Are contemporary far/extreme right parties inherently fascist, conservative or neither?
In last three decades it is possible to observe the constant rise of support for far-right parties all across Europe, but especially in the West. When it comes to positioning far-right, it seems to be dependent on the spectrum of their radicalisation. (Copsey, 2013, p. 3) According to Carter, what makes far-right parties right-wing lays in the rejection of the principle of fundamental human equality. (2005, p. 17) In this case, the question, whether these parties are inherently fascist or conservative would depend on their position on, exactly, this spectrum. Without any doubt, there are many ideological similarities between extreme-right, fascism, and conservatism.
…show more content…
(Copsey, 2013, p.2) Populism is an important, if not vital element in describing far-right parties. According to Cas Mudde the radical-right wing populism is ‘pathologically normal, entirely unremarkable’ (Copsey, 2013, p. 3) and closely connected to mainstream political activity. Their populism offers a very simplistic, radical views that are shared by large pluralities within Western states. (Mudde, 2000, p. 188) too. Betz describes this as this key feature that separates modern radical right-wing parties from their inherently neo-fascist predecessors. (Copsey, 2013, p.8) Extreme right populists spin the wheel of social fear, both on economic and security grounds. This is mostly expressed through the opposition to immigration, also used as their core political concern in electoral campaigns. (van Spanje, …show more content…
centralisation of power in a national leader). (Karapin et al., 1998, p. 217). Supposedly, ‘they seek to roll back as far as possible the libertarian spirit of the contemporary democratic order and to replace it with an ethnically homogeneous authoritarian state’ (Wolin, 1998, p. 49)
However, the new generation of far-extreme right parties do not have any neo-fascist legacy. As an example it is possible to take Vlaams Blok. In their case they are more of ‘by-products’ or ‘off-spring’ of the conflicts of post-industrial society. (Copsey, 2013,
Right realism can be linked to political right wing parties ideology and the sociological theory functionalism. The reason is because people have not been socialised correctly therefore children do not possess the correct norms and values to make society function correctly, which leads to social order. This created the divide between people from the upper class to the working class and underclass. We can see people within the working and underclass
The People's Party, also known as the "Populists", was a short-lived political party in the United States established in 1891 during the Populist movement. It was most important in 1892-96, and then rapidly faded away. Based among poor, white cotton farmers in the South and hard-pressed wheat farmers in the plain states, it represented a radical crusading form of agrarianism and hostility to banks, railroads, and elites generally. It sometimes formed coalitions with labor unions, and in 1896, the Democrats endorsed their presidential nominee, William Jennings Bryan. The terms "populist" and "populism" are commonly used for anti-elitist appeals in opposition to established interests and mainstream parties. Though the party did not win much of anything it did however shape the United States we know today.
The Populist Party, although short lived, was one of the most successful third party movements in American history. Though the party itself is no longer existent, many of the party’s ideas and goals lead to legislation after their demise.
After the civil war, especially during the late 1800s, the US industrial economy has been thriving and booming which reflected on the numerous improvements that occurred in transportation through new railroad, in new markets for new invented goods and in the increased farm yield. However, most of this wealth has been captured by the capitalists, they looked down on the working poor class and expected them to submit to them. Also, they had control over the government seeking to maintain a system of monopoly to allow them to grow richer from others. Thus, they were controlling both political and economic conditions of the country.
Although not all of the components of authoritarianism correlated significantly with right-wing political views, three did: conven- tionalism, submission to authority, and aggression towards targeted out- groups.... ... middle of paper ... ... credibility (Johnson, Torcivia, & Poprick, 1968). Similarly, consistent-handers have been characterised as generally less cognitively flexible than inconsistent-handers (Sontam & Christman, 2012).
One idea shared by all fascist movements is the lack of a consistent political standard behind the ideology. Each individual leader who was associated with a fascist movement would handle every situation a little differently with no sense of tradition or law. However, one very ordinary aspect of fascism is the unmerciful drive to achieve and maintain state power and supremacy. On that road to conquest, fascists are willing to abandon any principle and adopt an issue more in acceptance and more likely to gain them followers.
That’s what a "newcomer" would ask. Populism explains a type political of style more than a specific set of ideas or policies, and most commentators apply it to others instead of themselves. Our textbooks usually combine populism with the People’s Party of the 1890s, but there is more knowledge to it. Populism refers to political movements that see the great mass of hard-working ordinary people in conflict with a powerful, parasitic few, variously described as “special interests,” the “elite,” the “so-called experts,” and of course, the “establishment.” Populists often demanded that plain common sense is a better source of wisdom than elite qualities like advanced education, special training, experience, or a privileged background. Populist movements can be choosy, however, in how they define the “people,” and have frequently excluded women, the very 'savage' as they would describe it but I will say the poor or racial and ethnic minorities.And these happen like in our century, like can you believe its selfish motive........anyways, Over time, movements labeled “populist” may have targeted the marginalized about as often as they have the elite, sometimes perceiving an alliance between the idle rich and the undeserving poor at the expense of folks in the
I agree with the opinion of Davidson especially. Although American division has quieted down as time has passed since Charlottesville and natural disasters have wracked the country, I have long believed that mainstream liberalism is the greatest fascist threat to America, not white supremacism or any right-wing group. Davidson’s point that the left is trying to paint right-wing fringe groups as being mainstream is perhaps his most interesting point. Leftists hate to acknowledge that their radical wing is a lot closer to inflicting totalitarianism in the US than the Trump regime or any conservative movement ever will be. Just because you agree with a principle does not make it acceptable to be enforced with a totalitarian hand.
...itism and attempting to appeal to ultra-nationalist sensibilities there is a definite racist element to their discourse. Such racism is evident in the National Front’s stance against immigration where they argue that Arab Islamic immigrants are unlikely to assimilate on the basis of the alien nature of their culture and in the idea that immigration should be banned and the rights of French citizens be made a national priority. Whilst attempts have been made to make this stance appear more moderate and in line with popular discourse in recent years, such as by aligning anti-immigration with cultural incompatibility these arguments simply attempt to mask the true nature of the National Front’s policies. Despite attempts to focus on other elements of party policy it is clear that underneath the rhetoric of Marine Le Pen the National Front is inherently a racist party.
Democratic representatives scream about "right-wing conspiracy" while radio talk shows lament the evil of "liberal agenda." News broadcasters are branded as "chauvinist conservatives" by Hollywood pundits or "liberal bigots" by Christian broadcasters. Everywhere someone is firing the label gun, plastering liberal or conservative on their opponents, and many Americans are scratching their heads trying to understand the division and difference between both. Liberalism, formed in the latter part of the 18th Century from opposition to existing political monarchies in Europe, was based on rights of individuals and the responsibility of government to protect those rights. Conservative philosophy was born as a reaction to dangerous tendencies detected within the liberal movement toward excessive governmental control.
So we have looked at various different Political Ideologies that have developed in modern times however not one of them proves itself to be superior to another. They all have certain strength’s and weakness to be taken advantage of by all governments. It is best to understand that different political ideologies serve different purposes, and that governments must remain ideologically flexible depending on current national conditions.
Modern liberalism and modern conservatism are both political outlooks that involve acceptance or support of the balance of the degree of social equality and social inequality; while they tend to avoid political changes that would result in extreme deviation of society to either side. Modern liberalism and modern conservatism tend not to be as centrist or middle-of-the-road ideologies as they once could be. Ideology is a set of ideas and beliefs that guide the goals, expectations, and actions of a group (Webster’s Dictionary). Individuals who are conservative or liberal tend to have views that align within a political party, whether it be Republican or democratic, but this is not always the case. There are conservative democrats, such as, Jim Costa and Jim Cooper and there are liberal republicans, such as, Nathaniel Banks and George Washington Julian. Another name for conservative democrats would be blue dog democrats while the nickname for liberal republicans is the Rockefeller republicans. These two ideologies tend to be more of the centrist ideologies. Modern liberals tend to be members of the Democratic Party because they support a wide range of welfare programs and government support of the public sector and tighter corporate regulations (PP Modern Liberalism). U.S. Conservatism evolved from classical liberalism, which makes them similar, yet there is many differences between modern conservatism and modern liberalism. There are principles and tenets that govern each ideology. A tenant is a belief or idea that is held as being true from a group (Webster’s Dictionary). In understanding both ideologies, it is imperative to have an understanding of classical liberalism. Classical liberalism was built on ideas from the seventeenth ...
Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. William E. Gladstone
These two political ideologies offer to government leaders, policy makers, and thoughtful citizens a set of guides permitting some semblance of coherent conclusions regarding compelling social, economic and political issues. Their common features include rejection of radicalism and its attending violent uprooting of established instructions and practices, acceptance of the need for restraints on the powers of government, advocacy of balance in society regarding individual rights and social powers, and ultimately some root concerns for individual dignity. Most certainly disagreement abounds between the two woe within the same government framework. This agreement to disagree in a civil manner surely constitutes one of mankind’s most noble achievements.
Liberalism and fascism present two very different understandings of freedom. On one hand, liberalism provides freedom whereas fascism provides a lack of liberty. This essay will argue that liberalism and fascism provide two different ideas of freedom and to discuss this through the differences and similarities between the two. In order to argue that point, we need to address the meanings of freedom, the idea of freedom in both ideologies, and then the key similarities and differences between liberty in fascism and liberalism.