What do you think?
Rate this book
The Politics of the Extreme Right: From the Margins to the Mainstream
O ΠAPΩN ΣYΛΛOΓIKOΣ TOMOΣ ΠPAΓMATEYETAI TO ΦAINOMENO THΣ NEAΣ AKPAΣ ΔEΞIAΣ, OΠΩΣ AYTO ΣE IΔEOΛOΓIKO, ΣE KOMMATIKO/OPΓANΩTIKO KAI ΣE ΠOΛITIKO/ΠPOΓPAMMATIKO EΠIΠEΔO AΠOTYΠΩNETAI KAT' APXAΣ ΣE ΩPIMEΣ ΔHMOKPATIEΣ THΣ EYPΩΠHΣ (ΓAΛΛIA, AYΣTPIA, ITAΛIA, ΓEPMANIA, BEΛΓIO, OΛΛANΔIA, M. BPETANIA, ΣKANΔINABIKEΣ XΩPEΣ) KAI ΣTIΣ HΠA. EΠIΠΛEON, H NEA AKPA ΔEΞIA EΞETAZETAI ME EΠIKENTPO NEOTEYKTA METAKOMMOYNIΣTIKA KAΘEΣTΩTA (PΩΣIA, POYMANIA, ΣEPBIA), TA OΠOIA EIΣHΛΘAN ΣE MIA ΔIAΔIKAΣIA KOINOBOYΛEYTIKOΠOIHΣHΣ KAI ΣTAΔIAKOY OΣO KAI AΣTAΘOYΣ EKΔHMOKPATIΣMOY META THN KATAPPEYΣH TOY "YΠAPKTOY ΣOΣIAΛIΣMOY" ΣTHN KENTPOANATOΛIKH EYPΩΠH KAI ΣTA BAΛKANIA.O EΠIMEΛHTHΣ THΣ AΓΓΛIKHΣ EKΔOΣHΣ, PAUL HAINSWORTH, ΠAPOMOIAZEI THN AKPOΔEΞIA ME "MIA ΠOΛYΠΛOKH AΛXHMEIA".
Paperback
First published March 1, 2000
About the author
Paul Hainsworth
15 books1 followerPaul Hainsworth is Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland. He is the editor of The Extreme Right in Europe and the USA (1992) and The Politics of the Extreme Right: From the Margins to the Mainstream (2000).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
October 19, 2022
This is a collection of academic essays on the rise and performance of far-right political entities across Europe and the US. Published in the late 1990s, the volume might at first glance appear dated. While, for example, many contributors express their concern about the prospect of broader popular support to ultra-conservative rhetoric, there is little to suggest here that less than two decades later a motley crue of hipster fascists, ‘alt-right’ bloggers and common mobsters would hold office or pull the strings of governmental alliances in western democracies.
Yet - and despite the sad wisdom of hindsight - the careful reading of the collected articles provides useful insights into the micro-politics of right-wing extremism in a specific historical moment, and - most importantly -help us understand some of the causes of its unpredictable success today. Returning themes include: populism, the correlation between economic insecurity and working-class voting patterns, decline in the representational appeal of established political parties, far-right influence in the agenda of mainstream conservatism, and – in the case of some post-Soviet democracies – the legacy of Stalinist nationalism.
The article on the Belgian far-right scene, for example, is an excellent case of thorough micro-analytical research; the success of the far-right is traced on the level of local politics and municipality power-relations in the city of Antwerp, bringing to light the diverse social geography of hate-rhetoric.
On a critical note, however, I would underline the volume’s strong emphasis on sociological rather than historical analysis. While the authors themselves acknowledge the futile nature of ‘definitions’ or ‘ideal-types’ in describing right-wing extremism, they draw very little on the rich historiography mapping the social, economic and indeed cultural causes of right-wing radicalism in the 20th century.
Moreover, most authors tend to ignore the importance of anti-fascist activism, both within and beyond the boundaries of parliamentary debate. This, however, strips the analysis from any focus on agency, and provides rather determinist interpretations of the fluctuating appeal of far-right rhetoric.
This brings me to a final, but central, criticism: by their apparent insistence in drawing a clear line between extremist organizations on the one hand and mainstream politics on the other, most contributors fail or refuse to acknowledge the extent to which parliamentarian conservatism is both attracted to and generates ultra-right rhetoric and policies. What we experience today is not necessarily the case of the far-right hijacking mainstream politics, but all too often a ‘mephisto waltz’ of two willing, if somewhat reluctant, partners.
Yet - and despite the sad wisdom of hindsight - the careful reading of the collected articles provides useful insights into the micro-politics of right-wing extremism in a specific historical moment, and - most importantly -help us understand some of the causes of its unpredictable success today. Returning themes include: populism, the correlation between economic insecurity and working-class voting patterns, decline in the representational appeal of established political parties, far-right influence in the agenda of mainstream conservatism, and – in the case of some post-Soviet democracies – the legacy of Stalinist nationalism.
The article on the Belgian far-right scene, for example, is an excellent case of thorough micro-analytical research; the success of the far-right is traced on the level of local politics and municipality power-relations in the city of Antwerp, bringing to light the diverse social geography of hate-rhetoric.
On a critical note, however, I would underline the volume’s strong emphasis on sociological rather than historical analysis. While the authors themselves acknowledge the futile nature of ‘definitions’ or ‘ideal-types’ in describing right-wing extremism, they draw very little on the rich historiography mapping the social, economic and indeed cultural causes of right-wing radicalism in the 20th century.
Moreover, most authors tend to ignore the importance of anti-fascist activism, both within and beyond the boundaries of parliamentary debate. This, however, strips the analysis from any focus on agency, and provides rather determinist interpretations of the fluctuating appeal of far-right rhetoric.
This brings me to a final, but central, criticism: by their apparent insistence in drawing a clear line between extremist organizations on the one hand and mainstream politics on the other, most contributors fail or refuse to acknowledge the extent to which parliamentarian conservatism is both attracted to and generates ultra-right rhetoric and policies. What we experience today is not necessarily the case of the far-right hijacking mainstream politics, but all too often a ‘mephisto waltz’ of two willing, if somewhat reluctant, partners.
Want to Read
May 7, 2017
The (year 2000) broad definition of far right groups in Europe in this book should be reconsidered: "[characteristics] nationalism, xenophobia, racism, anti democracy ...support for a strong state emphasis on law and order, ethnic identification and exclusion".
One should not forget the upcoming French elections (April 23rd) and how words can take on new meanings. Marine Le Pen has been recently in Moscow. She may not be seen as her father.
"In the second round I won't vote for either Le Pen the fascist or Macron the banker. Let's go to hell and see what happens next" anonymous.
So, what are her chances for 7th of May?
April 7th 2017
---
She didn't win, just like that.
May the 7th, 2017
May 5, 2019
[This review is based on the Greek translation, which sadly is not listed in Goodreads. My reading copy was the 2-volume Παπαζήσης edition, distributed for free by the now defunct Ελευθεροτυπία newspaper.]
This is a collection of academic essays on the rise and performance of far-right political entities across Europe and the US. Published in the late 1990s, the volume might at first glance appear dated. While, for example, many contributors express their concern about the prospect of broader popular support to ultra-conservative rhetoric, there is little to suggest here that less than two decades later a motley crue of hipster fascists, ‘alt-right’ bloggers and common mobsters would hold office or pull the strings of governmental alliances in western democracies.
Yet - and despite the sad wisdom of hindsight - the careful reading of the collected articles provides useful insights into the micro-politics of right-wing extremism in a specific historical moment, and - most importantly -help us understand some of the causes of its unpredictable success today. Returning themes include: populism, the correlation between economic insecurity and working-class voting patterns, decline in the representational appeal of established political parties, far-right influence in the agenda of mainstream conservatism, and – in the case of some post-Soviet democracies – the legacy of Stalinist nationalism.
The article on the Belgian far-right scene, for example, is an excellent case of thorough micro-analytical research; the success of the far-right is traced on the level of local politics and municipality power-relations in the city of Antwerp, bringing to light the diverse social geography of hate-rhetoric.
On a critical note, however, I would underline the volume’s strong emphasis on sociological rather than historical analysis. While the authors themselves acknowledge the futile nature of ‘definitions’ or ‘ideal-types’ in describing right-wing extremism, they draw very little on the rich historiography mapping the social, economic and indeed cultural causes of right-wing radicalism in the 20th century.
Moreover, most authors tend to ignore the importance of anti-fascist activism, both within and beyond the boundaries of parliamentary debate. This, however, strips the analysis from any focus on agency, and provides rather determinist interpretations of the fluctuating appeal of far-right rhetoric.
This brings me to a final, but central, criticism: by their apparent insistence in drawing a clear line between extremist organizations on the one hand and mainstream politics on the other, most contributors fail or refuse to acknowledge the extent to which parliamentarian conservatism is both attracted to and generates ultra-right rhetoric and policies. What we experience today is not necessarily the case of the far-right hi-jacking mainstream politics, but all too often a ‘mephisto waltz’ of two willing, if somewhat reluctant, partners.
This is a collection of academic essays on the rise and performance of far-right political entities across Europe and the US. Published in the late 1990s, the volume might at first glance appear dated. While, for example, many contributors express their concern about the prospect of broader popular support to ultra-conservative rhetoric, there is little to suggest here that less than two decades later a motley crue of hipster fascists, ‘alt-right’ bloggers and common mobsters would hold office or pull the strings of governmental alliances in western democracies.
Yet - and despite the sad wisdom of hindsight - the careful reading of the collected articles provides useful insights into the micro-politics of right-wing extremism in a specific historical moment, and - most importantly -help us understand some of the causes of its unpredictable success today. Returning themes include: populism, the correlation between economic insecurity and working-class voting patterns, decline in the representational appeal of established political parties, far-right influence in the agenda of mainstream conservatism, and – in the case of some post-Soviet democracies – the legacy of Stalinist nationalism.
The article on the Belgian far-right scene, for example, is an excellent case of thorough micro-analytical research; the success of the far-right is traced on the level of local politics and municipality power-relations in the city of Antwerp, bringing to light the diverse social geography of hate-rhetoric.
On a critical note, however, I would underline the volume’s strong emphasis on sociological rather than historical analysis. While the authors themselves acknowledge the futile nature of ‘definitions’ or ‘ideal-types’ in describing right-wing extremism, they draw very little on the rich historiography mapping the social, economic and indeed cultural causes of right-wing radicalism in the 20th century.
Moreover, most authors tend to ignore the importance of anti-fascist activism, both within and beyond the boundaries of parliamentary debate. This, however, strips the analysis from any focus on agency, and provides rather determinist interpretations of the fluctuating appeal of far-right rhetoric.
This brings me to a final, but central, criticism: by their apparent insistence in drawing a clear line between extremist organizations on the one hand and mainstream politics on the other, most contributors fail or refuse to acknowledge the extent to which parliamentarian conservatism is both attracted to and generates ultra-right rhetoric and policies. What we experience today is not necessarily the case of the far-right hi-jacking mainstream politics, but all too often a ‘mephisto waltz’ of two willing, if somewhat reluctant, partners.
Read
August 4, 2011Kohtalainen.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews