The right-wing surge across Europe has made its way to Estonia.
The latest results from the Estonian general election show that the Reform Party came out on top with 28.8 percent of the vote. The Reform Party is known for its platform of lower taxes and limited government and has held control of the Prime Minster position from 2005 to 2016.
The current Prime Minister Juri Ratas’ Center Party came in second place with 23.1 percent of vote.
There was also good news for supporters of populism. The anti-mass migration Conservative People’s Party of Estonia (EKRE) attained 17.8 percent of the vote.
The Reform and Center parties, the two political powerhouses in Estonia since the country gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, came together to prevent EKRE from gaining electoral traction.
EKRE was able to achieve 8.1 percent of the vote and gained seven Riigikogu (parliament) seats in the 2015 elections. With 18 percent of the vote, the EKRE now has 19 seats in the Estonian parliament.
Martin Helme, the son of EKRE party leader Mart Helme, said that EKRE’s gains are part of a larger trend sweeping across Europe:
“I think Estonia is no different than almost all other countries in Europe, where there’s a serious public demand for political parties who will stand up against the globalist agenda and the ever-increasing movement of power from (EU) member states to Brussels.”
Indeed, Helme is on to something.
One needn’t look any further at France, Sweden, and the UK to see what happens when you mix a bloated welfare state with mass migration. It’s a social calamity waiting to happen.
Estonia has been one of the world leaders in economic freedom, currently ranked in 15th place according to the Heritage’s 2019 Index of Economic Freedom, since it separated from the Soviet Union. Under the tutelage of visionary leaders like Mart Laar, Estonia has embraced markets and rejected central planning.
It’s good to see that Estonia is taking a rational approach to immigration as well. Eastern Europe and the Baltic states seem to be the only bastions of reason left in the EU.
Bypass Tech Censorship!
Facebook, Twitter and Google are actively restricting conservative content through biased algorithms. Silicon Valley doesn't want you to read our articles. Bypass the censorship, sign up for our newsletter now!
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
Did Bernie Sanders Just Endorse a Neocon Regime Change Foreign Policy?
Is Bernie Sanders the anti-war candidate that many non-interventionists are making him out to be?
Journalists Jacob Crosse and Barry Grey presented some interesting observations about Sanders’ foreign policy views.
Sanders criticized the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Suleimani in January and also stressed his opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
During the Iowa presidential debate, Sanders loudly boasted, “I not only voted against that war, I helped lead the effort against that war.”
However, Sanders changed his tune when chatting with the New York Times.
The answers the Sanders campaign gave the Times showed its flexibility when it comes to foreign policy.
In other words, the Sanders campaign signaled to the military and intelligence apparatus that Sanders won’t present a threat to their interests and may actually carry out their interventionist agenda.
One question in the survey that the Times sent the Sanders campaign stuck out above the rest.
The third survey question asked, “Would you consider military force to pre-empt an Iranian or North Korean nuclear or missile test?”
The Sanders campaign responded, “Yes.”
Based on this response, Sanders’ is signaling that he’s willing to continue Bush-era policies of “preemptive war.”
Like Obama, Sanders’ opposition to the Iraq War was a matter of politics rather than a principled opposition to regime change wars.
His campaign was also asked, “Would you consider military force for a humanitarian intervention?”
Sanders responded, “Yes.”
Some of the wars that the U.S. carried out in the name of “human rights” have been the Bosnian war and the bombing of Serbia in the 1990s along with the aerial campaign against Libya in 2011 and the Civil War launched in Syria.
All in all, Sanders’ pro-peace/non-interventionist image is at best window dressing.
Under a Sanders presidency, the interventionist status quo will likely stay in place.
News3 days ago
Bernie Sanders 2020 ‘Win’ in NH Netted a LOSS OF 80,000 VOTES from 2016
News3 days ago
Virginia State Police are Silent About Door-to-Door Enforcement of Suppressor Ban
Violent Left2 days ago
New Mexico Bureaucrat Arrested for Vandalizing State GOP Headquarters
Tech3 days ago
More Censorship: Controversial Right-Wing YouTuber Nick Fuentes is Booted From Platform, Even Ben Shapiro Says It’s Too Far
Violent Left3 days ago
New Hampshire Thug Arrested After Assaulting ‘MAGA’ Hat-Wearing 15-Year Old at Polling Site
Deep State3 days ago
Bill Barr Pushes Back Against Trump, Criticizes President’s Comments on Stone, Drops Case Against McCabe
Violent Left3 days ago
Wife of ‘Proud Boys’ Member Imprisoned for Self-Defense Pleads for Help for Their Three Children
News2 days ago
MS-13 Thug Gets Life Sentence in Virginia for Rape and Abduction
Culture2 days ago
How Vulture Capitalists Use Their Ill-Gotten Gains to Push Transgenderism Onto Children
The Swamp2 days ago
SWAMP: FBI Press Officer Accepted Baseball Tickets From CNN Reporter
News3 days ago
GUILTY: Creepy Porn Lawyer Michael Avenatti Convicted in Extortion Trial
Politics3 days ago
MIT Warns That Voting App Used in Several States is Vulnerable for Hackers to ‘Alter, Stop or Expose’ Votes