Food & Drink2 mins ago
National Action - Right Wing Terrorist Threat
There has been reluctance in some quarters to accept the danger of this Neo-Nazi organisation. Hopefully the testimony in Court this week will dispel that.
// The alleged leader of a neo-Nazi terrorist group urged one of his subordinates to assassinate the former home secretary Amber Rudd, a court has heard.
Renshaw detailed how he was going to murder [Labour MP] Ms Cooper with a machete before taking hostages in a pub.
Another defendant, Matthew Hankinson, said Renshaw should target a synagogue – even if there were children inside – because “all Jews are the same, they’re all vermin”. //
https:/
Dangerous men (targetting women) hopefully a long prison will result.
// The alleged leader of a neo-Nazi terrorist group urged one of his subordinates to assassinate the former home secretary Amber Rudd, a court has heard.
Renshaw detailed how he was going to murder [Labour MP] Ms Cooper with a machete before taking hostages in a pub.
Another defendant, Matthew Hankinson, said Renshaw should target a synagogue – even if there were children inside – because “all Jews are the same, they’re all vermin”. //
https:/
Dangerous men (targetting women) hopefully a long prison will result.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
AOG
I think the problem we have on AB, and generally online - is that people are wary of ‘getting into bed’ with certain groups, because you don’t want others to make invalid assumptions.
For instance, those on the Left on AB, are loathe to join your chorus, because of the fear of being though of as a bigot. This is the same issue you have - you are loathe to criticise the Far Right (or ‘patriots’) as you call them, because you don’t wish to be considered a liberal.
There is no level playing field because no-one will concede to the other side.
I think the problem we have on AB, and generally online - is that people are wary of ‘getting into bed’ with certain groups, because you don’t want others to make invalid assumptions.
For instance, those on the Left on AB, are loathe to join your chorus, because of the fear of being though of as a bigot. This is the same issue you have - you are loathe to criticise the Far Right (or ‘patriots’) as you call them, because you don’t wish to be considered a liberal.
There is no level playing field because no-one will concede to the other side.
sp, you might find this interesting.
http://
http://
AOG
//ignore all the other Jew haters, let's just focus on the Far-Right.//
But...this thread is about the Far Right.
Surely it’s appropriate to talk about the Far Right on a thread concerning a court case involving the Far Right?
If you raised a thread about a court case involving Muslims, and someone tried to divert the conversation to talk about the Far Right, you would be completely justified in saying that the thread were being diverted.
Do you think that perhaps what you’re doing here is a diversionary tactic?
//ignore all the other Jew haters, let's just focus on the Far-Right.//
But...this thread is about the Far Right.
Surely it’s appropriate to talk about the Far Right on a thread concerning a court case involving the Far Right?
If you raised a thread about a court case involving Muslims, and someone tried to divert the conversation to talk about the Far Right, you would be completely justified in saying that the thread were being diverted.
Do you think that perhaps what you’re doing here is a diversionary tactic?
sp1814
No sp you have me wrong, I am quite prepared to criticise any group, Left or Right, Islamic or Christian, Black or White, Male or Female, Homosexual or Heterosexual, if they have been seen to do harm.
By harm I mean physical harm, not just the wrong word, or peaceful protests at certain national concerns.
Because of the fear of being though of as a hypocrite, you understand?
No sp you have me wrong, I am quite prepared to criticise any group, Left or Right, Islamic or Christian, Black or White, Male or Female, Homosexual or Heterosexual, if they have been seen to do harm.
By harm I mean physical harm, not just the wrong word, or peaceful protests at certain national concerns.
Because of the fear of being though of as a hypocrite, you understand?
sp1814
/// Do you think that perhaps what you’re doing here is a diversionary tactic? ///
I must have looked into my crystal ball, I knew that one was coming.
How many time have threads been diverted, you yourself do it all the time, when threads are about black on black killings or homosexual issuers, but you are not on your own, some even delve into their history books to find an opposing argument.
It is always the case in debates, they get side tracked from time to time, especially when one group is being condemned for all the world's ills.
/// Do you think that perhaps what you’re doing here is a diversionary tactic? ///
I must have looked into my crystal ball, I knew that one was coming.
How many time have threads been diverted, you yourself do it all the time, when threads are about black on black killings or homosexual issuers, but you are not on your own, some even delve into their history books to find an opposing argument.
It is always the case in debates, they get side tracked from time to time, especially when one group is being condemned for all the world's ills.
Can someone give me (or point to) a precise definition of "Right" and "Far-Right"? Or a list of attributes or core beliefs by which you can classify people like: if you believe A,B,C you're on the right, if you believe D,E,F you're on the left.
I've never understood, for instance, why people call National Socialism Far-Right rather than Far-Left.
I've never understood, for instance, why people call National Socialism Far-Right rather than Far-Left.
v_e
The political terminology of left, right, extreme left, far right can be a minefield for anybody trying to make sense of their newspaper. Not only are the terms hard to pin down to a precise definition they are also used interchangeably and (often) wrongly, leading to widespread confusion.
In order to understand what we mean when we use the term "far right" we need to be clear where it sits on the political spectrum and how it relates to other political perspectives.
Broadly speaking left wing views are concerned with the principles of Socialism. This is the belief that the state should work for the good of the people and which encompasses the ideas of democracy, free health care, the welfare state and some level of redistribution of wealth.
Further left than Socialism is Marxism. Marxism seeks to put control of the economy into public rather than private hands. The idea being that instead of workers working for a private owner they work for a collective benefit that they can all share in. Culturally this further left position is concerned with the social responsibilities of the state to the individual and also of the individual to the state.
The extreme left would be Communism which draws heavily on Marxist theory but which propounds the idea of a society with no class boundaries where all citizens are equal with equal rights and opportunities.
Equally broadly speaking the right wing are concerned with the principles of Conservatism which is a belief in upholding traditional established values and institutions such as the monarchy and the church. Conservatism is built on the idea of a defined national identity and embraces a monocultural rather than a multicultural society. Political Conservatism is linked to the idea of Capitalism, the idea that the economy is strongest when based on competing factions, with wealth in the hands of the few used to employ the many.
Further right than Conservatism is Libertarianism. This places more emphasis on the individual's rights than any obligation the individual has to community values. Libertarianism is concerned with freedom and has become intrinsically linked to the concept of free speech. In Libertarian economics both private ownership and private enterprise are encouraged.
The political terminology of left, right, extreme left, far right can be a minefield for anybody trying to make sense of their newspaper. Not only are the terms hard to pin down to a precise definition they are also used interchangeably and (often) wrongly, leading to widespread confusion.
In order to understand what we mean when we use the term "far right" we need to be clear where it sits on the political spectrum and how it relates to other political perspectives.
Broadly speaking left wing views are concerned with the principles of Socialism. This is the belief that the state should work for the good of the people and which encompasses the ideas of democracy, free health care, the welfare state and some level of redistribution of wealth.
Further left than Socialism is Marxism. Marxism seeks to put control of the economy into public rather than private hands. The idea being that instead of workers working for a private owner they work for a collective benefit that they can all share in. Culturally this further left position is concerned with the social responsibilities of the state to the individual and also of the individual to the state.
The extreme left would be Communism which draws heavily on Marxist theory but which propounds the idea of a society with no class boundaries where all citizens are equal with equal rights and opportunities.
Equally broadly speaking the right wing are concerned with the principles of Conservatism which is a belief in upholding traditional established values and institutions such as the monarchy and the church. Conservatism is built on the idea of a defined national identity and embraces a monocultural rather than a multicultural society. Political Conservatism is linked to the idea of Capitalism, the idea that the economy is strongest when based on competing factions, with wealth in the hands of the few used to employ the many.
Further right than Conservatism is Libertarianism. This places more emphasis on the individual's rights than any obligation the individual has to community values. Libertarianism is concerned with freedom and has become intrinsically linked to the concept of free speech. In Libertarian economics both private ownership and private enterprise are encouraged.
The extreme right wing would be Political Fascism. Fascism can be defined by the autocracy of a leader or government, a strong nationalist agenda and a pro uniformity approach. Diversity is not encouraged within a Fascist ideology. The emphasis is on conforming to the unified goals of the state.
The far right of which Resisting Hate and other anti hate groups speak share certain key characteristics. The first is Nationalism. It is important to distinguish Nationalism from Patriotism. Patriotism being love of one's country whereas Nationalism is the belief that one country and its people are superior to others. Patriotism can be found in both left and right wing politics. Nationalism is a right wing ideology.
The right have a strong sense of national and cultural identity which can be a positive thing but the far right take this further and perceive integration with other cultures as a threat to their sense of identity. In doing so they reject the concept of diversity and start to see those of different races or cultures as potential usurpers of their country and diluters of their cultural values. This can lead to unrest within communities and prejudice toward those not deemed to share the same racial or cultural background.
The far right appeal to a sense of elitism. This is closely linked to the idea of racial and cultural preservation but with emphasis on the fact that a 'superior' community is being eradicated. This can be seen in far right white supremacist groups who call for more breeding among white people to ensure their race survives the 'threat' of blood mixing with other ethnic groups . It is not hard to see how closely this elitism is linked to racism. It is equally not difficult to see how this idea of racial purity invites a parallel with the Nazi Germany obsession with the Aryan race.
The growth of the far right can be attributed to the focus on a sense of community. Using similar recruitment rhetoric to a street gang, far right leaders offer individuals a sense of belonging and pride. This can be a powerful tool, particularly among deprived areas with low employment which is often the demographic where far right activism is the most prevalent.
In keeping with the idea of a traditional and, to a certain extent, homogenous society the far right reject the liberal ideals of actualising the self and condemn individuals who do not conform to their preconceived ideas of how people should behave. This is where we encounter gender and sexuality prejudice which is often deemed by the far right as unnatural human behaviour. It is also where we encounter religious prejudice with the far right self identifying as defenders of the Christian faith and using the pretext of upholding Christian values as a way to cause conflict with other religions.
The primary tactic used in advancing a far right agenda is the sense of urgency in defending a nation or community against an external threat. We have seen this throughout history with the persecution of people of colour, homosexuals, Jews, Muslims and other minority groups. This was very clearly illustrated during the Brexit referendum with Nigel Farage's infamous Breaking Point poster which sought to depict immigrants as invaders in order to unite and mobilise the far right against a common 'enemy.'
As a defender of liberal values I am often challenged why my view of live and let live does not extend to the far right. I am asked why I can support those who differ to me in matters of faith, race and culture but not those who oppose my political views. The answer lies in the essence of what it is to be far right. It is to oppress, devalue and discriminate against others. This is the ethos I oppose. The paradox being that the one thing I will not tolerate is intolerance.
The far right of which Resisting Hate and other anti hate groups speak share certain key characteristics. The first is Nationalism. It is important to distinguish Nationalism from Patriotism. Patriotism being love of one's country whereas Nationalism is the belief that one country and its people are superior to others. Patriotism can be found in both left and right wing politics. Nationalism is a right wing ideology.
The right have a strong sense of national and cultural identity which can be a positive thing but the far right take this further and perceive integration with other cultures as a threat to their sense of identity. In doing so they reject the concept of diversity and start to see those of different races or cultures as potential usurpers of their country and diluters of their cultural values. This can lead to unrest within communities and prejudice toward those not deemed to share the same racial or cultural background.
The far right appeal to a sense of elitism. This is closely linked to the idea of racial and cultural preservation but with emphasis on the fact that a 'superior' community is being eradicated. This can be seen in far right white supremacist groups who call for more breeding among white people to ensure their race survives the 'threat' of blood mixing with other ethnic groups . It is not hard to see how closely this elitism is linked to racism. It is equally not difficult to see how this idea of racial purity invites a parallel with the Nazi Germany obsession with the Aryan race.
The growth of the far right can be attributed to the focus on a sense of community. Using similar recruitment rhetoric to a street gang, far right leaders offer individuals a sense of belonging and pride. This can be a powerful tool, particularly among deprived areas with low employment which is often the demographic where far right activism is the most prevalent.
In keeping with the idea of a traditional and, to a certain extent, homogenous society the far right reject the liberal ideals of actualising the self and condemn individuals who do not conform to their preconceived ideas of how people should behave. This is where we encounter gender and sexuality prejudice which is often deemed by the far right as unnatural human behaviour. It is also where we encounter religious prejudice with the far right self identifying as defenders of the Christian faith and using the pretext of upholding Christian values as a way to cause conflict with other religions.
The primary tactic used in advancing a far right agenda is the sense of urgency in defending a nation or community against an external threat. We have seen this throughout history with the persecution of people of colour, homosexuals, Jews, Muslims and other minority groups. This was very clearly illustrated during the Brexit referendum with Nigel Farage's infamous Breaking Point poster which sought to depict immigrants as invaders in order to unite and mobilise the far right against a common 'enemy.'
As a defender of liberal values I am often challenged why my view of live and let live does not extend to the far right. I am asked why I can support those who differ to me in matters of faith, race and culture but not those who oppose my political views. The answer lies in the essence of what it is to be far right. It is to oppress, devalue and discriminate against others. This is the ethos I oppose. The paradox being that the one thing I will not tolerate is intolerance.
Thanks very much for that, SP.
It's quite a clever propaganda piece by the lady with the hyphen, with too either/ors and contrived antitheses, e.g. the "Left's" belief that "the state should work for the good of the people and which encompasses the ideas of democracy" with its obvious implication that the "Right" doesn't.
However, nice of you to go out of your way to answer my question.
It's quite a clever propaganda piece by the lady with the hyphen, with too either/ors and contrived antitheses, e.g. the "Left's" belief that "the state should work for the good of the people and which encompasses the ideas of democracy" with its obvious implication that the "Right" doesn't.
However, nice of you to go out of your way to answer my question.
But I thought that *was* the difference between, reasonable, left-wing and right-wing people, ie the relative size of involvement of the state in people's lives. It's not necessarily a criticism of right-wingers that they typically prefer self-help to state support.
But anyway.
The difference between Communism and Fascism is easy to remember: Communists believe in aggressively enforcing total equality, leading to an authoritarian regime with lots of poverty while a privileged few enjoy excessive wealth and power at the expense of freedom and democracy; Fascists, however, believe in aggressively enforcing inequality -- leading to an authoritarian regime with lots of poverty while a privileged few enjoy excessive wealth and power at the expense of freedom and democracy.
Very different.
But anyway.
The difference between Communism and Fascism is easy to remember: Communists believe in aggressively enforcing total equality, leading to an authoritarian regime with lots of poverty while a privileged few enjoy excessive wealth and power at the expense of freedom and democracy; Fascists, however, believe in aggressively enforcing inequality -- leading to an authoritarian regime with lots of poverty while a privileged few enjoy excessive wealth and power at the expense of freedom and democracy.
Very different.
Latest Posts
Crosswords3 mins ago
Vitamins For Macular Degeneration
Body & Soul7 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles13 mins ago
Stealing Money 11 - Fri 26 April 2024
Football14 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.