2017: The Year of the Far Right
2017 was, in many ways, a year of extremes—while the left celebrated events like the Women’s March and the #MeToo movement, which allowed historically marginalized voices to be heard, members of the far right also gained a new level of influence and attention. With events like the Charlottesville rally in August, which drew thousands of protesters and extensive media coverage, far right groups made significant headway into mainstream conversation. In the aftermath of the rally, it became clear that the hateful ideologies expressed in Charlottesville indeed continue to appeal to a significant number of Americans. Many other Americans, though, watched in horror as they realized the extent to which racism remains a powerful force in American society. These Americans are trying to find the right words with which to describe the phenomenon, and this discourse is crucial because the wrong ones can galvanize the far right and inadvertently provide them with them more followers. In an interview with the HPR, Jason Stanley, a professor of political science at Yale, warned that “the far right has been dominating the semantic wars.” If the left wants to reverse that trend, it will need to start using language wisely as well.
Some have argued for the use of labels like “Nazi” and “neo-Nazi,” which effectively express the reprehensible and extreme views endorsed by far right groups. For example, in the wake of the Charlottesville rally, the city’s mayor railed against “neo-Nazi cowards.” Counter-protesters took to the streets with slogans like “Kill all Nazis” and “Punch a Nazi in the mouth.” Headlines drew attention to the “neo-Nazi rally” and criticism centered around “Trump’s tepid condemnation of neo-Nazis.”
Are “Nazi” and “neo-Nazi” appropriate labels? In a literal sense, they may sometimes be accurate. Some Charlottesville protesters identified with neo-Nazi parties. Some chanted Nazi slogans like “Blood and Soil” and carried flags depicting the swastika. But the important question is not whether neo-Nazis were present in Charlottesville or if there are neo-Nazis among the American far right; instead, we must consider whether the term “Nazi” is useful and accurate as shorthand for the entire American far right.
In one sense, the definition of “neo-Nazi” is specific. The term refers to someone who actively believes in and relies on Nazi imagery and rhetoric. This person despises Jews and likely other minorities, including women and the LGBTQ community. Like the German Nazis of the 1930s and 1940s, this person advocates for a white-only state. If we accept this narrow, literal definition, it should be easy to identify neo-Nazis. But the term has also begun to gain a broader definition in colloquial use. The New Oxford American Dictionary lists its secondary definition as “a person of extreme racist or nationalist views.” But how does one decide what counts as “extreme”?
This question, of who exactly ‘counts’ as a Nazi, may seem narrow and unimportant, overly concerned with linguistics when attention should be focused on policy and protest, but it has crucial ramifications. Mention of the word “Nazi” conjures up clear images of hateful ideologies and horrific practices—with memories of Holocaust concentration camps and Hitler’s anti-semitic policies still relatively fresh in society’s collective memory, the term Nazi implies the highest possible evil. That is precisely why, though, American citizens, media outlets, and politicians must be careful in using the label. When it comes to the American far right, “neo-Nazi” is a misleading and unhelpful umbrella term. This term implies that these abhorrent ideologies are imported from Europe, when in fact their history in the United States dates back to before the country was even founded, and furthermore, it is too narrow to apply accurately to most of the far right. Overuse will render the term meaningless, and treating white supremacy as a foreign concept allows Americans to avoid taking responsibility for the history of these ideologies within our own borders. There must, then, be some better shorthand for American’s far right.
Made in America: A History of Bigotry
The first problem associated with using the term “neo-Nazi” to describe the entire American far right is its misrepresentation of the history of white supremacy. The images that Nazism conjures up are of twentieth century Germany, but the reality is that the history of American racism is robust and dates back to well before the emergence of Nazi ideology. When we discuss current extremist movements like the ones celebrated at Charlottesville, we must remember how they connect to and play off our nation’s past.
A consistent cycle in American history has been white backlash to black progress. This pattern began after the Civil War, when the Ku Klux Klan was founded to terrorize blacks and prevent the realization of the goals of Reconstruction. The cycle repeated in the 1920s and 1930s, when the KKK flourished again with as many as 5 million members, riding a new wave of anti-immigration sentiment. Then, in the 1950s, as the civil rights movement began to gain traction, Southern white supremacists like George Wallace gained power by promising “segregation forever.” And while these movements have usually at least partially failed, the values they championed have permeated through American culture and continue to remain relevant today. In an interview with HPR, Angela King, cofounder of the nonprofit Life After Hate, explained that “we live in a country that was built on oppression and genocide; those things were built into the very fabric of our social systems, and at the end of the day, no matter what we call it, we do live in a system that is not equal for everyone.”
So as liberal movements focus on exposing and reforming this system, eradicating persistent forms of institutionalized racism and xenophobia, the cycle has once again repeated, resulting in the backlash expressed in places like Charlottesville. Developments like the election of the country’s first black president have revealed just how uneasy some Americans feel about diversity, and the sense that the traditional white patriarchy is under attack may be pushing people towards more aggressive, racist ideologies. King shared her past as a former neo-Nazi with the HPR, explaining that she “was raised in a household where [she] was taught racial slurs and homophobia and stereotypes. Not having my own knowledge of black people or other races or gay people, as I started to go out and experience the world, that lack of knowledge turned into fear. Instead of getting to know people who were different than I was, I feared them, which eventually made me feel like I had to act against them.” King views her own descent into crime and extremism as a product of insularity; the ideologies she was taught as a child were not imported from foreign destinations, but instead reflected stereotypes and beliefs that have been a part of American political culture for centuries.
Many of the Charlottesville protesters, meanwhile, marched in defense of a statue celebrating Robert E. Lee—a uniquely American cause. And while many were denouncing neo-Nazi ideologies in the wake of the rally, Lindsey E. Jones responded with an article titled “Don’t Call All American White Supremacists ‘Nazis.’” In the piece, published by Vox, Jones explains that “ people [she] grew up with…are not Nazis. They are ordinary white people who deny that their veneration of a mythologized South amounts to white nationalism.” The beliefs endorsed by Jones’ neighbors are essentially cultural traditions, shared with past generations and passed on to each subsequent one. These people, Jones concludes, are not supporters of the Nazis of 1940s Germany, but instead endorse modern versions of the same American ideologies that have played a role in American society for hundreds of years.
Missing the Mark: The Problems of “Nazi” and “Alt-Right” as Labels
In addition to the historical inaccuracy of associating American white supremacy with German Nazism, part of the danger associated with overuse of the label “Nazi” is that it will cease to be as meaningful. This caveat applies to many labels with a loose definitions; in an interview with the HPR, George Hawley, a professor at the University of Alabama who studies the alt-right, warned that “when terms are overly applied and applied too broadly, then they can lose some of their power. If everyone gets a label, then getting that label stops mattering very much.” This warning is especially relevant with terms like “Nazi” and “neo-Nazi,” which are expected to imply a level of bigotry and hatred that no other term can adequately express. As our understanding of what behaviors and ideologies fit under the umbrella of Nazism expands, the power of the term becomes diluted. As that happens, people accused of being “Nazis” will care less, and people who are unsure what to think of the far right may grow more sympathetic.
The term “neo-Nazi” is also too narrow for many members of the modern American far right. The American neo-Nazi movement has been on the decline in recent years; even the largest American Nazi party, the National Socialist Movement, has only 350 members. In an interview with the HPR, Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, explained that, “for the most part, today’s white supremacists are not affiliated with organized groups. This lack of affiliation means that any groups that do emerge tend to be extremely flexible and porous.”
The largest of these flexible, emerging groups is the “alt-right.” Coined by American white nationalist Richard Spencer, this term has grown more popular over the past few years, and now describes an increasingly large portion of the far right. Greenblatt told the HPR that “the alt-right is a new name for an old hatred… make no mistake—the alt-right is racist and anti-Semitic to the core.” He also, though, elaborated on some of the unique features of this new incarnation: “The alt-right is distinguished by its younger demographic, frenetic use of social media, and attempts to employ irony as part of its hateful messaging.”
As a result of some of these new features, and as Charlottesville so vividly revealed to the rest of the country, more Americans are being attracted to the movement. As King explained to the HPR, the alt-right has “started to pick up people that one wouldn’t necessarily consider a white supremacist or a Nazi or someone affiliated with things like that.” And so using terms like “Nazi” becomes dangerous even when describing people like Spencer, who occasionally uses Nazi rhetoric—at a conference following Trump’s election, Spencer greeted the crowd by chanting “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory!” and was met with Nazi salutes. But, Hawley cautioned that “people like Spencer, when they appropriate Nazi slogans and gestures, do so in a kind of quasi-ironic way.” When they are labeled as “Nazis,” people like Spencer are in fact emboldened in their complaints about overreactions of a biased media.
However, while “Nazi” and “neo-Nazi” are dangerous because they are so extreme, the term “alt-right” is problematic for the opposite reason: its deceptive benignity. Stanley criticized the dominance of the term alt-right, explaining that “Richard Spencer is very proud of [the term], rightfully so, because it makes the Nazis seem like a grunge band from Seattle. It’s cool now to be far right.” This term, then, masks the hatred and bigotry wrapped up in the ideologies espoused by members of the far right like Spencer. By normalizing and even glamorizing the far right, the term “alt-right” undermines efforts to reject those ideologies.
Given, though, that the term has become so commonplace, complete erasure may not be feasible. Greenblatt shared his view with the HPR: “The problem is not so much with the term but in how people choose to define, or not define it. It is crucial that whenever the term alt-right is used, it be defined clearly as a movement of extremists and not some ‘alternative to the mainstream’ political movement.” Appropriately, the media is showing signs of adopting this approach. The Associated Press’ guidelines for using the term “alt-right,” updated after Charlottesville, emphasize the need for context: “Depending on the specifics of the situation, such beliefs might be termed racist, white supremacist or neo-Nazi… Whenever ‘alt-right’ is used in a story, include a definition.”
Towards Accuracy: White Supremacy and White Nationalism as Appropriate Descriptors
Given the problems associated with using terms like “neo-Nazi” and “alt-right” in reference to the American far right, we must begin to use words which accurately and precisely conjure up the ideologies of the movement. While they may not be as catchy, the terms “white supremacy” and “white nationalism” clarify that the American far right is not cool, new, or exciting; instead, these labels present people like the protesters at Charlottesville as, fundamentally, modern supporters of the racist ideologies that have been present in American society since the country’s inception.
The terms mean slightly different things, although they are often elided. While white supremacists advocate for a state governed by a racial hierarchy which positions whites at the top, white nationalists call for an exclusively white ethno-state. Members of the “alt-right” like Spencer fall more into the second category; as Hawley explained to the HPR, “groups like the alt-right, for the most part, are calling for the separation of different racial categories as they define them, as opposed to a multi racial society in which a certain hierarchy is strictly enforced—which we might think of as being sort of classical white supremacy, something like apartheid South Africa or the Jim Crow South.” However, the lines often blur, and the sense of racial superiority that “white supremacy” indicates is indeed a large part of the ideology of white nationalism. Hawley is “sensitive to the argument that all these racist ideologies should be classified under the umbrella term white supremacy;” instead, according to Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League, “we need to make sure that ‘alt-right’ is correctly identified as being part and parcel of the white supremacist movement.” The consensus seems to be that at this point, for the general public, both labels are accurate if adequately explained.
An additional reason to use terms like “white supremacy” and “white nationalism” is that they conjure up more American images of hate than the word “Nazi” does. These terms bring to mind the KKK and the Jim Crow South, reminding us that racism in American culture is present in everything from terrorist groups like the former to whole legislative systems like the latter. These labels help to remind all Americans, even those who are already vocally opposed to the far right, of these ugly realities of American history.
The many possible terms that can be used to describe the far right can begin to feel like a hopelessly tangled web. But ultimately, as Tom Rosenstiel, executive director of the American Press Institute, told the HPR, “the goal for journalists is to create understanding for their audience but also to balance that against being used by these hate groups.” That understanding applies not only to current events like the rally in Charlottesville, but also to awareness of the facets of American history and culture that allow events like it to occur.
In today’s America, continued use of the term “Nazi” and variations of it may be tempting given the almost cathartic release of anger it allows for, but the term largely fails to add nuance and context to conversations about race and justice. The term not only tends to be inaccurate, but may also undermine the cause of condemning and preventing the spread of these hateful ideologies. While it feels cruelly ironic that racists and white supremacists are free to spew their hateful beliefs while we must check and control our word choices, the reality is that repelling this kind of hatred will require targeted, careful efforts in realms including government, education, media, and even language.
Featured Image Source: Wikimedia Commons/Anthony Crider
In-Text Image Sources (in order): Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia Commons/Fibonacci Blue