Do we need a different term for "Far Right" extremists?
 

I'm largely indifferent when it comes to politics but on most things I either don't care or lean right, and I have nothing in common with the extremists who are increasingly making a nuisance of themselves.
Nor do any prominent right wing politicians, who are closer to being neoliberalists than anything else. Most are either pro-gay or don't take an active position. Most are for limited immigration. None support the acts of terror carried out by right wing extremists.

I've noticed that feathers get ruffled around here when such extremists are referred to as right wing, and I can see why. Maybe it'd be more productive if they were just labelled as neo-nazis, as absolutely no-one with a brainstem identifies with them, and fascism doesn't fit easily into the left-to-right scale as it contains elements of both extremes, sitting on top of the horseshoe.

Neo Nazi's is Fine
for Extreme Far Right Wingers

I think it would be bloody hilarious if we stop referring to the extreme right wing as "far right" because it hurts the feelyfeels of your average Joe Tory, whilst still happily referring to ISIS et all as "Islamic Extremists" when there are well over 1.5 billion peaceful Muslims in the world.

For YEARS there has been this rhetoric that the general Muslim community "must take ownership, must take responsibility" for their extreme fringes.

And yet the suggestion is that we should rebrand extreme right-wing attacks under a new name because its "not fair on the normal right wing folks"? Err no. The non-extreme right are often a huge part of bolstering and encouraging the actions of right wing extremists so I don't think a free pass to make them feel more comfortable is warranted in the slightest.

Islamic extremism is directly influenced by the Qur'an and Hadiths, and the acts are carried out due to the religion.

Racism has no place in politics, racist attacks are carried out because the perpetrator is racist, not because they are right wing.

Current right wing political rhetoric legitimises xenophobia and bolsters extremists by making them believe that "plenty of people are low-key on their side", which encourages them to act.

Far right incidents are on the rise. The individuals carrying out the actions were just as far right as they are now before the incidents began to rise. They are ACTING on their beliefs, because there is an impression that the public mindset is shifting towards one that "quietly" supports the underlying philosophies of those extreme actions.

Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage aren't going to kill anyone but I absolutely guarantee that their words lead to killing.

Whats wrong with fascists?...

:clap1: :clap1: :clap1:

Nazi fits just fine

The people who actually carry out the attacks likely don't have any political views apart from racism, so calling them "right wing" isn't valid.
Everything is wrong with them, they're scum!

Agreed.

Far right it is.

Far-right politics are politics further on the right of the left-right spectrum than the standard political right, particularly in terms of extreme nationalism,[1][2] nativist ideologies, and authoritarian tendencies,[3] all sustained by an organicist vision of the world.[4]

Used to describe the historical experiences of fascism and Nazism,[5] it today includes neo-fascism, neo-Nazism, Third Position, the alt-right,[6] and other ideologies or organizations that feature ultranationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, anti-communist, or reactionary views.[7] These can lead to oppression, violence, forced assimilation, ethnic cleansing, and even genocide against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group,[8][9] nation, state,[10] national religion, dominant culture or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.
[11]


The answer to this nonsensical proposition is no.

The rest of the world calls it far right and theres no reason for tibb to be different

I meant as a term for the far right extremists obv lol

Far Left, Far Right, two peas in a pod as far as I'm concerned

Xenophobia, racism, and chauvinism aren't exclusively right wing though.

I would LOVE to hear about some far left violence/ terrorism. Could you highlight some for me please?

North Korea, China and Russia are such beacons of virtue

would you open the link if I bothered to post it for you? anyway BOTs has done a fine job in responding

Tibb rightwingers feel uncomfortable? So let's rewrite political sciences and the encyclopedia ?
I dont think so :laugh:

Ollie, join a political sciences faculty somewhere and lead the terminology revolution. Then let us know how you get on.

False equivalency, we're not talking about far right/left governments we're talking about manifestations of extreme ideologies in Western nations.

Does any extreme ideology have the POTENTIAL to manifest in violent activity? Sure. That doesn't mean that recent far-right attacks aren't far-right attacks, or that they should be rebranded as something else.

There has never been anything left wing about North Korea, it's actually a theocracy. One swift look at all the miracles attributed to the 3 generations of Korean rulers will show that explicitly.

Russia was far left originally, but again, became more of a theocratic state under Stalin. It then went back to far left post Stalin, but the breakup of the old soviet union saw an oligarchy form.

China was perhaps the longest consistent far left experiment, but today they are pretty much a capitalist country with some older authoritarian ideas thrown in for good measure.

The extremists who get called "right wing" have about as much in common with the mainstream left as they do the right. Which is why fascist or neo-nazi would fit them better.

You've been a cheerleader for immigrants/refugees dying as they tried to find better lives for themselves. Others on this forum have blanket labelled ethnic groups arriving in this country as "trash", I'm guessing no one on this forum considers themselves far right, but if you're acting and using the same language as far right groups, then maybe some folks need to address their own attitudes.

No it wouldn't. Not all far right are nazi :facepalm:

Well said.

Plenty of right wingers are all for open immigration, plenty of lefties are against it.

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