NationStates Jolt Archive

It honestly confounds me.

You see a man or woman, devoted to a cause. Is that cause just? Who are we to say? It could be for gender equality, or for abortion, or animal rights. Or, it could be against all of the above.

However, this once peaceful process falls to peices when extremism comes into play...

Extremists, are by my account, people who are so devoted to their cause that they are consumed and obsessed by it, allowing it to control their lives. They are so convinced that what they are doing is right that they will ignore the basic human rights of others to achieve that end, and allow themselves to be destroyed as well. Some may even go as far as to ignore ethics, and kill for these causes.

I've done some research and have come up with a list of left- and right-wing groups that can be considered "extremist", that can be found in the United States. Please discuss...and correct me if you feel I am mistaken.

Extremist Left

PETA
Earth First!
Greenpeace
ANSWER

Extremist Right

The Aryan Nation
The Militia Movement
Opus Dei
Westboro Baptist
KKK

It honestly confounds me.

You see a man or woman, devoted to a cause. Is that cause just? Who are we to say? It could be for gender equality, or for abortion, or animal rights. Or, it could be against all of the above.

However, this once peaceful process falls to peices when extremism comes into play...

Extremists, are by my account, people who are so devoted to their cause that they are consumed and obsessed by it, allowing it to control their lives. They are so convinced that what they are doing is right that they will ignore the basic human rights of others to achieve that end, and allow themselves to be destroyed as well. Some may even go as far as to ignore ethics, and kill for these causes.

I've done some research and have come up with a list of left- and right-wing groups that can be considered "extremist", that can be found in the United States. Please discuss...and correct me if you feel I am mistaken.

Extremist Left

PETA
Earth First!
Greenpeace
ANSWER

Extremist Right

The Aryan Nation
The Militia Movement
Opus Dei
Westboro Baptist
KKK

KKK aren't right-wing. Read, for example, Klandestine: The untold story of Delmar Dennis and his role in the FBI's war against the Ku Klux Klan by William McIlhany.

I don't think that the KKK of the Aryan Nation count as right-wing. They're just racist, not politically motivated.

KKK aren't right-wing. Read, for example, Klandestine: The untold story of Delmar Dennis and his role in the FBI's war against the Ku Klux Klan by William McIlhany.

Okay. Where would I be able to find it, a place like Barnes and Noble?

Okay. Where would I be able to find it, a place like Barnes and Noble?

Unfortunately, no. It was published in the early-mid 70's, so it's long out of print.

Unfortunately, no. It was published in the early-mid 70's, so it's long out of print.

Kind of hard to get a copy if it's out of print, no?

Kind of hard to get a copy if it's out of print, no?

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/oopbooks/oopsearch.asp?userid=ba6WWUZAVK

www.amazon.com

KKK aren't right-wing. Read, for example, Klandestine: The untold story of Delmar Dennis and his role in the FBI's war against the Ku Klux Klan by William McIlhany.

I disagree. Like it or not, they were right wing. We socialists don't try to pretend that Stalin was right wing (though many socialists consider him to be essentially a capitalist with strong socialist influences).

I disagree. Like it or not, they were right wing. We socialists don't try to pretend that Stalin was right wing (though many socialists consider him to be essentially a capitalist with strong socialist influences).

Read the book first, please.

Read the book first, please.

The KKK was not left wing. There is almost no history of white supremacism in the Left and a great deal of it in the Right.

The KKK was not left wing. There is almost no history of white supremacism in the Left and a great deal of it in the Right.

Wow, you read the book that fast? :eek:

Wow, you read the book that fast?

Don't have to. Pinning widely despised figures is a popular argument against socialists, in particular anarchists. You see people arguing that the Marquis de Sade was an anarchist, for example. Your visions of Internationale-singing klansmen suggest you haven't met too many racists. Virtually all of them are intensely anti-socialist.

Don't have to. Pinning widely despised figures is a popular argument against socialists, in particular anarchists. You see people arguing that the Marquis de Sade was an anarchist, for example. Your visions of Internationale-singing klansmen suggest you haven't met too many racists. Virtually all of them are intensely anti-socialist.

Many are, yes. But not all.

Don't have to.

Talk about naive. :rolleyes:

Many are, yes. But not all.

I have never met a racist who was for socialism, actually. Every single one without skipping a beat will tell you that socialism was invented by the Jews to undermine white people.

I don't think that the KKK of the Aryan Nation count as right-wing. They're just racist, not politically motivated.
Though they do vote overwhelmingly Republican!

Though they do vote overwhelmingly Republican!

Republicruds are neoconservatives. Neoconservatives are hated by just about everyone- by leftists, rightists, and moderates. Nobody likes them except fellow neocons.

I disagree. Like it or not, they were right wing. We socialists don't try to pretend that Stalin was right wing (though many socialists consider him to be essentially a capitalist with strong socialist influences).

Really?!?!

http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=383

I coulda swore he was a Democrat!

Regards,
Gaar

Though they do vote overwhelmingly Republican!

Given that the Democrats are the ones that generally support Affermative Action and such, are you really surprised?

Really?!?!

http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=383

I coulda swore he was a Democrat!

If you want to get technical, the democrats are right wing. They may be for more regulations of capitalism than republicans, but they would never do anything to seriously undermine capitalism.

I do have to wonder why someone so fond the whole "South will rise again" thing would be a democrat, given the fact that republicans pride themselves on being more for states' rights. Perhaps he was trying to undermine the democrat party by making it less popular with black voters, though I'm not sure racists are smart enough to think of that.

Republicruds are neoconservatives. Neoconservatives are hated by just about everyone- by leftists, rightists, and moderates. Nobody likes them except fellow neocons.
Erm...No. Not all Republicans are neoconservatives. In fact, the majority of them aren't in terms of what they would identify themselves as. They would identify as being conservative. Additionally, neoconservative is generally applied to foreign policy. Republicans who focus on domestic policy don't care about that distinction all that much.

Additionally, your post itself is a fallacy - logically, if all Republicans are neoconservative, and no one likes no conservatives, then no one would like Republicans, right? And yet somehow they won the last election, right?

This coming from me (someone probably reasonably far to left in the Democratic party).

Erm...No. Not all Republicans are neoconservatives. In fact, the majority of them aren't in terms of what they would identify themselves as. They would identify as being conservative. Additionally, neoconservative is generally applied to foreign policy. Republicans who focus on domestic policy don't care about that distinction all that much.

Additionally, your post itself is a fallacy - logically, if all Republicans are neoconservative, and no one likes no conservatives, then no one would like Republicans, right? And yet somehow they won the last election, right?

This coming from me (someone probably reasonably far to left in the Democratic party).

It's nice to see that there are some Democrats who are still level headed and objective. Not saying there aren't Republicans who "Generalize" about the opposition too, just that it's nice to see a Democrat try to "straighten out" someone from their own side of the Aisle, quite refreshing...

I can only hope that WE Conservatives can see how this may also apply to us and stop with the generalizations.

Thank you, it is greatly appreciated!

The link I supplied was to merely show that at least one prominent Democrat was a significant player in the KKK as well.

Regards,
Gaar

I think that I need to point out that the Democrats and Republicans of the 19th century were far different from what they are today.

If you want to get technical, the democrats are right wing. They may be for more regulations of capitalism than republicans, but they would never do anything to seriously undermine capitalism.

I take it, then, you've never heard of Franklin Roosevelt or Lyndon Johnson?

I think that I need to point out that the Democrats and Republicans of the 19th century were far different from what they are today.

Perhaps someone should remind YOU that the KKK is STILL around even TODAY!

http://www.geocities.com/__izzy__/Dengue/kkk/today.htm

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/KKK.html

Edit: And so is Senator Byrd.

this whole debate just highlights the limitations of the two party system and the left wing/right wing scale.

I have never met a racist who was for socialism, actually. Every single one without skipping a beat will tell you that socialism was invented by the Jews to undermine white people.

Karl Marx was jewish

this whole debate just highlights the limitations of the two party system and the left wing/right wing scale.



Karl Marx was jewish

So it was invented by the Jews?

Karl Marx was jewish

WHOAH! That's very different than the quote you took from the other post. Yes, you're correct, Karl Marx was Jewish. But you're missing a few key things -
A. Marx didn't practice Judaism very much. He was nominally born to a Jewish family, but his father converted to Christianity for job security reasons and young Karl wasn't so big on religion (see the "opiate of the masses" quote)
B. The initial quote implied that Jews as an organization were at the heart of Communism. Not true. Marx does not represent all Jews.

Perhaps someone should remind YOU that the KKK is STILL around even TODAY!

http://www.geocities.com/__izzy__/Dengue/kkk/today.htm

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/KKK.html

Edit: And so is Senator Byrd.

I know they still exist today. Jesus, no need to get snippy...

I know the KKK was originally an arm of the southern democratic party. But as the democratic party became more liberal, they broke away and now associate themselves mostly with ultra-rightists.

So calm down...

I know they still exist today. Jesus, no need to get snippy...

I know the KKK was originally an arm of the southern democratic party. But as the democratic party became more liberal, they broke away and now associate themselves mostly with ultra-rightists.

So calm down...

Oh I see...

It's ok for YOU to take Bigotry and place it squarely on the back of all "Conservatives", but when someone SHOWS YOU that you are WRONG, even by todays standards, THEY are somehow getting "snippy" with you and need to "calm down"?!?!

Give me a break!

I have never met a racist who was for socialism, actually. Every single one without skipping a beat will tell you that socialism was invented by the Jews to undermine white people.

I personally know (and thoroughly despise) a once hardcore Nazi skinhead turned Kerry mouthpiece that really shatters the validity of your statement.

Though they do vote overwhelmingly Republican!

Perhaps because they want to keep their guns?

I don't see anywhere in the Republican Party platform that supports Bigotry, do you?!?!

You think all them KKK'ers in the Republican Party are happy that Colin Powell was Secretary of State for THIS Republican Administration? You think they like it even more that Conni Rice has replaced him?

Again, give me a break!

Oh I see...

It's ok for YOU to take Bigotry and place it squarely on the back of all "Conservatives", but when someone SHOWS YOU that you are WRONG, even by todays standards, THEY are somehow getting "snippy" with you and need to "calm down"?!?!

Give me a break!
I know they still exist today. Jesus, no need to get snippy...

I know the KKK was originally an arm of the southern democratic party. But as the democratic party became more liberal, they broke away and now associate themselves mostly with ultra-rightists.

So calm down...

Cool it both of you. The KKK aren't right or left wing. They just vote with whoever is the least interested in paying attention to minorities. In the past, it was the Democrats. Today, it's the Republicans. I really doubt that they care otherwise.

Perhaps because they want to keep their guns?

I don't see anywhere in the Republican Party platform that supports Bigotry, do you?!?!

You think all them KKK'ers in the Republican Party are happy that Colin Powell was Secretary of State for THIS Republican Administration? You think they like it even more that Conni Rice has replaced him?

Again, give me a break!

Well, then they still identify more with right-wing ideals than left-wing ideals. In their battle choosing the lesser of two evils, they obviously have chosen the Republican party. So that indicates that they see themselves as more ideologically similar to the Republicans than the Democrats, even if there is still a huge gap. You certainly don't see them supporting the Democrats' pushes for affirmative action or legalized abortions.

Perhaps because they want to keep their guns?

I don't see anywhere in the Republican Party platform that supports Bigotry, do you?!?!

You think all them KKK'ers in the Republican Party are happy that Colin Powell was Secretary of State for THIS Republican Administration? You think they like it even more that Conni Rice has replaced him?

Again, give me a break!

Christ man! CLAM DOWN!

Let me make this clear: NO WHERE in my original post did I mention the Republic Party or the Democratic Party. I used the terms "left" and "right". I want to make this public by saying that:

Most Republicans DO NOT condone the KKK

And

Most Democrats DO NOT condone groups like PETA

As a matter of fact...I claim an atempted hijacking...

Well, then they still identify more with right-wing ideals than left-wing ideals. In their battle choosing the lesser of two evils, they obviously have chosen the Republican party. So that indicates that they see themselves as more ideologically similar to the Republicans than the Democrats, even if there is still a huge gap. You certainly don't see them supporting the Democrats' pushes for affirmative action or legalized abortions.

You make the strangest arguments my friend...

So because they may agree or be more closely associated with a Conservative standpoint you are then going to blame that entire standpoint on Conservatives?!?!

Wouldn't that be like us saying all Liberals are violent because we can find a radical arm on the Liberal side that uses violence?!?!

And how is it we have a ranking Democratic member of the Senate that was a ranking member of the KKK if the KKK didn't see some of the "values" in the Democratic Party as beneficial to their cause?

And why are you just ignoring that FACT in your argument?

Regards,
Gaar

Doesn't this whole pointless discussion as to whether the KKK is a left or right wing organization show that the automatic division of political position along what is only one of many (not just two either) axes simply does not work.

Bolol probably caused some confusion by placing single issue groups, such as KKK or Greenpeace, in a much broader political spectrum.

The point though is that thes groups are obsessive aboutr their issue. Nothing else seems to matter. Try discussing the Iraq war with a greenpeace activist. Typically all they will talk about is how war damages the environment, and that oil is bad etc. No ideas whatsoever as to whether the war was justified or not.

A similar result witrh the Klansmen, so long as they weren't whites being killed then its OK.

How do people become so monothematic? Do they really see the world in shades of a single subject?

You know, the hypothesis that racism is largely a right-wing phenomenon is either true or false depending on two crucial questions: does anti-Semitism qualify as racism and what part of the world are we discussing?
To me, at least, the answer to the first one is obvious - clearly yes. In fact, many anti-Semites (particularly Nazis and their rather pathetic although frightening modern-day following) view Jews as a separate and distinct race, despite appearing virtually identical to those who live around them. The next question is more interesting, as in the United States, racism has always been by definition conservative - an attempt to keep things as they are in the status quo. Racists attempt to uphold the current society in which whites are priviledged over other races, hence the conservative label. Additionally, most racist organizations in the US support the Republican party due to their consistent positions against equal rights for any marginalized groups (gays, women, racial minorities, etc.) In Europe, things are totally different. Racism is prevalent on the far left and the far right. Both view immigration as bringing in inferior people, and both are virulently anti-Semitic (hence the European leftists' tendencies to make up stories about events in Israel, the perfect example being the "Jenin massacre," a charge of mass murder which the Israeli government has been cleared of by all humanitarian organizations, and yet is still believed by certain far-left individuals). I'm not saying opposing Israel is anti-Semitic, just that the latter often creates the former.

I personally know (and thoroughly despise) a once hardcore Nazi skinhead turned Kerry mouthpiece that really shatters the validity of your statement.
Key word here is "once." That implies a change of opinion, thus they are no longer a Nazi and now a liberal. Additionally, Kerry's not a socialist, so no comparison.

EDIT: I agree with Alien-Born. It's just incidental that the KKK now supports mostly Republicans; they did support the Democrats directly after the Civil War due to the Democratic stance against Reconstruction and the all-important facts that Lincoln was a Republican and Calhoun/Davis Democrats.

You make the strangest arguments my friend...

So because they may agree or be more closely associated with a Conservative standpoint you are then going to blame that entire standpoint on Conservatives?!?!

Wouldn't that be like us saying all Liberals are violent because we can find a radical arm on the Liberal side that uses violence?!?!

And how is it we have a ranking Democratic member of the Senate that was a ranking member of the KKK if the KKK didn't see some of the "values" in the Democratic Party as beneficial to their cause?

And why are you just ignoring that FACT in your argument?

Regards,
Gaar

Did I say any of that? Did I blame all conservatives for the KKK? No. Stop putting words in my mouth, thank you kindly.

I think that I need to point out that the Democrats and Republicans of the 19th century were far different from what they are today.

So you join in on the subject and then want to claim it as "Hijacking", how does that work?

Regards,
Gaar

Originally Posted by Bolol
Extremist Left

PETA
Earth First!
Greenpeace
ANSWER

Extremist Right

The Aryan Nation
The Militia Movement
Opus Dei
Westboro Baptist
KKK

I don't like the way you categorized these extremists. Liberals need not support the ideas of PETA or Greenpeace in order to be liberal, and conservatives need not support the ideas of Opus Dei or KKK. Although most people would call these groups "extremists," they are not extreme to the left or right, but in their own dimension.
Furthermore, even though conservatives support the ideas of Westboro Baptist, mainstream conservatives do not support the tactics of this group, which is what makes it extreme.

So, there are really three ways to be and extremist: spending all your time and effort for the political ends of one ideology, spending all your time and effort for the political ends seperate from any major ideology (while claiming to be the "true" form of a certain ideology), or using deceitful tactics to convince people of the truth of your ideology (and the deceitfulness of your oppressors).

Well, then they still identify more with right-wing ideals than left-wing ideals. In their battle choosing the lesser of two evils, they obviously have chosen the Republican party. So that indicates that they see themselves as more ideologically similar to the Republicans than the Democrats, even if there is still a huge gap. You certainly don't see them supporting the Democrats' pushes for affirmative action or legalized abortions.

Hmmm....

Seems you are trying to say that the KKK and Repubicans are very similar ideologically, although we have seen that a Major Democrat was also a Major Player in the KKK.

So I am left to wonder why you would make such a comparison given the FACTS at hand?!?!

MY POINT is that Bigotry belongs to NEITHER Political side, Conservative or Liberal, and it insults me, as a Conservative, that you would continue to try and "relate" it to me...

Regards,
Gaar

Conservatism as a concept is one that racists will inherently latch onto. If Republicans are the conservative party of America, than bigots will indentify it. It' s different in Europe - I explained this further above.

So, there are really three ways to be and extremist: spending all your time and effort for the political ends of one ideology, spending all your time and effort for the political ends seperate from any major ideology (while claiming to be the "true" form of a certain ideology), or using deceitful tactics to convince people of the truth of your ideology (and the deceitfulness of your oppressors).

You excluded the most common way. The single issue extremist. The groups listed are nearly all single issue groups. If you surveyed PETA members regarding their economic views, you would get a cross section. They are not united by this. They are united by animal welfare issues only, nothing else. No political ideology, nor even specifically political ends.
(You may wish to claim that these are include in your second category, I just felt that their single issue nature had to be more strongly expressed.)

Hmmm....

Seems you are trying to say that the KKK and Repubicans are very similar ideologically, although we have seen that a Major Democrat was also a MAjor Player in the KKK.

So I am left to wonder why you would make such a comparison given the FACTS at hand?!?!

MY POINT is that Bigotry belongs to NEITHER Political side Conservative or Liberal, and it insults me, as a Conservative that you would continue to try and "relate" it to me...

Regards,
Gaar

Deal with it. The KKK seems to vote Republican more than Democrat. They obviously see more benefit to their goals to vote Republican than Democrat. Does that make you a racist bigot? No, not at all. They're the racist bigots, of course. I also never said that all bigots identified with the Republican party. And the FACT that one former member of the KKK is now a Democrat does not mean that the KKK is ideologically similar to the Democratic party. The key word in all of that, of course, is former. Past tense; no longer. As in he is not in the KKK anymore; his personal ideology is no longer consistent with that of the KKK. You can spin this any way you want, you can accuse me of calling all conservatives bigots, but you know and I know that that's not what I'm saying.

Hmmm....

Seems you are trying to say that the KKK and Repubicans are very similar ideologically, although we have seen that a Major Democrat was also a Major Player in the KKK.

So I am left to wonder why you would make such a comparison given the FACTS at hand?!?!

MY POINT is that Bigotry belongs to NEITHER Political side, Conservative or Liberal, and it insults me, as a Conservative, that you would continue to try and "relate" it to me...

Regards,
Gaar

You are right in saying that bigotry isn't on the political spectrum, in that I have seen bigoted liberals, and accepting conservatives.

And don't take that hijacking thing too seriously...

As I have asked before: calm down, you are taking things way to seriously.

Deal with it. The KKK seems to vote Republican more than Democrat. They obviously see more benefit to their goals to vote Republican than Democrat. Does that make you a racist bigot? No, not at all. They're the racist bigots, of course. I also never said that all bigots identified with the Republican party. And the FACT that one former member of the KKK is now a Democrat does not mean that the KKK is ideologically similar to the Democratic party. The key word in all of that, of course, is former. Past tense; no longer. As in he is not in the KKK anymore; his personal ideology is no longer consistent with that of the KKK. You can spin this any way you want, you can accuse me of calling all conservatives bigots, but you know and I know that that's not what I'm saying.

First off, you ASSUME they vote Republican, and until you supply me with a link to some information other than just YOUR WORD it is just a matter of your opinion, stated as though it were some type of fact.

I have come to regard those types of statements as "Rather-Facts", if you know what I mean.

Regards,
Gaar

You are right in saying that bigotry isn't on the political spectrum, in that I have seen bigoted liberals, and accepting conservatives.

And don't take that hijacking thing too seriously...

As I have asked before: calm down, you are taking things way to seriously.

I apologize...

I just take it a bit personal when I see Conservatives being related to Bigots. There's nothing I hate more in this World than a Bigot.

Again, my apologies.

Regards,
Gaar

I personally know (and thoroughly despise) a once hardcore Nazi skinhead turned Kerry mouthpiece that really shatters the validity of your statement.
Correct me if im wrong but.... Kerry is still right wing, just not quite as right right-wing as Bush is. Hes a more conservative right-wing.

I apologize...

I just take it a bit personal when I see Conservatives being related to Bigots. There's nothing I hate more in this World than a Bigot.

Again, my apologies.

Regards,
Gaar

That's quite alright. Here, have a patented Bolol Nuclear Cookie.

(Hands Urantia Nuclear Cookie)

I think the world would be a lot better off if people would stop making assumptions based on political orientation.

i.e, not all Democrats are godless, tree-hugging commies, and not all Republicans are raving, gun-toting bigots.

Originally Posted by Alien Born
They are united by animal welfare issues only, nothing else. No political ideology, nor even specifically political ends.
(You may wish to claim that these are include in your second category, I just felt that their single issue nature had to be more strongly expressed.)

Actually, I did mean for my second definition to include these groups. Upon further review, I think this does not adequately define these groups. Using your example, PETA does not regard itself as the true liberal ideology. So although this is related to my second way of being an extremist, this is a fourth way:
using all your time and resources to support a single idea above all others, without compromise.

Correct me if im wrong but.... Kerry is still right wing, just not quite as right right-wing as Bush is. Hes a more conservative right-wing.

Not really. Kerry's less conservative because he wishes to make progressive reforms to existing systems in order to increase government role in the economy and in wealth distribution, allow for more individual freedoms, provide more aid for marginalized groups, and invade less foriegn countries. That last line is a bit biased.

i.e, not all Democrats are godless, tree-hugging commies,

They aren't? :confused:

and not all Republicans are raving, gun-toting bigots.

*quickly putting away his gun*

Yeah, what he said...

*wondering what he still needs the gun for now, if in fact all Democrats are not indeed Commies* :confused:

:p
Gaar

Originally Posted by Deleuze
Not really. Kerry's less conservative because he wishes to make progressive reforms to existing systems in order to increase government role in the economy and in wealth distribution, allow for more individual freedoms, provide more aid for marginalized groups, and invade less foriegn countries. That last line is a bit biased.

The person who stated that Kerry is right wing was using the political compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org/) placement of Kerry.
Also, aren't "increase government role" and "allow for more individual freedoms" opposites.

The person who stated that Kerry is right wing was using the political compass (http://www.politicalcompass.org/) placement of Kerry.
Also, aren't "increase government role" and "allow for more individual freedoms" opposites.

No, because the context was "economic freedoms" and "civil rights." Often, the paradox of increased government role to protect rights is necessary in a capitalist economy, as corporations have an odd habit of trampling certain individual rights (like the right to life in terms of not having your water supply poisoned).

My definition of left/right is the current one used in the United States: Those who favor more economic freedom and less expansive civil ones are on the right, and the opposite for the left. Anarchists and authoritarians are anomalies (particularly telling of the American experience).

Originally Posted by Deleuze
No, because the context was "economic freedoms" and "civil rights." Often, the paradox of increased government role to protect rights is necessary in a capitalist economy, as corporations have an odd habit of trampling certain individual rights (like the right to life in terms of not having your water supply poisoned).

Laws against murder, manslaughter, and littering are actually on the "social libertarian, authoritarian scale" and not on the economic scale, even when these laws also apply to businesses. A true capitalist applies the same laws to business owners as are applied to individuals.
Even so, government involvement in anything makes people less free, as they could have decided for themselves to do the things the government is doing for them. For instance, in a free market system nothing stops people from joining communes or ordering themselves in any way they want (including any form of welfare). On the other hand, non-free markets do not allow optional non-participation. In these systems all people, by the law, must adhere to whatever laws (economic and social) the government holds.

[QUOTE=Deleuze]You know, the hypothesis that racism is largely a right-wing phenomenon is either true or false depending on two crucial questions: does anti-Semitism qualify as racism and what part of the world are we discussing?
To me, at least, the answer to the first one is obvious - clearly yes. In fact, many anti-Semites (particularly Nazis and their rather pathetic although frightening modern-day following) view Jews as a separate and distinct race, despite appearing virtually identical to those who live around them.QUOTE]

well national socialism isn't actually right wing...

World history lesson...

The division of the human family into its two distinct political branches occurred some 10,000 years ago, when humans coexisted as members of small bands of nomadic hunter/gatherers.

The pivotal event of societal evolution was the invention of beer. This epochal event was both the foundation of modern civilization and the occasion of the bifurcation of humanity into its two distinct subgroups: Liberals and Conservatives.

Once beer was discovered, it required grain, and that was the beginning of agriculture. Neither the glass bottle nor aluminum can were invented yet, so it was necessary to stick close to the brewery. That's how villages were formed.

Some men spent their days killing animals to barbecue at night while they were drinking beer. This was the beginning of the conservative movement. Other men who were weaker and less skilled at hunting, learned to live off the conservatives by showing up for the nightly barbecues and doing the sewing, fetching and hair dressing. This was the beginning of the liberal movement.

An interesting evolutionary side note: some of these early liberal men eventually evolved into women. Liberal achievements include the domestication of cats, the trade union, the invention of group therapy and group hugs, and the concept of democratic voting to decide how to divide the meat and beer that the conservatives provided.

Over the years, conservatives became to be symbolized by the largest, most powerful land animal on earth.

Liberals are symbolized by the jackass.

Modern liberals like imported beer (with lime added), but most prefer white wine or imported bottled water. They eat raw fish but like their beef well done. Sushi, tofu, and French food are standard liberal fare.

Another interesting evolutionary side note: most of their women have higher testosterone levels than their men.

Most social workers, personal injury attorneys, journalists, dreamers in Hollywood and group therapists are liberals. Liberals invented the designated hitter rule because it wasn't "fair" to make the pitcher also bat.

Conservatives drink domestic beer, They eat red meat, and still provide for their women. Conservatives are big-game hunters, rodeo cowboys, lumber jacks, construction workers, medical doctors, police officers, corporate executives, soldiers, athletes, and generally anyone who works productively outside government. Conservatives who own companies hire other conservatives who want to work for a living.

Liberals produce little or nothing. They like to "govern" the producers and decide what to do with the production. Liberals believe Europeans are more enlightened than Americans. That is why most of the liberals remained in Europe when conservatives were coming to America. They crept in after the Wild West was tame and created a business of trying to get MORE for nothing.

Here ends the lesson in world history

Extremists, are by my account, people who are so devoted to their cause that they are consumed and obsessed by it, allowing it to control their lives. They are so convinced that what they are doing is right that they will ignore the basic human rights of others to achieve that end, and allow themselves to be destroyed as well. Some may even go as far as to ignore ethics, and kill for these causes.

I've done some research and have come up with a list of left- and right-wing groups that can be considered "extremist", that can be found in the United States. Please discuss...and correct me if you feel I am mistaken.

Extremist Left

PETA
Earth First!
Greenpeace
ANSWER

i'd be interested to know how you decided these are examples of leftwing extremist groups in the u.s. cause they look rather tame to me. particularly answer - you ever seen one of their protests? boring as all hell (until we launch our unpermitted breakaway marches, at least). and greenpeace? they're like an official lobbying group that does the ocassional banner drop - any extremists broke away from them more than a decade ago. hell, even earth first! esentially kicked out its radical direct actionists in favor of just doing tree-sits and fairly standard protests.

You see a man or woman, devoted to a cause. Is that cause just? Who are we to say?

I dont think most people dispute that many people have just causes. But its those whose cause is intrgially linked with harming people which is the problem.

Opus Dei isn't an "extremist organization" it's a religious organization. If they're "extremist" - count all Catholics and Orthodox in the world as extremists"

Gimme' a break.