Habib at Enlightenment Corner offers a number of characteristics of right-wing extremists, including:
--believes that America is always, in every instance, the ultimate force of moral authority in the world.
--believes that capitalism creates perfect justice, and that any attempt to tax or regulate it constitutes “social engineering.” (Doesn't believe in evolution, but does believe in social darwinism.)
--believes that there are inferior religions.
--believes in a global conspiracy led by Jewish bankers, Hollywood executives and journalists.
--believes, despite the above, that Israel is absolutely wonderful, and that when it achieves full dominion over its Biblical lands—especially Judea and Samaria—a great battle will be fought and Jesus will descend from the clouds.
--believes that homosexuals are condemned to hell.
Habib lists other characteristics as well — I'm simply quoting the ones most relevant to extremist religion as opposed to extremist politics (though the line between the two can be difficult to maintain). Not every "extremist" will fully assent to every characteristic, but the more of these that a person believes the more difficult it becomes not to conclude that they are, in fact, a right-wing extremist and especially a right-wing religious extremist.
Indeed, how likely is it that someone can be a right-wing extremist without their religion also being extremist? Are there any atheists or even agnostic theists among right-wing extremists? Not only is religion closely associated with right-wing extremism, but it is a driving ideological force behind that extremism. It's not incidental, it's necessary — it provides absolute sanction and cosmic justifications to the beliefs and policies of extremists, allowing them to move forward in the conviction that they will be rewarded for their actions.
I found this someplace online, I don’t recall where…it is present in a number of different forms with small variations in definitions. I chose this one a number of months ago and sent it to a number of family members who unfortunately are Bush-loving, newspaper-educated, gung-ho America rah-rah types. It is a list of qualities that can be used (suposedly) to assess fascist/authoritarian tendencies in personalities. A bit off topic here perhaps but it seems relevant to the extremist subject, though perhaps it can be applied to left-wing extremism as well:
“The instrument for assessing the underlying authoritarian personality structure is the so-called F-Scale (“implicit antidemocratic tendencies and fascist potential”). This scale consists of the following subscales:
CONVENTIONALISM: uncritical acceptance of social conventions and the rules of authority figures; adherence to what is perceived as ‘traditional and accepted’
SUBMISSIO: unqualified, unquestioning submission to authorities and authority figures
AGGRESSION: hostility toward individuals or groups disliked by authorities, especially those who seem to threaten or violate ‘traditional values’
INTELLECTUAL HOLLOWNESS: rejection of the subtle, subjective, imaginative and aesthetic; little or no introspection; shallow interests; simplistic world view
SUPERSTITION AND STEREOTYPY: ready acceptance of pseudoscience as truth; cliché; categorization; ethnic and religious prejudice; fatalistic determinism
POWER AND TOUGHNESS: identification with those in power; excessive emphasis on socially advocated ego qualities; rejection of gentleness; contempt for the weak, unpopular, and powerless; bullying; dominating; controlling
DESTRUCTIVENESS AND CYNICISM: general hostility; lust for violence; extreme pessimism; view of the world as a dangerous place
PROJECTIVITY: belief in the overwhelming power of evil in the world, even in natural phenomena, and to project unconscious emotional impulses outward
SEXUALITY: undue concern with the methods of reproduction and sexual activity; homophobia; misogyny (‘woman hating’); worry and concern about the sexuality of others; attempt to regulate private sexual relations of others”
Wait a minute…maybe I saw this here at some point? I apologize for not remembering the source.
More and more I believe religion and nationalism are the world’s deadliest enemies. If we cannot break free of them, “civilization” will always remain where it is now, in near infancy, barely out of the mouth of the cave.
OOPS the second one is supposed to read “SUBMISSION.” Typo City.
>You don’t have roving bands of extremist mathematicians attacking each other, nor have any extremist biologists flown planes into any buildings. Religious extremism drives violence in a way that’s difficult to replicate in other contexts.
There’s also an important line between extremist beliefs and extremist actions. On the quote from Habib–I’m OK if someone believes all those things. I may be critical of the beliefs–but I’m not going to freak out about it. Until, as you point out above, it “drives” someone’s actions.
What any of us believes is sometimes interlinked to what we do, certainly. But, for example, there are nonpolitical religious groups who are extremists in that they think what they believe represents absolute right and that anything different is pure evil. These groups may keep to themselves, though, and most of the members may not even vote; they may consider “the world” something they simply reject all together–including politics. And they may be no more violent than any other social cross section.
As with anything, extreme beliefs seem to become a problem when they end up in the hands (or heads) of people who hold to one more extremist belief: “I have a right to impose what I believe onto others.”
So, there’s an ideological extremist (Extremist A), and an active, imposing extremist (Extremist B)
For me, Extremist B is at the point where he will encounter opposition. Prior to that, Extremist A may encounter criticism for what he believes–but nobody is going to actively oppose him for merely holding his beliefs (except Extremist Bs perhaps.)
I only wish more people grasped that they can believe. And they can act on their beliefs. But they need to let others do so as well. Too often, I think people simply fail to ask themselves: How would _I_ feel if someone was doing this to _me_? How would I feel if someone who thought _I_ was wrong was imposing their idea of right behavior onto _me_? Is there any reason I can’t live by my ideals and leave others to live by theirs?
It’s really not that hard. But some people just don’t seem to “get it.” It doesn’t matter if they think they’re right. They can do what they think is right–but why do they have to try to force _me_ to do what _they_ think is right?
Jesus never taught: “Go out and preach to everyone…and if they don’t accept the message–force them to live like Xians anyway.” They don’t score any points for forcing people to act like Xians. Nothing in the New Testament encourages this. They have the command to police one another’s actions–but not to police the actions of nonXians. And I have no idea why they’re overlooking that in modern political Xianity. This is just one more example of a situation that would be remedied if only Xians would read their own Bibles.
I have heard Old Testament justifications–but again, that’s simply in contrast to what Jesus indicated. And if they’re supposed to be followers of Christ, I would imagine that any conflict between Jesus’ teachings and the OT would go to Jesus…?
Dave:
A couple things on your list relate to what I just wrote–especially Aggression, Power (a little less so), and Destructiveness. It’s when they project their ideas outward an onto others that what the believe becomes a problem for other people. And then they make up all sorts of excuses why _they’re_ being persecuted…as if it isn’t obvious: When I try to force other people to do what I want them to–and have no respect or regard for what they might want–suprise, surprise–they don’t like that.
All they have to do is put themselves in the “other’s” spot, and a light bulb would go on. But they seriously lack the capacity to consider things from any perspective but their own. That’s freakish–but I’m convinced it’s true.
All they have to do is put themselves in the “other’s” spot, and a light bulb would go on.
YOU SAID IT TRACIEH!!! Being able to put oneself in the place of another and try to see things from their perspective is, to me, the most important ability a human can have, and if every human on earth did it, we would have few problems. Instead, most are governed by their base instincts of fear of change, and “us against them.” Sad, sad, sad.
Being able to put oneself in anothers place is one of the things that makes us human. As far as i know, only dolphins and great apes have this ability.
It’s also a fundamental basis for morality. Could extremists’ inability to empathize (outside their in-group) be related to their command ethic view of morality and their addiction to double-standards?
I do fit one of the characteristics of extremists! I believe that there are plenty of inferior religions.
Extremists aren’t found in a religious backdrop, there are folks who you would consider extremists due to their actions. There are environmental extremists who go so far as to sabotage logging and mining equipment or the animal right activists that firebomb animal testing laboratories.
I believe that there more atheists on the right than on the left. They won’t come out and admit it because religion is useful in keeping the rabel in line. Anybody believe that Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter are Christian in any way but nominal?
See graveyard of the gods to see extremists at work- anarchists,particularly Francois Tremblay who @ strong atheism is such a good proponent of atheism. There is Dr. X@ various sites.There are the Objectivists.
Right or left, all should support the ACLU and AU.
Austin might comment on extreme atheists
I believe the list of traits from Dave The Wave’s first list is from the book “The Authoritarian Personality” by Adorno et al., 1955.