Farage Blasts "Bullying Brussels", Cheers Swiss Immigration Curbs Bill

Tyler Durden's picture

Switzerland's surprise decision in favor of curbing EU immigration, was greeted by UKIP's Nigel Farage as "wonderful news for national sovereignty and freedom lovers throughout Europe." With 50.3% of Swiss voters backing the "Stop Mass Immigration" bill proposed by right-wing populists, AFP reports that Farage (who has been outspoken over immigration and sovereignty problems in Europe) added "a wise and strong Switzerland has stood up to the bullying and threats of the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels." As we noted previously, with the EU elections rapidly approaching non-centrist status quo parties are quickly gaining attention as 'the protest vote' gains traction.


Via AFP,

The leader of Britain's main eurosceptic party hailed "wise" Swiss voters Sunday for backing curbs on EU immigration, saying it would encourage others across the continent.


Nigel Farage, the head of the UK Independence Party, said Switzerland had stood up to "bullying" from Brussels and that it was "not a matter of race but of space."


"This is wonderful news for national sovereignty and freedom lovers throughout Europe," said Farage, who is a member of the European parliament (MEP).


"A wise and strong Switzerland has stood up to the bullying and threats of the unelected bureaucrats of Brussels."


Final results from a referendum showed that 50.3 percent of Swiss voters had backed the "Stop Mass Immigration" proposal pushed by right-wing populists, threatening to ignite a row with Brussels.


UKIP has led calls for similar calls for a cap on immigration, a touchy issue in Britain since Bulgarians and Romanians were given full rights on January 1 to free movement within the European Union.


Farage added: "It is a great thing to be welcomed that the Swiss people now have the freedom to decide the number and skill level of the people who they wish to invite to work or stay in their country."


"It is not a matter of race but of space, of numbers and of skills," he said.

Of course this move is a blow for a Europe "run by big banks, big business, and big government" as Farage has described it in the past but we thoght this brief discussion from the UK (Boston, Lincolnshire) was useful in summing up the rising tensions from both the people and non-status-quo politicians looking for change...



It would seems to us that one 'event' that no one is discussing as a catalyst is the EU elections and here, from El Pais, is a very enlightening graphic showing the considerable growth in "Extreme Right" parties across the entire European region:


Whether, as Farage has warned in the past, we remain on the verge of social unrest is unclear but for sure this is not the poltical union that Barroso pitches it to have become...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
fijisailor's picture

no sound in the video

jaap's picture

Geert Wilders VVD? Not since almost a decade...

BaBaBouy's picture

"" Elections And Referendums Are A THREAT To Democracy ""...

redpill's picture

Why is it so difficult for people to come to terms with the fact that open borders and a welfare state are not fiscally compatible policies?  And to label people "extreme right wing" just for bringing it up is ludicrous, but also reveals the truth: that political proponents of open borders with a backdrop of existing (expensive) social programs are typically going to be proud members of their local "free shit" party, either as someone who gets the benefits, or as a politician who reaps the electoral rewards from pillaging their own social infrastructure.  In either case it is theft at best and treason at worst.

TBT or not TBT's picture

I'm going with treason. Ted Kennedy's 1960's psychotically self destructive immigration bill comes to mind. We are reaping the rewards now but the full reckoning is unbelievably still ahead of us.

TBT or not TBT's picture

Aha! The Kennedys were Jooos in league with the LooneyNaughties. Some dude was arguing that to some Lyndon larouche PAC luminaries a few months back and it flew right over my head, then. Not now. Thanks.

Rafferty's picture

The Ted Kennedy Act????  Oh PULEEEZE!

Teddy was just goyishe window dressing.  The bill was written by Norbert Schlei and driven through by Jacob Javits and Emmanuel Cellar.  All tribe members.


But yes, you're 100% right about its being treason.


Sofa King Confused's picture

The Swiss are also getting ready to give the citizens a living wage of 2500 francs a month whether you choose to work or not.  I guess they dont want the rest of the world to move there when this gets approved.

SwissCake's picture

Just watch and experience the sweet 75/25 when this is voted.

TeMpTeK's picture

Its about diluting the sovereignty of a nation with an influx of people that dont understand freedom or the reasons why the freedom theyre experiencing exists... when enough of them have been introduced into a society its only a matter of time before the sovereignty of the people has been yeilded over to the state.... This is why the US wont close the southern border or slow the invasion at our ports.... treasonous..

Rafferty's picture

You explain it perfectly.  And yes, it's treason, 100% so.

SwissCake's picture

The "I am glad not to have referendums." is the discourse the EU "congressmen" are holding presently to our Swiss medias.

Oh, and also the:

"Citizens are... dumb."

"Recall when you shut the borders in 1933."

"Your people obviously understand very little."


Source in French:




Moe Howard's picture





Isn't this that mother fucking democracy they are always spouting off about [the leftists I mean].


All good until the people don't vote the way they want, then it's mob rule and racist!

eurogold's picture

I am not sure what there is to be happy about, EU is going down in a really bad way. The U.S. Will soon experience the same.

Max Damage's picture

Again, well said Farage, but the dickheads still vote Liebour, Cons, and Lib/dicks. Hopefully they will wake up

NotApplicable's picture

Well, if they do wake up, then they won't vote at all. Otherwise, they'll do nothing but fall victim to the latest round of divide and conquer.

It's the 1930's all over again.

Mandel Bot's picture

Euro Countries like France and the UK could stop immigration altogether today and it wouldn't make any difference. It is too late. The native population is breeding below the rate needed to maintain population (2.1 children per woman) while the already resident muslims are breeding like rabbits. France has 10% muslims overall but, in the age range below 15 yrs, muslims are 30%. Extrapolate that to 2050 and adulterers will be stoned in European marketplaces.

TBT or not TBT's picture

Don't mention the existing (today) plague of honor killings, forced marriages, thousands of zones where the police don't go, European women adopting headscarves to get through their commutes unscathed, rapes, and the lovely makeup of their jails, which they mostly reserve for violent offenses in Europe.

BandGap's picture

Wow, the English are not a handsome people. They could use a bit of (controlled) genetic diversity.

eurogold's picture

The British are unique. The men are gay and the women are ugly.

StychoKiller's picture

Right, absolutely hideous!

One should use absolutes in a sentence only after careful consideration.

Tom_333's picture

Just ask her to raise her arms....

Kreditanstalt's picture

I'm sure this will be popular with the hoi polloi...  But everyone should have the absolute right to move anywhere not privately-held.

Why did we ever let the governments create and control artificial stste borders in the first place??  They're lines on a map...

FreeMktFisherMN's picture

Agree. I am pro national sovereignty, but nationalism does not equal statism. Nationalism is based on cultural values. I am against any integration as the NWO wants a neo Tower of Babel and want to destroy traditional values such as the family. America is about people who have reverence for liberty and private property, not the statist apparatus that has continued to increase since its nascence. What made America special was that it was damn near anarcho capitalist. 

ANY statism implies an organized system of theft and coercion. 'Limited' government still is statism. And those who say look at Somalia, well the point is that in any scenario adding an organized system of theft and violence will only make matters worse. And Somalia still has states (i.e., rogue agencies) but without a publicly legitimized state, they have a hard time overcoming competing defense agencies, voluntary associations, commercial entities, etc., whereas even with 'limited' government the apparatus for the means of subjugation is in place. And government's incentives are to justify themselves and add bureaucracy and power via fearing the people into giving up liberty, so they will take bribes/cronyism. 


If a Mexican wants to come over here and pick grapes as no one else will there is nothing wrong with that. It increases efficiency. The problem is looking at the incentives of why they come here; is it for the free shit or actual work. Removing the state would solve that as there would be no free shit taken at gunpoint from others and given to them. There are sadly some luddites here on ZH who are all for protectionism/tariffs that exacerbated the Great Depression and prolonged it. 

Kreditanstalt's picture

Agreed...the central problem is an insolvent social welfare system funded by coercive seizure of private property and assets by an armed gang of thugs who have the hubris to call themselves a "government".

falak pema's picture

well according to ZH the central problem is the insolvent Banking cabal and the socialisation of its private debt that has spilled over and made government incapable of spending money on social programs, on military adventurism gone viral since 9/11, and on saving the banks and the rich who run AMerica. AND THIS CANCER JUST KEEPS GROWING...EVERY DAY.

Triple whammy; but you say its the 99% who are the problem...It doesn't correspond to the factual reality as related here since 2008. 

SO what is the true cause and what is consequent effect; thats the question to ponder.

Your affirmation is short, like the guys who say that the WS bubble dies tomorrow. If they short they lose their shirts ! 

Facts and delusions or illusions of cause and effect. 

Dugald's picture


"an armed gang of thugs who have the hubris to call themselves a "government".

All true.....but, to the playing of bands, the popping of balloons and the waving of placards and streamers...with eager faces and hearts full of what seemed like joy..

You prats voted them into power!

And it made no matter which lot won they are all corrupt, and you knew that going in....now you whinge and whine whilst crying into your piss weak beer.....fer christs sake you are behaving like a bunch of Americans....oh, wait,



redpill's picture

If there isn't a social safety net/welfare state, open borders are no problem at all.  If there is a social safety net and it merely takes your geographic presence to qualify for it, then people looking for free shit will just go to where the best benefits are and camp there until the place is bankrupt and then move on to the next like locusts.

Surging Chaos's picture

Agree with this 100%.

The biggest reason I'm against "build a big fence/concrete wall/whatever" is because that strengthens the police state that we all love to hate. That big fence designed to keep people from entering inevitably becomes the same fence that keeps people from leaving. It's not a coincidence that totalitarian countries have strict (e)immigration controls and big fences/walls/guards all around their borders.

redpill's picture

I don't disagree, unfortunately the (correct) alternative is to remove the incentive to pillage the welfare state by reducing its size.  But doing so by the tiniest amount yields blood-curdling screams from those already solidly addicted to their helping of free shit and can't fathom going without any of it.

Surging Chaos's picture

It is a sad realization that has become the case (and I would know considering I live in Oregon where there is all sorts of welfare abuse), but the scaling back of the welfare state would kill countless birds with one stone.

MrPalladium's picture

It is not just a matter of cutting back welfare, desirable as that may be. But we also need to restore freedom of association and freedom of contract, the ability to do business with whomever we please to sell our property to whoever we please (and refuse to do business, employ and sell to anyone we please for any reason). In other words there is no freedom if individuals and businesses are not allowed to discriminate based on any criteria they choose.

Eliminate welfare and restore complete freedom of association and immigration restrictions would be unnecessary.

Leaf of Tree's picture

In other words, if a business owner wants to hire mexicans for 3 bucks an hour instead of united stateans for 15 bucks an hour, he should be free to do just that.

Am I correct? Is this what you mean?


Or he should be free do close down shop in USSA and move factory to Guatemala. Correct?

MrPalladium's picture

You should read "The Big Sort" by Bill Bishop to see how this might play out. Given both abolition of welfare and reinstatement of freedom of association there would be millions of U.S. born former welfare recipients looking for work and accepting market wages. Immigrants would have no safety net to fall back on and thus would not undertake the trip. Owners of small businesses would be free to preferentially hire their own kind, or hire based on ability alone.

In such an environment big business that wanted to keep applying racial preferences would face the true costs of "diversity" as competitors hiring based on ability alone could adapt more quickly, innovate and produce better quality, and defeat competitors.

Why do you think our laws were passed to abolish freedom of association?

It was precisely so that burdens could be placed upon the majority race and to ensure that businesses implementing racial preferences would not face competion from businesses that hired based on ability alone. These laws shield those economic actors implementing preferences from the competitive consequence of its economic costs.

Kreditanstalt's picture

Correct.  When you favour an interest group with government force you deny personal liberty to others.

TBT or not TBT's picture

Let me know when the politicians buying FSA votes has come to a full halt, and THEN we can talk about draining the great southern alligator moat. Not holding my breath. Instead I'm supporting building the machine gun nests and mine field strips etc that will protect the fragile new National Alligator and Pirhana Wetlands' development.

tarsubil's picture

Yes, generally, crappy systems will tend to failure. This is actually a good thing. Whether we learn from our mistakes or not.

killieboy's picture

Exactly, the UK is being hollowed out by the predations of the locusts.

youngman's picture

And does your house have a door..and a lock...same reason

NotApplicable's picture

Maybe you should read the post before replying next time, eh?

Kreditanstalt's picture

MY house is private property.  

tarsubil's picture

If you downvoted this, please go away.

gmrpeabody's picture

"MY house is private property"

So was mine. Right up until I got taxed out of it to pay for Pedro's extended family coming up to my neighborhood to get medical benefits for free.

gmrpeabody's picture

If you down voted this..., you probably rent.

Canadian Dirtlump's picture

if the state wasn't obliged or mandated to ( based on bad policy or perverted ideology ) provide a massive architecture of taxpayer funded welfare programs then the point would be alot better made. Between gypsies invading britain and folks from africa and the middle east enjoying the complimentary largesse that most hard working britons couldn't afford I'm shocked there hasn't been riots. I said years ago thank goodness they can't walk to north america, not that our programs ( immigrations or welfare ) are much better.


There is a francis sawyer esque conspiracy theory about multiculturalism and bad immigration policies which if you squint just right makes sense from time to time.

TheMeatTrapper's picture


But everyone should have the absolute right to move anywhere not privately-held.

Perhaps the entire population of Liberia can relocate to your city. You'd change your tune pretty quick in that case. 

Those lines on a map represent the territorial boundaries of areas populated by common cultural groups. They are means of demarcating areas that those cultural groups deem to be "theirs". These areas contain natural resources  that are vital to their survival, and as such, these groups are willing to use violence to retain them in their bid for survival. 

It's pretty obvious you don't provide your food by the work of your own hand, otherwise you'd understand why those "lines on a map" are important. 

Temporalist's picture

I was going to say something similar although I agree in prinicipal with Kreditanstalt.  It prevents "other's" criminals so that whole groups of people can have their "own" criminals in charge.


If it were just an individual here and there that is looking for a better lot in life that's one thing.  Allowing predators/criminal mobs to move in groups is suicide.