It is hard, then, on this basis, to support ruminations about the end of capitalism, or even of American-style capitalism, except possibly in the United States itself under President Barack Obama. In Canada, the incumbent Conservative government, which has its own problems, can take some heart in this.So the success of extremist hate groups like The British National Party that forbids non-white members and calls for all descendants of immigrants in the British Isles to be 'voluntarily repatriated' to their ancestor's countries of origin isn't a dangerous sign of rising extremism it's a sign of fundamental support for the tenants of capitalism.
The EU elections were a vote for caution and stability, for conservatism in uncertain times. They also reflect misgivings among many people over the scale of immigration in Europe, and concern over the rapid pace of European political integration. These are legitimate concerns, not evidence that Europe is inching toward neo-fascism, as some fear after a handful of extremists were also elected.
It would be wrong to dismiss the message of European voters so crudely.
Marx once said that capitalists would sell the rope used to hang them, and clueless neoliberal corporatist rags will gloss over the extremism of populists - as long as they're right wing populists.
Matt Steinglass on why interpreting the EU election results as a vote for capitalism is a serious misreading.
It is a historical accident that in the US, the populist nativist rural/exurb party is also the party that embraces free-market economics. It’s actually quite weird that the GOP combines these two elements, since in most countries they’re generally opposed to each other. And it leads American commentators to interpret victories for nativist parties like the French Front National or anti-Muslim “charismatic” politicians like the Netherlands’ Geert Wilders as victories “for capitalism” and “against socialism”. They have nothing to do with each other.