You are here

Who is in charge in Ukraine today?

We republish from an article which gives the non-Anglophone sourced version of what has been happening in the Ukraine. There are, according to Global Research 6 ultra-right members of a neo-nazi party in the current government, whose Acting Prime Minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, was welcomed by Obama on March 12, 2014. Hostility towards their treatment by Russians during the Second World War and the then perception of the German Nazis as a rescue force, underlies some of the anti-semitism and fascist sympathies of Ukraine today. We should not overlook, however, the real energy behind events in this regions, which is the battle between alignments with superpowers, Russia, US, EU, and China, for the difficult to access but tantilising oil and gas reserves in the Caspian Sea, and the power to decide who dominates the countries the pipelines go through and to what destinations future pipelines will go. (Editorial comment by Article follows.)

Demonstration of 15 000 nazis in Kiev, the 1st January 2014.

Article below berepublished from

[Photo illustration also from]

The dominant condescending and appeasing tone towards the new Ukrainian authorities in the West drastically contradicts to its democratic and humanitarian values, persistently promoted by them in the world. Any attentive unbiased observer of the situation in this post-Soviet state and the Western policies in the region cannot help but feel a sense of déjà vu when watching transatlantic public declarations in support of “the legitimate Ukrainian government”, brought to the power and still controlled by the radical ultranationalists representing a scarce minority of the population of Ukraine. Indeed, the raise of Hitler in Germany in the early 1930s was carried out using almost identical political technologies and social instruments as in today’s Ukraine. The careful study of the current developments and diplomatic maneuvers around Ukraine would shed a new light on the origins of the Nazi movement in Germany in the last century as well.


Ukrainian neo-Nazi organizations were the driving force behind the coup d’etat committed in Kiev in late February. The ultranationalist Pravy (Right) Sector, led by Dmitro Yarosh, is the most publicized of them. Yarosh is backed by a number of the neo-fascist paramilitary organizations that make up the “self-defense of Maidan” and sport neo-Nazi symbols (a modified swastika and Celtic cross). They pay homage to the legacy of the war-time Banderite Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists – Ukrainian Insurgent Army and the Galician division of the SS, blasphemously enduing them with “sacred” meaning.

The Svoboda (“Freedom”) Party is the political front for the Ukrainian neo-Nazi movement. It has been the beneficiary of almost half the political appointments made by the “provisional government” in Kiev, and its leader, Oleg Tyahnybok, is one of the three who rose to fame as the “leaders of the Euromaidan movement.” The party won more than 2.5 million votes in the last election (looking at Western Ukraine separately, a large percentage of the registered voters there are already part of this party’s electoral base). According to the party’s program, Tyahnybok’s followers plan to introduce a mandatory “Nationality” category in Ukrainian passports, in order to facilitate the identification of Muscovites and Jews, to extend the right to own firearms to everyone (except the mentally ill), and to insert a provision in the Constitution of Ukraine proclaiming that the current government is the rightful heir to the Ukrainian state that was established by the legal act of June 30, 1941, which stated,

“The new Ukrainian power will work closely with the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, which under the leadership of Adolf Hitler is creating a new order in Europe and assisting the Ukrainian nation to rid itself of its occupiers from Moscow…”

Another point in the Svoboda program is also worth of note – the determination to return Ukraine to the status of a nuclear power and to acquire a “tactical nuclear-missile arsenal.” Can you imagine an independent Ukraine with nuclear weapons and Dmitro Yarosh as its president?

Battle tactics

As the German Nazis did in the 1920s and 1930s, the Ukrainian neo-Nazis seized power in the wake of mass riots accompanied by killings. The insurgents characterized even the sluggish response by the legitimate authorities as the “suppression of freedom and terrorism at the hands of Communist Jews.” Attempts of civil resistance against the coup were labeled as “intrigues contrived by the agents of Moscow.” The putschist propaganda, taking advantage of “freedom of speech,” wailed to the whole world about the “suppression of peaceful protests”. And when these howls of protest were not enough, “mysterious snipers” began to assassinate people in downtown Kiev. This is exactly how Hitler and his supporters came to power in Germany. The new regime in Kiev is now idolizing anyone who was seizing administrative buildings with ashow of weapons, beating the political opponents, torturing official, law-enforcement officers and journalists in public. The junta in Kiev and its henchmen are attempting to use force to suppress any popular protests in the southeastern regions, as they tried to do in Donetsk (Eastern Ukraine) on March 13.

The Ukrainian fascists’ massive torchlight processions were borrowed directly from the Nazi playbook and include chanted slogans such as “Ukraine above all,”“Glory to the nation – death to its enemies,” and so on. The black and red Banderite flag that was raised before the Supreme Rada of Ukraine in Kiev is a direct allusion to the black and red flag of Nazi Germany.

The false pathos of a “national revolution” is being forcibly impressed upon the consciousness of the citizens of Ukraine, who have been mesmerized into zombie-like submission by the events on Independence Square. This charade culminated in Kiev in the early morning of Feb.22, 2014 – when the ink was still wet on the agreement to normalize the political crisis, an ambitious, loaded gambit that was “guaranteed” by the foreign ministers of Germany, France, and Poland, plus a representative of the European Union.


The cult of the “Heavenly Hundred” of Independence Square is a direct borrowing from the cult of the “Martyrs’ Movement” in Nazi Germany, although not even Hitler and his cronies during the Beer Hall Putsch hired snipers to shoot at their own. The establishment of absolute control over the media, the repression of political opponents, and the creation of a nationalist psychosis in the country is now being carried out by a regime of Ukrainian nationalsts under the slogan “Do Not Betray the Heavenly Hundred!” The neo-Nazi propagandists declare any departure from the totalitarian methods used to battle dissenters to be a betrayal of the “Martyrs’ Movement.”

The dream of constructing a state that would unify the German nation always held center stage in the mythology of Nazism. And eradicating the Russian language from all realms of life is a high priority for the new regime. The infamous desire for integration into Europe is being cast as a sacred act in the mythology of the new regime, as though it represented an escape to Europe from the “barbaric Asian” hordes from Moscow. There is a deadly irony in the fact that the very word “maidan” is of Asian origin and entered the Ukrainian language as a vestige of the influence left on the culture of Rus’ Minor by the Tartar-Mongol hordes.

Religious policy

The ultranationalist position of the schismatic “Patriarchate of Kiev” and the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic (Uniate) Church has become the religious basis of the supporters of Independence Square and the Ukrainian insurgents who have seized power. But that Uniate Church has a loaded Banderite-Nazi past. The religious and ideological role of the “Patriarchate of Kiev” in the new regime’s frame of referenceis similar to the position that was allocated to Ludwig Müller’s German Evangelical Church by the leaders of the Third Reich. And just as the Nazis set out to create a unified, national Lutheran Church of the Reich, today’s Ukrainian Nazis promote a program that includes the demand for a unified, national “local” Ukrainian church.

Neo-Nazi “laws”

The first deeply symbolic act of the new Ukrainian regime was to abolish the law on regional languages, which to some degree guaranteed the basic rights of the ethnically Russian and Russian-speaking majority of Ukraine’s population at the local level. However, Oleksandr Turchynov, the so-called “president of Ukraine” was encouraged not to sign this act. A short break was seen as advantageous for the regime in its fight against the Russians. The new law on languages is now being drafted by the commission chaired by the Russophobe and neo-Nazi Volodymyr Yavorivsky, with the help of the lunatic Iryna Farion. According to one of the committee members, the authors of the new “law” were eager to introduce a “language police” within the country, but, facing European grudge, decided to temporarily delete any reference to the Russian language from the text. (Russian is the primary language spoken in Ukraine.)

The first tentative steps taken by the clique in Kiev have also included a ban on the broadcasting of Russian TV channels and the tacit approval of the destruction of monuments, which the Ukrainian fascists believe are a reminder of the fact that Ukraine and Russia are one. The leader of the Svoboda Party, which has a broad presence in the “provisional government,” has already announced the need to ban public communication in Russian and has offered to make de-Russification one of the nation’s goals, equating it with decriminalization. All of which is the insurgents’ first attempt to test drive their own Ukrainian version of Nazi Germany’s sinister Nuremberg Laws.

The administration of violence and oppression

On March 13, 2014, Ukraine’s national legislative body Supreme Rada (currently unconstitutional), still at the gunpoint of “self-defense of Maidan,” adopted a resolution on the creation of a “National Guard” of 60,000 stormtroopers, whose jobs will include the protection of “public order” (modeled on the German “new order” over its occupied territories) and the suppression of “disturbances” (popular protests) during a state of emergency, as well as assistance to defend the borders (from Russia, naturally), and participation in military operations in the event of war. The“self-defense of Maidan” and Right Sector will make up the backbone of these armed forces.

Just like the German stormtroopers, these battalion, mostly originated from L’vov (Western Ukraine) will be retaliatory and frontline units – analogous to the Waffen SS. In their era, the Nazis quickly got rid of the Wehrmacht generals who dared to oppose the creation and arming of an“Army of the Party.” Using the same game plan, acting “prime minister” Arseny Yatsenyuk did not hesitate to fire three Ukrainian deputy ministers of defense who dared to oppose the lunatic plan to arm Right Sector.

The Ministry of Internal Affairs, Ukrainian Security Service, and prosecutor’s office will soon no longer exist in Ukraine. They have been assigned a single, primary goal – to identify skeptics and dissenters and punish them. Anonymous hotlines are being advertised everywhere, urging vigilant citizens to “snitch” about any “separatists” they may know, telephones are being tapped, email is being hacked, and intimidation with the threat of criminal prosecution and a summons to the Ukrainian Security Service is evident. Undercover agents do not bother to conceal their actions when photographing anyone who shows up for anti-fascist protests. A lustration committee has been created to rid the state bureaucracy of “unreliable elements.” After a blanket amnesty for all the “heroes of Maidan,” up to and including murderers, a wave of new criminal cases were opened against “separatists,”“federalists,” and those who took part in the “seizure” of administrative buildings in the Southeast, etc. A system of unlimited surveillance and persecution is being established at breakneck speed in Ukraine. This system, which is now consolidating all the punitive government agencies, is a Ukrainian version of the German Gestapo.

Those who disagree with the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine are being so massively persecuted that the country could soon witness another Kristallnacht like the one orchestrated by Nazi stormtroopers in November 1938 throughout Germany.

Should the Russians sit around and wait for this? Currently those who have been summoned for questioning and then thrown into the torture chambers run by the Ukrainian Security Service number in the dozens. Later, there will be hundreds, thousands…

Yet there is no sign that the accomplices of Kievan neo-Nazis sitting in Washington and Brussels regret about their failed strategy of ousting Russia from the Ukrainian affairs. They baselessly believe that the neo-Nazi beast they fed in Ukraine is still leashed…

“Who is in charge of Ukraine today?”, Oriental Review, Voltaire Network, 20 March 2014,

Voltaire Network

Voltaire, international edition

Article licensed under Creative Commons

The articles on Voltaire Network may be freely reproduced provided the source is cited, their integrity is respected and they are not used for commercial purposes (license CC BY-NC-ND).

Image icon nazi-march-Ukraine.jpg20.88 KB
Image icon nazi-march-Ukraine-tiny.jpg5.89 KB


The problem is, that Ukrainians want to detach from Russia and move Westwards, but they are also aware that Europe is committing suicide, especially Western Europe. They don't want that either. So what to do?

It's easy to rag out nationalist parties, and just make accusations of it being Nazism V2.0, but one must realise why these parties arise. Its NOT out of 'bigotry' or 'hatred', but do to real problems which only they address.

People forget that the NSDAP addressed real, critical problems the Germans were facing. Being economically destitute, national humiliation, threat of Communist take over. At this time, there was a real fear in Europe that the Communist revolution would enslave them (Italy had the same fear, hence why the fascists were pushed into power there).

Fast forward a few generations, and Europe is facing another existential crisis, the likes of which occur once every few hundred years, if that. Centrist, moderate powers, and the intellectuals who support them essentially deny this, or try to redefine the problem as a non problem. Effort is put, not into fixing the problem, but trying to reengineer people so they don't consider it a problem. This can work, to a limited degree, but will eventually unravel, as it is now, and as it will here too.

Dennis.K wrote:

... there was a real fear in Europe that the Communist revolution would enslave them ...

Surely you must be aware that Nazi Germany started a World War in which 60 million people died, including the six million Jewish victims of their holocaust?

No other creed in human history even approaches the vileness and criminality of the German Nazi Party, certainly not the 'communists', even if Josef Stalin and his henchmen are to be included in their ranks. However, given that that Stalin murdered nearly all the leaders of the 1917 communist revolution, labeling Stalin and his ilk 'communist' is a gross libel against communists including his communist victims.

Wikipedia gives estimates of the count of those killed in Stalin's Great Purges as between 681,692 and 1,704,230. Other communist victims of Stalin include the higher ranks of Red Army officer corps, of whom three quarters were murdered according to Wikipedia. This is the main reason, why the Soviet Union paid such a terrible cost in the Second World War of between 20 million and 30 million lives lost. Had the officer corps not been so disastrously reduced by Stalin, Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941 would have quickly come to grief.

Whilst the Red Army Officers played no role in the internal struggles of the Bolshevik Party in the 1920s and 1930s, Stalin had good reason to fear that they remained loyal to the old Bolshevik leaders including Leon Trotsky, the founder of the Red Army.

The Communist Party of Germany (KPD) was the main bulwark against the Nazis and their Freikorps predecessors in the inter-war years. One major social upheaval in which the KPD successfully fought the Nazis/Freikorps is their defeat of Kapp Putsch of 1920.

However, in 1933, Stalin prevented the KPD from uniting with the German Social Democratic Party (SPD – the German equivalent of the Australian Labor Party) to resist the Nazi rise to power. For all its faults and past betrayals by their leaders, the SPD had as much to fear from the Nazis as the communists and would have been the communists' natural allies after 1932.

Instead of fighting the Nazis, the KPD, under orders from Stalin, refused to act against the Nazis, and on occasions, even supported the Nazis against the SPD. Consequently Hitler was needlessly allowed able to seize power in 1933 without any effective grass-roots opposition.

Had the KPD prevented Hitler's rise to power in 1933 as it could so easily have done, and presumably formed government in collaboration with the German Social Democratic Party (SPD), humanity would have been spared the the ensuing catastrophe of the Second World War. Does Dennis.K, with the hindsight of history, truly not see that outcome as preferable to what happened?

Whilst Admin gives a very good history of what happened with the communists in Russia and in Germany, I get the impression that he thinks that Dennis K meant to imply that the Nazi party was a good thing. Reading Dennis K's contribution, I cannot see that. He only seems to be saying that Germans were afraid of the Communists and that the Nazis' proposed solutions to some problems, like unemployment. He is not saying that the Nazis were good; far from it; he then goes on to imply that we are heading the same way, i.e. that Australia and other places are in danger of succumbing to fascism because they are prevented from exercising less extreme 'solutions' - such as democratic voting on immigration numbers, protection for local workers' conditions and security in employment, and secure and affordable housing for locals - i.e. civil rights.

Yesterday I was discussing with another writer on this forum how the recent repeal of an aspect of the racial discrimination act in conjunction with remarks in parliament that Australians have the right to be bigots, prepares the way for rough attitudes towards different communities within our now very multi-ethno-racial society of which a large portion are new immigrants, including some much wealthier than locally born.

It seemed to us that racial vilification laws had been used to frighten Australian-born and new and old immigrants, from criticising high immigration because 'racism' had been progressively more loosely defined, if not at law, in common understanding. Criticism of high immigration was often popularly conflated, in the press and by politicians, with racism. This made Australians, whether born here or elsewhere, unsure of what they could say and assisted pro-big population newspapers, the ABC and SBS, not to report on good reasons for local objections to population growth.

In this way a social environment was achieved where successive governments, notably the Rudd, Howard and Gillard governments, and state governments which included the Kennett, Bracks, Brumby, Baillieu and Napthine governments in Victoria, and premiers from either side of government in all other states, could massively ramp up immigration and massively dismantle worker protection and housing affordability for locals.

Now that high immigration is almost entrenched in our society, despite any sensible person's wishes, the Federal government believes that it has something to gain by what amounts to promoting individuals' rights to insult each other on the basis of race. This prepares us for a crude, rough society where the government may feel able openly to support and employ a rough group of nationalistic people to police and head-kick the rest of Australians.

A situation has been created where there are enough new immigrants of many different sects and origins present in an Australia with declining quality of life and standard of living (housing, work, space, ammenities) for the social environment to be full of friction and stress.

What did Labor and Liberal and Green power in the parliament mean to do when they all worked together to create this situation? Look beyond the political brand names to the corporate motives - for cheap labour in an era where there is declining fossil fuel availability, notably petroleum. There is also pressure on water and land supply and the costs of mounting and running a business are heavily against small to medium enterprises. Revolts are an obvious outcome of overcrowding, unemployment, bankruptcy and loss of self-government. How will having a fascist police composed of young bullies (like the de facto one that seems available from the Socialist Alliance) help the corporate case in a political system where corporations and government are much the same thing?

Even though the racial vilification laws remain in force where a person is actually physically threatened on grounds of their race, the initial phase where people begin with insults and foment resentment against certain groups, has been facilitated now by the Abbott Liberal government in a social environment full of multicultural vulnerabilities.

Whilst I agree on the importance of free speech, this is how it looks as if it may pan out in a society that has recently been stripped of decent protections for housing and employment and where the institutions guaranteeing some civil rights have mostly been destroyed. We should have had free speech and we need free speech to speak up for democracy, but we may be heading towards a situation where only loud, scary people dare to speak out.

While violence and racial vilification can't be allowed or justified, it's a bit harsh of migrants who complain about how "racist" Australia is, when they know when they come here they will be part of an ethnic group, and stand out culturally and physically.

Considering that where most of our migrants come from now, China and India, don't have mass immigration, they are in the lofty privileged position of not having experienced a continual flow of foreigners taking jobs, and housing - yet they expect to have no wave of impact?

Australians can't migrate overseas, without dual residency, and usually there are strict limitations to permanent visas, such as only for former residents or children and families. It's assumed that Australia is open international territory, and foreigners can simply slip in and be embraced joyfully, and without any cultural/national values, and with an open patriotic system!

Racism and xenophobia are inevitable for all national and territorial groups, and is part of national identity and patriotic fervour. We have cashed up Asians buying property that's unaffordable for most Australian, and privatisation means foreign ownership of public services. Jobs are being opened up for foreign visa holders, and there is little democratic options to change government decisions that are not in our interests.

Considering that Australia has years of Multiculturalism, and decades of high rates of net overseas migration, we are probably the most tolerant, accepting and non-racist nation in the world!

In economics, there is an ideal of 'revealed preference', where what someone actually chooses is a better indicator of market desire than what they say, or how they respond to questions. So analysing choice provides better empirical means to determing peoples choices and thoughts than surveys.

In this case, you can analyse someone true opinion of diversity, Western nations or whatever, more accurately by studying movement of people than through surveys. So the racism in Australia is proved not to be a major issue, due to revealed preference that migrants make, that is, to move here. The desire for 'diverse' neighbourhoods is revealed by the choice that Australians make to move towards, or away from them.

I think this gives a better indicate of future political movement than surveys, or what people say. And in this case, examining movement and choice, one can understand how the far right can arise despite appearances of tolerance.

Thanks Sheila, thats pretty much it. People usually tend to conflate statement of fact with endorsement of fact. So when a scientist says Humans evolved from Apes, it is interpreted by some as being 'endorsement' of the view that people are just animals, so the Creationist says this has to be wrong. The secular humanist who hears someone talk of cultural differences ascribes this observance as being an endorsement of 'racial supremacy', so the secular humanist says it has to be wrong and hes a bigot. This is why people against racism say "I don't see race", or why a business might push for people to believe "nothing is impossible" and criticise those who point to how something is technically NOT possible. Property spruikers also think this way, where someone who sees an unsustainable bubble is criticised as wanting to undermine the market. What they observe, is somehow an indication of what they want, as if reality is dictated by what one says, and not some independant, immutable fact.

This got Galileo into trouble too. We like to think we are modern, but in reality, our society today is not all that different from the oppresive religious society Galileo had to content with. Just replace Catholic Church with Political Correctness. Replace "Heretic" with "Racist". The similarites aren't coincidence. It IS the same thing occuring again. "Hate Speech" laws are just a rehash of blasphemy laws. Todays recording of every 'hate speech' is just a witch hunt.

Besides, the worst form of bigotry I see, is the one where people today think their morality, their tolerance and ideals are somehow much better than those in the past. That people of the past were ignorant, stupid, believed in nonsense and had 'evil' ideals, that we are finally overcoming because we are enlightened. Now THATS bigotry!

Dennis K., wrote, "Besides, the worst form of bigotry I see, is the one where people today think their morality, their tolerance and ideals are somehow much better than those in the past. That people of the past were ignorant, stupid, believed in nonsense and had 'evil' ideals, that we are finally overcoming because we are enlightened. Now THATS bigotry!"

I agree. This prejudice against the past prevents us from learning from history. The ideology of 'progress' is how we are kept ignorant, constantly reinventing the wheel and alienated from our ancestors.

"Progress and the nature of time: In the ideology of progress, time is relative only to human aspirations. Einstein notwithstanding, time is goal directed. According to this perspective, we humans face forward and march onward to perfection, every day getting better and better, continuously improving. We are taught to regard the past and old people with contempt because the further away from now, the further away from the future you are, the closer to imperfection, to ignorance, to naivety, to 'inefficiency', to 'primitiveness' or an earlier stage of 'development'."

"The Future of magic:
The people who invent and publish explanations about Progress which motivate 'leaders' to drive the rest of us ever further down the one-way road of good intentions have forgotten - if they ever knew - that our industrial revolution relied on coal and oil. If you analyse the logic behind the myths of Progress and economic growth, it seems that most people actually believe that the industrial revolution was entirely a product of human ingenuity. We can infer this because the same people object to concerns about finite resources by saying that human ingenuity will always find a way. This is tantamount to saying that the technology and vast wealth of the industrial revolution were due to magic. It totally disregards the role of fossil fuel reserves, which formed completely independently of human ingenuity but without which 'modern society' could not exist. It is as if religious myths of humans reaching perfection and lightness of being have been confused with earthly reality and that humans have implicitly assumed that they are becoming celestial beings with magic powers due to their unique qualities as a smart or divine species. For the unscientific, modern civilisation must be like an Indian rope trick, or reliant on moral and spiritual bootstraps. Trains, rockets, cars, factories, electric lights are powered by magic. Willing cows, crops, and plastic trees fill the supermarket shelves with milk in cartons, bags of flour, and implements and containers made of plastic. Petroleum mysteriously replenishes petrol pumps on demand. The shops are full of sparkling trinkets like Aladdin's caves. You can pick up a plastic implement and magically talk to someone thousands of kilometers away whom you have never seen. You can press a switch and a virtual world of little laughing, talking, singing, important people appears on a glass screen. You can make all these things happen at once on your computer and on a hand-held device. The quality, quantity and rate of delivery of the magic goodies – particularly the electronic ones from the industrializing countries - seems to be intensifying, but per capita oil has apparently been on slightly variable annual plateau since 1979, if we are to believe the published data. Closer examination reveals that the definition of ‘oil’ has changed and that our fuel sources are increasingly leveraged and socially rationed by price. If we do not personally feel the impact of cheap petroleum energy decline per capita, it is probably because we are in a socially buffered class."

Source: Sheila Newman, Demography, Territory, Law: The Rules of Animal and Human Populations, Countershock Press, 2013, p.42.

Back then, Communism was in power, but Nazism wasn't, yet. The Italian in the 1920's or the German in 1930 didn't know what Fascism/Nazism had in store, but they had seen Communism. People can only go by what they've seen, and if they've seen one evil in action, but not the other in action, they choose the latter evil to fight the former. You must remember, they had seen Socialist purges and persecution of people and obviously didn't want it, at least, those who thought they would be its victims. The Fascists in Italy were pushed into power, Mussolini almost missed the march on Rome as he wasn't ready! There were of course, Communists in these countries, but they lost out, in Germany, democratically. You must also remember that Ukrainians remember the Holodomor, where millions died due to that system in the early 30's. This system racked up a death toll first. That's important. They didn't have the hindsight we have. In Germany, the Weimar republic was ill equipped to deal with its problems and with Communism.

My point? Not that we need the far right, but that the lurch that way is inevitable unless the rest of the political sphere tackles their issues. Parties like the BNP, Golden Dawn, Front National exist because their respective nations are undergoing unprecedented demographic and social change. The English people are projected to become a minority. It is staggering to think that people are so delusional, that they honestly believe that somehow, this can happen without dissent or a fight. Of course, law enforcement suppresses dissent in England, but the more things progress, the more willing they'll be to push back. Same in Greece, PC laws failed, so now they use force. They'll lose that battle too and it's all over. There is only so long you can tell people not to talk about it, or pretend it's not a problem, or pretend its all about 'boat people'.

This is why sites like this are important. addresses issues many others refuse to touch and doesn't force a "Politically Correct" interpretation. If mainstream politics honestly tackled social cohesion, demographic change, national integrity, then they could avoid having political amateurs take them up.