Far-Right Networks Link US, Europe, and White South Africa

Analysis of: NY Young Republican Club leader to speak in Pretoria, cementing bonds with Afrikaners and European far right
The Guardian | February 25, 2026

TL;DR

US far-right operatives are building institutional ties with European ethnonationalists and white South African separatists, directly shaping Trump's foreign policy. This transnational alliance reveals how settler-colonial ideology unites capitalist reaction across borders.

Analytical Focus:Class Analysis Historical Context Interconnections

The formation of institutional ties between the New York Young Republican Club, Afrikaner nationalist organizations, and European far-right parties represents a significant development in transnational reactionary politics. This network operates through conferences, galas, and direct lobbying of state officials, with measurable policy outcomes including Trump's executive order prioritizing white South African refugees and suspending aid to South Africa. The class character of this alliance becomes clear when examining its composition: billionaire-funded PACs, state-subsidized Hungarian think tanks, and organizations defending the material interests of white property owners in post-apartheid South Africa. The ideological coherence binding these disparate groups centers on what they frame as 'self-determination' but functions as defense of racialized property relations and settler privilege. Orania, the whites-only Afrikaner settlement, serves as an aspirational model—not despite its explicit racial exclusion but because of it. As the article's expert notes, these groups see it as 'an exemplar of a successful ethnostate.' This ideology serves concrete material interests: protecting white-owned agricultural land, resisting redistributive policies, and maintaining hierarchical labor relations that benefit capital owners. The infrastructure enabling this coordination—CPAC Hungary, the 'Make Europe Great Again' conference, NYYRC galas—represents the superstructural apparatus of a class alliance operating across national boundaries. Hungarian state funding flows through think tanks to organize international conferences; billionaire money funds school board campaigns and GOP networking; Flemish parliamentarians carry Afrikaner talking points into NATO assemblies. This is not merely ideological affinity but organized political power capable of shaping US foreign policy, European parliamentary debate, and international media narratives simultaneously.

Class Dynamics

Actors: Billionaire donors (1776 Project PAC funders), Professional political operatives (Forte, Roets, Kleynhans), White South African landowners and farmers, European far-right party leadership, Hungarian state apparatus under Orbán, Trump administration officials, Black South African working class and poor (implicit), South African democratic government (ANC)

Beneficiaries: White South African property owners seeking to preserve land holdings, Far-right political parties gaining international legitimacy, US Republican operatives expanding networks and influence, Billionaire donors advancing anti-democratic agenda

Harmed Parties: Black South Africans facing suspended US aid, Democratic movements globally facing coordinated reaction, Immigrant and refugee populations (non-white excluded from preferential treatment), Workers in all countries facing united capitalist-nationalist opposition

The network operates through asymmetric resource flows: Hungarian state funds, US billionaire capital, and inherited white South African wealth concentrate in coordinating bodies that leverage access to media platforms (Fox News, Daily Caller) and state officials. This allows a numerically small elite to punch far above its weight, translating economic power into political influence across multiple national contexts. The democratic majority in South Africa—whose government these groups seek to sanction—has no equivalent transnational infrastructure.

Material Conditions

Economic Factors: Post-apartheid land reform threatening white property holdings, Billionaire funding of far-right political infrastructure, Hungarian state subsidies for international networking, US foreign aid as leverage tool, Agricultural capital concentration in white minority hands

At the core of Afrikaner nationalist grievance lies the question of land ownership—who controls agricultural production and extracts surplus from farm labor. Post-apartheid South Africa's tentative steps toward land redistribution threaten the material basis of white minority privilege. The 'farm murders' narrative, whatever individual tragedies it may include, functions ideologically to delegitimize any challenge to existing property relations, framing redistribution as racial violence against whites rather than democratic correction of colonial theft.

Resources at Stake: South African agricultural land, US foreign aid allocation, Political legitimacy and media access, Refugee resettlement quotas, International diplomatic recognition

Historical Context

Precedents: Apartheid-era international lobbying networks, Rhodesian settler movements seeking external support, Cold War anti-communist alliances uniting authoritarian regimes, Inter-war fascist international coordination, White Citizens' Councils building cross-regional US networks

This alliance represents a contemporary manifestation of what has historically been termed 'herrenvolk democracy'—political systems where democratic forms exist for a dominant racial group while others are excluded. The Vlaams Blok's 2004 conviction for racism, followed by immediate reconstitution as Vlaams Belang, exemplifies how such movements adapt to liberal-democratic constraints while maintaining ideological continuity. The current conjuncture—marked by neoliberal crisis, rising inequality, and challenges to US hegemony—creates conditions where settler-colonial ideologies resurface as frameworks for managing capitalist contradiction through racial division.

Contradictions

Primary: The network claims to defend 'Western civilization' and 'self-determination' while actively undermining democratic governance, aligning with authoritarian regimes, and seeking to override the democratic choices of South African voters through external pressure.

Secondary: Advocating 'freedom' while celebrating a whites-only settlement built on exclusion, US 'America First' nationalism partnering with foreign far-right parties, Claiming victimhood while wielding disproportionate access to state power and media, Framing refugee policy as humanitarian while explicitly limiting it by race

These contradictions are unlikely to destabilize the alliance because ideological coherence matters less than shared material interests and common enemies. However, the network's visibility may provoke counter-mobilization, and its dependence on state power (Trump administration access, Hungarian funding) makes it vulnerable to electoral shifts. The deeper contradiction—between democratic aspirations globally and minority rule these groups defend—will continue generating resistance.

Global Interconnections

This network exemplifies what scholars of fascism have long observed: the transnational character of nationalist movements. Despite rhetorical commitments to national sovereignty and cultural particularity, far-right groups consistently coordinate across borders, sharing tactics, personnel, and funding streams. The Hungarian state's role is particularly significant—Orbán's government functions as a hub, using state resources to convene and fund movements that individually lack such capacity. The connection to US foreign policy reveals how imperial power amplifies these networks. Trump's executive order on South African refugees didn't emerge from grassroots pressure but from direct lobbying by a small group with institutional access. This demonstrates how the imperial core's policy apparatus can be captured by organized minorities with coherent programs, translating the particular interests of white South African landowners into US government action with global implications. The 'farm murders' narrative, debunked by crime statistics, nonetheless became US policy—illustrating ideology's power when backed by material resources and institutional access.

Conclusion

The Pretoria conference represents not merely ideological affinity but practical coordination among forces defending racialized property relations across three continents. For those committed to democratic and egalitarian politics, this development demands serious attention to building equivalent transnational infrastructure. The network's power derives from concentration: relatively few individuals and organizations with access to significant resources. Counter-movements must develop similar capacity while maintaining the democratic, mass-based character that distinguishes them from elite reaction. The immediate task is exposure and delegitimization—as the article does—while the longer-term work involves building international solidarity capable of challenging both the ideology and material interests this alliance represents.

Suggested Reading

• The Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon (1961) Fanon's analysis of colonial psychology and the violence inherent in settler-colonial systems illuminates why white South African movements frame democratic change as existential threat.
• Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti (1997) Parenti's examination of fascism's class character and its relationship to capitalism explains how far-right movements serve propertied interests while deploying populist rhetoric.
• Capitalism and Slavery by Eric Williams (1944) Williams demonstrates the material basis of racial ideology in protecting economic interests, directly relevant to understanding Afrikaner nationalism's defense of inherited colonial property.
• Black Reconstruction in America by W.E.B. Du Bois (1935) Du Bois's analysis of how white workers were recruited to defend racial hierarchy against their class interests parallels the ideological work these networks perform today.