I want to start a discussion on extremism, both left and right and others. What draws people to extremism...

This was in college, retard, where you're supposed to be a little more cordial and mature in the academic setting. But no, niggers don't know how to act like that, they can't separate the Sahara from civilization, they are so dense.

It's okay user, you're safe from those bullies now

And Western civilization will soon enough be safe from them as well.

What, a centrist in 1917 was between democratic and authoritarian government systems? Or that a moderate in 1917 supported different policies than a moderate in 2017 would?

A "centrist" or "moderate" of 1917 would have VERY different ideas of what qualifies as "left" or "right" from a "centrist" or "moderate" of 2017.

Doesn't that strike you as a bit odd?

He might not, for instance, think that women have a moral right or duty to vote. If you asked 2017's "moderate" if women deserve to vote or not, he'd get indignant.

>What draws people to extremism?
Extreme problems require extreme solutions.

I became a supporter of what's basically a semi-theocratic, corporatist, absolute monarchy.

The main reason for this shift was that I basically realized that, unless you embrace the idea of an esoteric system of truth, then moral nihilism renders a lot of political philosophy obsolete, because most political philosophies just assume their goal is desirable without actually being able to justify it outside of their ideology.

Pic related is basically what I ended up becoming.

Did pic related help you at all?

I mean that's not odd at all, really. Times change, in 100 years time, who knows? Maybe women will be seen in the same light in 2117 as 1917 and not have the right to vote. Maybe the right to vote will be removed from everyone.

It really doesn't seem odd, it would seem more odd from a conspiracy standpoint that the old spectrum of left/right, where the left favored democracy/republicanism and the right favored monarchy/some sort of autocratic rule. Today, both conservatives and liberals on the spectrum support democracy and republicanism. I think the point of the post is that it seems "a bit odd" that democracy is seen as so universally accepted today.

Not really, although I like de Maistre as well. It wasn't really any particular writer that caused me to think that way as much as it was just coming across nihilism and solipsism (the latter belief causing me to decide that the only possible way to obtain true knowledge is divine inspiration, on the basis that all epistemology requires assumptions, and the assumption of God is the simplest); solipsism brought me to nihilism, because I realized that if you can't determine an objective fact, there is no objectively true morality, and that we are then all at the mercy of social trends. So, instead of becoming a sad sack of shit, I decided to read up on world religions to see which one seemed to me to be the most real; I ultimately settled on Orthodox Christianity after considering Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Sufism, and orthodox Judaism. Now that I had a moral system that I believed to be objectively true, it only seemed rational that I should follow it to its logical conclusion and see challenges to that moral code as a threat to civilization itself.

I've noticed that most people who sincerely get triggered by politics have underlying issues

>"REEEE!! We need to kill all X-people!!"

Is just a symptom. That's not to say that some well adjusted people can't be drawn to fanatical causes, but it's less likely.

this is absolutely fucking retarded. What a dumb ass and overly simplified answer.

I like how you just pick religions as it suits your mood. People from the past that you look up to so much would be killed if they tried something similar.

But it's fundamentally true. Unhealthy, harmful stances come from unhealthy conditions.

>I've noticed

Someone else noticed it for you.

At some point in the past, universalist democracy was one concept of society among many. Now people don't even conceive of it as such

Doesn't that strike you as a bit odd?

Very true. The Tutsi commandos were wrong for massacring the innocent Hutus in east Congo, but seeing as the Hutu just tried to outright exterminate their people you can understand the rage.

>as it suits my mood
I didn't, though; I studied them, and picked the one that seemed to be the most logically consistent with how I understood the idea of God, as an infinite being. I disqualified Roman Catholicism because some of its doctrines seemed to be innovations that contradicted the Ecumenical Councils, and Islam seemed problematic because of the way St John of Damascus described their conception of Christ.

Eat a dick

To put it simply, feeling like you are being backed into a corner makes people turn to extremism. I was basically a libratarian until I realized that leftists would not respect my independence and want to force their agenda on me. I became a fascist because crushing the left is the only way I can survive and keep my way of life.

Green leftist turned eco-Calvino-Stalinist here.

>What draws people to extremism?

People have their own goals. When they wish to pursue them at any cost, regardless of the human life, they become an extremist. When you start to see other people becoming a problem, I suppose that's when you have truly became extremist.

> Social disenfranchisement?
I'm a lonely autist. That might figure into it. Also, I've also been inexplicably subject to a racist tirade all while I was minding there own business. I don't view racism as the problem anymore, I view racists as the problem. I think "They ought to be killed and their babies' heads dashed against walls in front of them now."

>Economic disenfranchisement?
I've had the pretty shit experience of being dragged to a charity and "financial education" lesson, to translate for my parents.

>Extreme tribalism or nationalism?

Working class here, it's funny because I'm descended from a businessman who lost all of his assets in a war involving America. If anything, my family's heritage would've indicated that I'd would've been a centrist.

For me, Stalin is a true hero, as is Jean Calvin. They were men who believed that somebody had to do something, regardless of the cost.

Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds.

Every time.

captcha 220 liberty

What is with tankies and "libruls" recently? It used to be "librul" was a Fox News insult.

Stalin proposed a theory that Social Democrats are basically just fascists in denial.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_fascism

t. former tankie

Liberals are self aggrandizing idiots who will support anything and anyone when their little fantasy land gets threatened by reality.

For seven months, I've been reading from my tankie friends about "libruls cry when we punch a Nazi seven months ago". It's pretty embarrassing to watch that occupy such a huge part of their worldview.

It's understandable, Nazis and liberals both share the same victim complex.

Shouldn't you have punched a second Nazi by now? Perhaps a third? Just to show that you're serious?

It's hard to hit someone over the internet.

the simple minded are drawn to ideology. in the absence of a devotion to faith in a higher power, they align themselves with an ideology they can use as a tool to justify acting like an ass as if being obscene is some glorious rebellion against the status quo

Your right, I should fraise it as "what makes people follow an extreme ideology where human life is discarded as worthless"

From the replies I've seen. I would say in right about he told theroeies of social and economic disenfranchisement. If add mental issues to it as well.

It depends on the context and situation. I hate the expression "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter", but in rare cases it's actually true.

It's fucking complicated.

t. autist

Economically center left but otherwise Fascist/Traditionalist here, I think I might be able to provide some insight. I have many of the typical factors of what would draw people to any extreme from Islam to Marxism. I grew up in a financially struggling and violent household. I was and still am introverted and emotionally cold, only going out for the gym or work. I grew up in a "Diverse" area and had pretty negative impressions of minorities even as a kid. I was also pretty intellectual as a kid and I was reading at beyond college levels by 5th grade, and with that came a passion for history, which made me lean more socially conservative. As time went on I'd seen the wicked nature of men, how rotten to the core our country has become, I knew something was wrong but I still interpreted the world though your typical moderate Republican lens. It was only about 2 years ago that I became attracted to Fascism, after becoming disillusioned with Republican corporate cocksucking and Dem's bending over backwards to ghetto trash. If you have any questions feel free, I'm an open book.

It's ironic that US conservatards like hannity and shapiro have actually taken up that concept too with "liberal fascism".

...

Are you trying to imply that Early Christianity wasn't exactly that, a revolt agains the status quo? inb4 Fedora, I am a Christian myself.

Now THIS is what I call LARPing

T. Straw man

Laugh all you want, but thats the place I come from.

you come off like a redditor in the way that you assume an internet persona with the intention of seeming unique and interesting to make up for dissonance between how you see yourself and how others see you in your real life

Yeah, and OP wasn't.

not at all. but contemporary extremism almost always comes from a perversion of religious dogma or a fiercely clung-to fringe political ideology

and to echo what many have said, social disenfranchisement is perhaps the primary ingredient in radicals. there are many other factors, but holding extremist views and behaving with exclusive prejudice and violence is fundamentally self-destructive behavior, and the self-destructive person often believes in the fallacy that their experience is singular and spectacularly misunderstood by everyone around them

how exactly OP was a strawman?

I'm not remarkable at all, as you can see in this thread most people here had similar life experiences, they just picked a different way of translating that into some blind faith in an ideology. In any case, I have been reflecting on my beliefs as of late, so this thread was helpful. You right though I do come across as a overly dramatic faggot, my apologies.

anti social tendencies. yep

sorry for being a jerk, user

>i-it wasn't in high school, it was in college!
good comeback you fat faggot

t. Thinks his le based God Emperor is the next Hitler that will save EVROPA

He used political ideologies are examples of extremism, which is relative and viewed from a frame of reference which idolozes current capitalist societies without weighing their negatives- for instance it is obvious that money has taken precedence in current democracies wholly corrupting the system. Ask anyone for the reason behind the recent Iraq War and the answers usually given will be money from the Israeli lobby or the military industrial complex. The war had no benefit to America and cost 1 trillion- money does not play a determining role in government leadership in National Socialism or even Communism.

Ah yes, DA JOOS is the obvious answer for compelex geopolitical questions.

I said Israeli, not necessarily jews. I don't understand why you latched onto that, likewise the influence of pro-Israeli neo-conservatives in the Bush administration is well documented. Take Richard Perle, who was Bush's Chairman of the the Defense Policy Board and his past ties and collaborations with Benjamin Netanyahu-

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strategy_for_Securing_the_Realm

>A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (commonly known as the "Clean Break" report) is a policy document that was prepared in 1996 by a study group led by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu, the then Prime Minister of Israel.[1] The report explained a new approach to solving Israel's security problems in the Middle East with an emphasis on "Western values." It has since been criticized for advocating an aggressive new policy including the removal of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and the containment of Syria by engaging in proxy warfare and highlighting its possession of "weapons of mass destruction".

Or campaign donations from Sheldon Adelson, a multi-billionaire and proponent of Zionism.

huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/24/sheldon-adelson-donations_n_1910094.html

>Sheldon Adelson has set a new record in political donations by giving $70 million to help Republicans in the 2012 elections, nearly triple the previous highest amount, according to news outlet Politico on Monday.

DA JOOS U NAZI LOL

>Israel is valuable ally in the ME
wow shocking

I painted ideologies that call for supremacy or have killed lots of people as "extreme". Now I know I'm going to get called a moral fag but disregard for human life is generally a bad thing.

>implying it isn't
DA FROGS are behind Libya though

>2015
>war started in 2010

Why do niggers keep posting this?

From a realist standpoint not really. Iran or SA hold more clout in the Middle East than Israel. And to be honest our unquestioning support of Israel is more of a public relations disaster in the Middle East than an important national interest

That's when it was released by FOIA here's the actual date it was sent. And desu I don't understand how the date it was sent changes the content of the email. Seems like you're splitting hairs to me

wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328

What disaster? America has been supporting Israel since the Cold War. It did wonders for American interests there.

>has lasted more than a year
>started in 2011
>means it's 2013 at the most
keep shilling

How is Israel valuable? They have no natural resources we need like oil and there is only one small radio tower base there.
>Isreal is our greatest ally
>I'll just conveniently ignore the links between Israel and those who got us into numerous wars
So first you knee-jerked and sperged over DA JOOS being mentioned and now are saying Israel is our greatest ally. I wonder who is behind these posts.

They are valuable because they allow a ally state that gathers intelligence and serves as a propagator of American influence and interests

Beats the hell out of supporting unstable Arab dictatorships who change sides as it suits them. The US already gambled on Saddam during the 80s. Then he thought he could play his own game because he was too stupid to understand how things are supposed to work.

Saudi Arabia is only valuable because of oil, but they won't be forever.

Israel is a secure stronghold of American interests in the ME, the basis of its operations there.

>literally making every citizen from morroco to Pakistan have a visceral hatred of America only being kept in check by their autocratic rulers
You ever wonder why Obama gave the okay for the Egyptian military to kick out the democratically elected muslim brotherhood?

I would describe leftists as cultural imperialists rather than fascists

>someone, somewhere in the world hates America
boo fucking hoo

>arpatheid state with decreasing demographic favorability
>stable
Pick one.
And Iraq was also America's fault. One of our retarded ambassadors gave a tacit okay to Sadaam to invade Kuwait

Literally, unironically, kill yourself

>valuable
Our ties to Israel has done nothing but alienate the entirety of the Middle East and much of the world, likewise Israel has been more of a reciever of intelligence than a provider- in fact Israel has commited the greatest espionage crimes against the US in the last 50 years with Jonathan Pollard. The fact Israel hasn't been removed from our "ally" list is amazing. What is even more infuriating is the long list of Jewish US politicians who begged for Pollard's clemency, a bunch of Americans in name only.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Pollard

Not really good for propagating our interests in an area when everyone in an area hates us don't you think? Have you actually ever read up on the reasons why Bin Laden started Al-Qaeda? Protip, it relates to our Jewish friends in the Eastern Mediterranean

Israel has nukes. That's stable as it gets.
>ne of our retarded ambassadors gave a tacit okay to Sadaam to invade Kuwait
And Saddam fell for it. A fucking ambassador tricked him into invading another country.

Bin Laden was an American project from beginning to an end.

>Israel has nukes. That's stable as it gets.
>Pakistan has nukes. That's stable as it gets.
>Ukraine has nukes. That's stable as it gets

You're a moron.

Mostly this But I think it has a lot to do with the fact that extremism let the ideology think for you. Once that you go so far into politics that your ideology is able to explain everything that happens i nthe world with a single, internaly logical explanation, then you don't have to think anymore: you know the answer, you know who to blame.
That's a very comforting thought and makes you believe you have control/could fix it, which fixes both the feeling of helplessness one must feel in face of the world issues and the feeling of incomprehension you can have sometimes.
tl;dr it makes the world a simpler place and brainlets love it

>Personal issues
How so
>anti-social tendencies,
The examples used by OP- communism, national socialism, they all require, in order to be successful, people who organize and are outgoing.
>sexual repression
Oh look, Sigmund Freud has joined us.

>What draws people to extremism?
There does not seem to be any one correct answer to this. I hear arguments such as poverty and alienation all the time when this issue comes up, and while it certainly seems to be true for neo-nazis--at least where I live--who generally come from working class conditions and struggle to find jobs, it's certaonly not true for the extreme left who generally comes from middle-class families and don't seem to have anything debilitating in their history to explain why they resort to political violence. It's also worth noting that--again, at least where I live--the violence from the far right is given way more attention, but all the statistics on the subject show that the far left is responsible for at least 90% of all political violence in the country.

Loss of opportunity and declining living conditions can affect people of every class, not just the working poor but also middle class students who find themselves mired hopelessly in debt for degree whose job prospects simply aren't there, and that goes for all fields including STEM fields.

The difference is that the system is specifically designed to keep working people engaged full-time just to make ends meet, where the middle-class people have the resources and time to go out and attempt to change their condition. Truly effective uprisings are the result of classes allying with each other.

Anomie is answer to all those questions OP.

I take issue with your concept of 'Extremism' which is an entirely subjective label cast upon fringe groups by the in-group. Of course having an ideology which is in complete contrast to the ruling values system will seem from the perspective within the mainstream as extreme. However to the so called extremist the values by which the current system rules is extreme to them.

Ultimately the ruling elite will always cast those who want to remove their system as extreme for propaganda purposes.

But in an attempt to answer your question the most simple reason why people may reject the mainstream 'moderate' system of their time is most likely because that system no longer does anything for them. So they look for an alternative.

>have a belief that is diffirent from "centrist" beliefs
>extremist
desu maybe I should be an extremist

I'm for everything that works and is sustainable while providing relatively comfortable lives for the citizens.

if you believe that whatever things that you believe in is the ultimate truth and is unwilling to listen to other people's opinion than yes you are an extremist.

>I'm a green-neo-hussite-paleo-conservative-utilitarian and my mommy didn't like me
LMAO
do you guys live in the real world?
get a real freakin ideology you twats

>I became a supporter of what's basically a semi-theocratic, corporatist, absolute monarchy.
what in god's name

>OP, I think your question makes a lot more sense if you formulate it as "why doesn't everyone support status quo liberalism," treating it as an ideology in itself makes a lot more sense than considering everything outside it "extremism".
wow this is a smart fucking post

You should try it, it's great!

i.4cdn.org/wsg/1501192546212.webm

Communist here.

I've thought about this question a lot over the course of several years, mainly in long discussions with my roommate, who is a staunchly center-right.

The first issue here is to define "extremism." As other posters have mentioned in this thread, what is extreme is historically relative. Remember that republicanism was once considered extreme. But other posters have covered this issue well, so I'll wrap up by defining "extremism" a little more gently as "any political thought that is sufficiently far outside of or contrary to the mainstream political thought." To explain extremist ideologies as those that place little value on life misses the mark, because even the current hegemony of liberal capitalism accepts chronic hunger and resource wars as fundamental, no matter the blood cost.

Now to explain why people adopt these avant-garde ideologies. I feel like the first prerequisite is to have something genuinely terrible happen to you, ideally something random and unpreventable. And not because an injustice leads to bitterness or resentment, but because an injustice leads you to question. It leads you to question whether your assumptions about a society's fairness, egalitarianism, etc. are well-founded, or merely assumptions. And if you begin to question, and if you find others who were afflicted by the same disease, then you may begin to see yourself not as an isolated case of misfortune, but as a symptom of a greater societal pathology that an alternative ideology might address.

I have come to believe this only through the discussions with my roommate. I have been friends with him since we were high schoolers, and I must say, he has lived a comfortable life. He is perfectly rational, very critical of his stances, and willing to consider and adopt new ideas. But he believes that society is more or less fair and just, and that puts a cap on how deviant his opinions can be.

There's nothing about the extremes that make them inherently worse than the center.
t. Centrist