzAMSqqhvGFJL9Mf509wFPoyGRMncHF6YoBYjtRZTs_p0M_R4uKs0HNnZOI1NIcDI6HJA?key=e8n8MCn9RD3UeOCwjsa0Lw3p">FVD International’s director, John Laughland, was attending a conference on BRICS-Europe in Sochi last week when a chasm opened up within the NATO alliance. Shortly after his boss lost the US presidential election, the German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, initiated a phone call with Vladimir Putin. This is the same Scholz who had remained meekly silent in February 2022 when Joe Biden, standing next to him in the White House, said out loud that the Americans would destroy the Nord Stream pipeline. Last week’s phone call is the first time the Russian and German leaders have spoken in two years.&nbsp; Scholz then also used a press conference in Brazil to re-state his opposition to facilitating German Taurus cruise missiles attacking Russia – exactly what the US, the UK and France decided to do a day or so later. No doubt Scholz’s new disobedience explains why the very pro-American FDP party collapsed his ‘traffic light’ coalition, forcing new elections in Germany next February. One thing is clear: NATO is now deeply divided over the Ukraine war.<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O__NmdZESE&amp;ab_channel=FVDInternational">Watch John’s interview here</a>&nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-qw.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXeDE_1oQBlcukB8Gk7vKjy__DbQqQW0q1AeoGgoS-8xp8WBK-nKs084Y-F3WAqXlMI3xTBenhkTAjojaHpkFjN5HlRAsTsW0HvJuz0XaOD1n-Cnx4X6QW4uhXoD4E2NFcZnXgQ2sw?key=e8n8MCn9RD3UeOCwjsa0Lw3p">We can all be happy that Trump won and that the ludicrous Kamala Harris lost but what will it really mean? Stephen Baskerville has long argued that the problems of the USA are structural and very difficult to change. Bureaucrats paid to solve a problem have every interest in seeing it remain unsolved – otherwise their jobs would disappear. Citizenship is not about casting a vote but instead about the period between elections – and in any case the Trump victory might prove ephemeral, as it was in 2016-2020. A professional political class cannot solve anything if it is itself the cause of problems. The destruction of the family and the Mafia-like use of lawfare will continue, whoever is in the White House. Until the Right understands the nature of the problem at its deepest level, the yellow man’s triumph will be nothing but a straw fire.<a href="https://fvdinternational.com/article/so-the-good-guys-won-and-the-bad-guys-lost">Read Stephen Baskerville’s article here</a>&nbsp;<img src="https://lh7-qw.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdmj1wMdB63GaklRw6aLPel3SQNrHJsu8N58n-tPVRsvTo3X107CbQkmPuXUCjLK3Fo5Nc6lO9M22XBDx4oZj32MjwNeLor34viT51IJcMg_mvsearq6ZS-ojP3V-6jQFDO0nzj?key=e8n8MCn9RD3UeOCwjsa0Lw3p">An early litmus test will be what Trump does about Roger Ver, the ‘Bitcoin Jesus’ currently being held in Spain on trumped-up tax charges dating back ten years. The US demand for extradition of this non-US citizen and libertarian campaigner is one of the most grotesque examples of lawfare in recent times – and there have unfortunately been many. We were delighted to have Aaron Day, Chhay Lin Lim and Tracy Thurman as our guests on The Forum &amp; Friends to tell us about Roger’s case.<a href="https://fvdinternational.com/article/roger-ver">Read FVD’s article about Roger Ver here</a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY8eiW9Jhu4&amp;ab_channel=FVDInternational">Watch The Forum &amp; Friends special here</a>

large_The Weekly Forum 21 november 2024.png

medium_The Weekly Forum 21 november 2024.png

small_The Weekly Forum 21 november 2024.png

thumbnail_The Weekly Forum 21 november 2024.png

The Weekly Forum - 21 November

Forum for Democracy International

Articles

Subscribe to our international newsletter

The Great Replacement is NOT a Theory! #FVD #Netherlands #Migration #OpenBorders #shorts #edit #fyp

The Forum &amp; Friends: The Fall of Syria with Vanessa Beeley and Mark Sleboda

People are NOT interchangeable! #FVD #Netherlands #Migration #OpenBorders #shorts #edit #fyp

Becoming a Minority in Our Own Country #FVD #Netherlands #Migration #OpenBorders #shorts #edit #fyp

Forum for Democracy FACING CHARGES for Campaign Videos? - #FVD #freespeech #netherlands #democracy

The Forum &amp; Friends: The War in Ukraine with Glenn Diesen and Rainer Rothfuss

CrossTalk | Transmigration with John Laughland #FVD #USA #Russia #Europe #Ukraine #War

The Forum and Friends: The Trump Administration with Daniel McAdams and Catherine Austin Fitts

&quot;WILL #BIDEN UNLEASH WORLD WAR III?!&quot; Ralf Dekker talks about the developments in #Ukraine #FVD #USA

The Forum &amp; Friends: #DeepState Lawfare &amp; The Strange Case Against &quot;Bitcoin Jesus&quot; #FreeRogerVer

Forum for Democracy

FVD is a anti-globalist political party in the Netherlands founded and led by Thierry Baudet. John Laughland (right) is director of FVD International.

Subscribe to our international newsletter