Behind the Flimsy ‘Alt-right’ Mask
The far-right has a long history of using dishonest language in an attempt to distort reality, rewrite history, and hide its true nature. From the far-right in 1930s Germany appropriating the word ‘socialist’ for the name of their party, despite murdering genuine socialists, to the use of the term ‘alt-right’ in an attempt to rebrand the far-right, distortion through language is a key element of movements.
It is therefore critical that we correct these distortions and present things as they truly are. People choosing to align themselves with far-right movements, once it is clear what they are, is a different matter to groups being able to suck well-meaning people in by propaganda that glosses over reality. Pinning down the reality of the movements and locating them accurately on the political spectrum, based on facts rather than on spin, is key.
When a social scientist uses the term far-right, we are not saying they are Count Dracula or Hannibal the Cannibal — if only they were so interesting. We are simply, having examined the nature of the group in question, locating it where it is politically. This is a real and well-established designation, not something made up to upset them.
I have been on the receiving end of numerous rants on Twitter by people claiming that groups they support are not far-right. The groups in question range from the English Defence League (EDL), Britain First, National Action (which has become a banned terror group) and white supremacists who insist that they are ‘alt-right’ rather than far-right. This article is partly for those people, but it is also for those who are bombarded with similar demands that we “Explain why [insert far-right group] is far-right”.
Common features of far-right movements include nativism, ethno-nationalism, fear of the extinction of one’s ethnic group, anti-rationalism, anti-liberalism and authoritarianism. There is often a strong misogynistic and anti-feminist focus in such groups, which links to both the authoritarian mindset and the longing to drag countries back to a mythical golden age, when women ‘knew their place’ and there were few (or no) dark faces.
If we look at the style of the ‘alt-right’ in Charlottesville, where a civil rights worker was murdered by an angry far-right Trump supporter, and other events, we can see the expression of desire for a different time. Hitler hair, white polo shirts and khaki chinos make them reminiscent of the ludicrous ultra-conservative Omega fraternity in the classic satirical film Animal House. But they are proud of that look, which would have been unfashionable by 1962. It is as though such people wish to wipe out the social progress made since the 1950s.
Those at the heart of the neo far-right movement regard the post-World War Two ‘liberal consensus’ as an enemy to be driven back. We can see the very same narrative in the manifesto of far-right mass murderer Anders Breivik, who murdered dozens of children to promote the deeply flawed document. He sent the 1,000+ page manifesto to far-right allies and the media before setting off a bomb to kill politicians and massacring children at a festival. He makes it very clear in his document that the massacre, which took years to plan, was designed to publicise his manifesto and trigger European civil wars.
A spectrum of twisted narratives seen in Breivik’s manifesto can be viewed on Twitter every day — regurgitated and retweeted by people who might well deny being far-right. Repetition does not make something true but in the social media age, with extremists supported by bot accounts, it does cause toxic ideas to slither into public consciousness, like vipers into an infant school.
Groups in the USA that have been designated as far-right include the America First Party, American Freedom Party, American Independent Party, American Nazi Party, Christian Nationalist Crusade, Silver Legion of America and the Ku Klux Klan. Groups designated far-right that have emerged in the UK over the decades include the EDL, British National Party, British People’s Party, British Union of Fascists, National Action, the National Front, British Democratic Party, Britain First, Liberty GB, the Protestant Coalition and System Resistance Network.
Due to the fact that it became like a tent in which a range of people have clustered, the ‘alt-right’ has had some success in hiding the true nature of the movement, and the term has been used as a linguistic smokescreen to disguise and rebrand activities, positions and people that would historically have been regarded squarely as far-right. It is critical to be able to clear that smokescreen.
The reality of the alt-right
When you look beyond the smokescreen and examine the origins of the ‘alt-right’ you cannot avoid the realisation that it is but a flimsy mask on old-fashioned white supremacism and ethno-nationalism. An early reference to the ‘alternative right’ was made in 2008 by a paleo-conservative commentator, Paul Gottfried. Paleo-conservatism is a strand of right-wing thought in which there is a focus on tradition, national and Western identity and the aspiration for a small state. It was (and is) a backlash against immigration and multiculturalism.
In a 2008 address to the H.L. Mencken Club, named after a racist journalist, Gottfried spoke about what he called the ‘alternative right’. That speech was subsequently published in an article entitled ‘The Decline and Rise of the Alternative Right’ on the conservative online platform Taki’s Magazine. The following year, on the same platform, two further articles discussed the alternative right. The white supremacist Richard Spencer, who was executive editor at Taki’s from 2008 to 2009, popularised the term in 2010 via his ‘Alternative Right’ website.
Spencer, who gained widespread attention in 2016 when he shouted: “Hail Trump” at an event, in which many of his supporters responded with Nazi salutes, considers the alt-right movement to be about white identity. He has called for “peaceful ethnic cleansing” of non-whites and a white ‘homeland’, forgetting that people lived in America before the white influx.
Some might try to play down the overtly racist drive of the movement, but it is impossible to deny its origins or the narratives of key figures, who push a clearly far-right agenda. Spencer himself has done nothing to demonstrate that it is not, fundamentally, a white supremacist movement. In 2012, his website published an article, written by co-founder Colin Liddell, entitled ‘Is Black Genocide Right?’, which claimed that the “black race” has contributed almost nothing to civilisation.
Steve Bannon, a major figure in the dissemination of ‘alt-right’ narratives and the election of Trump, last year told a National Front audience in France to treat accusations of racism like a ‘badge of honour’, stating: “Let them call you racists. Let them call you xenophobes. Let them call you nativists.” Referring to far-right electoral victories and almost-victories, the Cambridge Analytica founder, also said: “What I’ve learned is that you’re part of a worldwide movement, that is bigger than France, bigger than Italy, bigger than Hungary — bigger than all of it. And history is on our side”.
More recently in the UK we have been witnessing the launch of the British branch of Turning Point, not to be confused with the reputable health and wellbeing charity of the same name. With Brits responding to the group by making numerous regional parody accounts to undermine social media campaigning, followed by Director of Communications Candace Owens appearing to suggest that Hitler wouldn’t have been so bad if he stuck to nationalism and didn’t have global ambitions (conveniently ignoring the vast numbers of Jews and Roma killed by the Nazis), the launch was a fiasco. Turning Point has denied links to the alt-right and presents itself as a youth-driven movement to challenge what it regards as a liberal bias within universities. Nevertheless, the parent organisation is associated with racist narratives and has been accused of racist employment practices.
It seems likely that Turning Point UK will fail as it is already a laughing stock but, given the way in which many people were lured into the alt-right tent without understanding the history of the movement, it would be wise to remain vigilant for any far-right movements masquerading as something more innocent.
