Based on what? I've heard those same talking points since the greek debt crisis. Only one nation has exited from the EU after that, and only recently, as you say; "pro-russia" party lost the german election.
I remember seeing you post or like (can't remember) news about the Romanian Georgescu case, as proof of this and that.
But never posted or liked anything having to do with the raids of his network discovering funds and weapons etc. I only bring this up because you try to make it like "pro-russia" opposition is just propaganda. There are far right and far left parties that want to cuddle Russia, for different reasons in Europe.
From personal experience from Finland and Sweden (italy meloni etc.) letting parties who are anti-eu or spectics into the government, is the best cure for this. Most of the time their positions soften when they actually have to start solving issues and take responsibility instead of just screaming from the opposition bench.
At this time i believe it's good not to let AFD into the coalition government because the government needs to function immediately. But in the future i believe it will be a good way to destroy their popularity and maybe get some policy changes in immigration. But single issue parties rarely do well in Coalition governments when they have to the responsibility for other stuff.
Off a tangent. Woke and anti-woke is cancer brought to us by the Americans. Both left and the right engage in it (luckily less now, at least over here) but for the most part is just a distraction from harder to solve issues. I loathe when political parties spend their time yapping about such things.
These talking points are very real, as demonstrated by the growing popularity of Eurosceptic parties in Europe, and even the fact some countries that had their ruling party wanting to join Europe losing elections to parties opposed to joining Europe.
The "pro-Russia" argument is only one, among many, used to discredit these parties and the concerns of anybody voicing opposition to whatever government is in place. It is nothing but a buzz-word just like "nazi" and "brown-shirts" were used before that.
The farmers in the Netherland, Poland and France, the Yellow Jackets, the anti-immigration movements in the UK, etc. All these got labeled as "pro-Russia" among other things.
Does this make these popular movements "pro-Russian"? No. Most of the people demonstrating don't give a f**k about Russia.
Do the leader of the political parties that are eurosceptic "pro-Russia"? Depends. It also depends on what "pro-Russia" means. But just like most words used to discredit "someone we don't like" the expression has lost both its value and meaning due to being overused.
Is it 100% propaganda? No. It is very possible there are pro-Russian politicians.
The question shouldn't be wether or not such belief exists, but rather to what extent, under what form, to what end, etc... Some are automatically labeled "pro-Russia" because they like Russia as a country, for its culture and such.
But is the claim "Kremlin stooges are actively trying to undermine and destroy Europe from within", propaganda? To that extent, I'd say yes. A grotesque kind, at that, especially considering it is used to cover for the short-comings and mistakes made by the various governments in power (especially when they are very pro-EU).
Pretending it does not exist or is only a temporary thing that will simply go away as "let them cry and tire themselves, they will shut up eventually" is unwise and shows contempt. First because these problems haven't gone away, in fact they have gotten worse, but the discontent grows as well. Every country in the EU has a more than one political party opposed to the EU, each country elected at least one representatives of these parties to the European parliament in 2024 (which is rather ironic and hilarious when you think about it).
But I think you are right, having political parties and leaders that are either anti or sceptic toward the EU is a good thing. As you said it calms discontent and allows new approaches to be taken.
Instead of the usual and dismissive "you don't like the EU because you are simply too dumb to understand it is good for you", there are actual explanations given and sometimes the discontent is proven to be justified. In addition, as you said as well, being in a position of power gives them the opportunity to do something about the issues they claim to have a solution to.
Yes, I posted about the Georgescu issue, but some thought proper to remove my posting privileges in said thread so I couldn't follow up on the story.
Money and weapons found at the place of his bodyguard?... heh... ok... is that a there there? That's rather tenuous. Is there a direct and factual link between the two, is it a hustle, is the bodyguard a crook (former Wagner apparently), etc... who knows. If one wnated to add stereotypes to the pile: it's Eastern Europe, therefore corruption.
However the claims leading to the cancellation of the first round by order of the EU, about which Thierry Breton bragged about, were BS. It shouldn't have happened to begin with, it shouldn't have been tolerated either. The ones who made the claim lied, but somehow it does not incites their following claims to be scrutinized.
www.breitbart.com
news.gallup.com
maps.app.goo.gl
