Theres a difference between being against immigration and wanting immigrants drowned you know

That's not really the point; taking a position on what you think is best approach on immigration for the country, is fine and normal. Speaking about refugees/immigrants drowning as being a positive thing, isn't really fine or normal, and is the language of extremists.

people will call things what they want to, there is no right or wrong. We all want to categorise terrorism, give it a focus and thats fine.

Where it all becomes confused is when people try and lump mainstream ideologies into extreme groups. We dont have anyone in parliament (as of now) who could be considered violently extreme. That may change in December of course.

Far Right is an accurate term, the problem is the tribalism that's rampant in the right wing that makes this an issue.

If there was ever a Far Left Terrorist, the left wing would disavow and condemn them but the right wing are tribalistic and protective of anything related to the right wing. They get more offended by the term 'right wing terrorism' then the acts themselves.

Not everyone of the same political leaning as you is an ally to your beliefs and causes, I think the Right often don't realise that and will bunker down whenever they hear the term 'Right Wing' in any context.

She's not a politician and it's not terrorist related but Megan McCain's a good example of this. Trump attacked her father on so many fronts while he was fighting cancer and continued to do so after he died yet you'll sparingly hear Megan share any truly negative words about the administration because it's a republican administration and her sense of tribalism kicks in to defend it regardless of how Trump treated her father.

People of a right leaning persuasion need to learn that not everyone who shares their beliefs at a base level is a good person. You must be able to criticise people of the same leanings when they do things that are against your morals and beliefs.

Changing the name of Right Wing Terrorism won't teach the right wing to be more critical of it's problematic parts, it just allows them to sweep it under the carpet more easily. Right Wingers need to look at the extreme aspects of their own leanings and accept they exist before they can do anything about such groups and individuals.

I know a great word that starts with a c and rhymes with punt x

As I explained the almost year old 'news' you posted I had already seen... no need to watch it again :/
How is the left in the west like China or North Korea? I would like to see a direct comparison between the two.

The differentiation could be alt right or neo fascist?

Well, yes and no. They are Nazis of course... but what do we call left wing extremists? If we're using 'Nazi', then we would call them Communists, surely. And let's remember, that Stalin killed more people than the Nazis did... but somehow it's still acceptable to carry his likeness at Labour rallies.

There is this fallacy that the far right is uglier than the far left. Actually, they are as ugly as each other. Extremists of all kinds are as ugly as each other.

Yep 100% agree :wavey:

The whole attitude of entitled centrism in saying that both sides are as bad as each other is just not helpful and it's pretty much proof of what I said earlier of the Right Wing's tribalism.

It's not really normal to react to terrorism by saying 'Well the left wing is just as bad!' If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd get a lot more left wingers condemning such terrorists then you'd get from the right condemning right wing terrorists.

You can't excise a tumour by pretending that something else is just as bad. If the Right Wing want to rid themselves of Right Wing terrorism then they must acknowledge the extreme factions and condemn them, their actions and the spreading of their idealogy, screeching about the left does nothing to stop the rot from spreading.

It's just such a strawman. Yes all extremism is bad... but we are discussing far-right extremism that is currently active and increasing. Saying "Well if left extremists were murdering people that would be just as bad" is such a nothing-statement. I mean... yes. Sure. So what? If/When there's a left-wing extremist terrorist incident in the west, we will discuss and I'm sure condemn that incident and call it what it is. In what way does the existence of two hypothetical extremes mean that we shouldn't call far-right extremism what it is, when it happens? Bizarre logic. All to give false comfort to people who consider themselves right-leaning and "feel attacked", when it's very rare for those people to have any concern for the comfort of others :facepalm:.

Antifa are pretty can violent. As are BLM.

How did I know the moderates would be at fault here, extremes in any are part of life are bad, politics is no different

...I don’t really understand any need for a different term...if someone is far right, then that in itself is an extreme scale of ideals ...and no one would assume those ideals to apply to them unless the ideals were actually agreed with...I mean, far right/far left, whatever...I don’t assume any of that to apply to me and I absolutely don’t defend or relate to any...because defence of it would surely be defending an extremist or extreme ideals, which makes no sense whatsoever...

bigots

Anti fa are violent towards who? Would you class them as terrorists, what acts of terror have they committed?

He's gonna be pissed when he finds out what the fa stands for.

I wouldn't call them terrorists, no. They're just a bunch of thugs who hold violent protests.

The antifa (/ænˈtiːfə, ˈæntiˌfɑː/)[1] movement is composed of left-wing, autonomous, militant anti-fascist[7] groups and individuals in the United States.[11] The principal feature of antifa groups is their use of direct action,[12] with conflicts occurring both online and in real life.[13] They engage in varied protest tactics, which include digital activism, property damage, physical violence, and harassment against those whom they identify as fascist, racist, or on the far-right.[20]

Activists involved in the movement tend to be anti-capitalists[21] and subscribe to a range of ideologies, typically on the left. They include anarchists, socialists and communists along with some liberals and social democrats.[28] Their stated focus is on fighting far-right and white supremacist ideologies directly, rather than through electoral means.[27]
Wikipedia

I mean our soldiers fought fascists with violent means. Antifa is simply continuing the tradition

Lol that's what they say, but when have they demonstrably targeted fascists? Smashing up university campuses because people they don't like are having speaking events isn't fighting fascism.

Agree that it's not very relevant here but violence is pretty integral to far left ideology as anyone who's familiar with it would know..

I have no problem with the term far right but I do have a problem with it's liberal use where everyone from classical liberals to nationalists, from one nation conservatives to neo-nazis, are all grouped under one banner of 'far right'

White extremists would be better.

What are you talking about?
Who ever called one nation conservatives far right?:conf:
You're making things up now.
The same goes for classical liberals and nationalists. The last one can be considered hard right depending on how far they go.
Only extremists are far right.
It's no good blurring the lines to prove your non existent point.

And btw it's not just violence that matters. It's how hateful the ideology is too.

And as Corbyn is classed as far left and his supporters I'm sure there are many cases where he and his followers have been or incited violence due to how integral it is to the ideology?...

Corbyn is in power because of Momentum, and they ARE a bunch of thugs. If the cap fits....