Der Spiegel recently ran a series on the Pan-European rise of anti-Muslim right-wing "populism." Agence France-Presse recently explained that President Nikolas Sarkozy's draconian crackdown on Roma, Gypsies and Travellers is wildly popular. The Guardian recently reported on the growing ties between England's far right and the U.S. Tea Party "movement." In this country, it's hard to keep up with the multiple manifestations of the rise of right-wing extremism. And people are getting the vapors because Markos dared identify similarities between our own theocratic extremists and the Taliban? And people even on this blog sometimes buy into the absurd and dangerous false equivalency between the anger on the right and the anger on the left?
Last weekend, Frank Rich pointed out that the hate-mongering of prominent right-wing politicians and media figures has at the very least coincided with a rise in right-wing violence against identifiable minorities. The Republican Party's long history of fomenting bigotry grows less veiled and more explicit as the staggering economy looses people's ugliest primal instincts. Hardship often breeds anger and hatred. Hatred is not rational. And those who deliberately exacerbate the hardship aren't going be reticent about trying to co-opt and direct the anger and the hatred. It isn't hard to do. And it also isn't hard to identify, once one is aware of it. But most people aren't aware of it. And the agendas of too many that are aware of it make them unwilling to or incapable of helping to stop it.
The anger on the left is focused. There are specific reasons. To give one obvious example, many on the populist left are frustrated that a Democratic administration continues to rationalize denying basic rights to the LGBT community. On the other hand, many on the populist right have paranoid delusions about ostensible losses of rights, none of which are actually taking place. But does anyone seriously question the reaction if those on the right were, as is the LGBT community, actually denied the same basic rights that everyone else enjoys? They brought guns to rallies opposing a very limited expansion in the government's role in providing access to health care. Imagine if they were denied the right to marry or serve in the military. And some want to equate the behavior of the angry left to that of the angry right? Other examples of anger on the left include issues of war and peace and international human rights or the disastrously inadequate response to what the science tells us about the rapidly developing climate crisis. And these are in some way similar to people freaking out about death panels or socialism or the ostensible family values by which even their heroes don't abide?
Is there anything even remotely similar on the left to a Republican Senate nominee (who might actually defeat the current Senate Majority Leader) talking about Second Amendment remedies if the elections don't turn out the way she wants? How about another Republican Senate nominee who openly excuses rape, another who opposed child abuse legislation, or another who praises Communist East Germany? When was the last time a Democratic governor floated the idea of secession? Can you imagine the reaction in the corporatist media if a Democratic Senate nominee had a history of disparaging religion? And those may be what now passes for a relative moderate Republican, when you consider yet another Republican Senate nominee whose associates are linked to armed insurrectionists. And that's somehow similar to liberals who are angry because the health insurance bill didn't go far enough or the stimulus was too small? That's somehow similar to liberals who are so angry that they might march in rallies or commit acts of civil disobedience or openly criticize a Democratic administration?
These are dangerous times. When economies collapse, and millions of people are suffering, many inevitably end up embracing extremism. It's happening all over the world. That is part of the reason so many on the left wanted to see a much more aggressive approach to reviving the economy. It worked during the Great Depression, when extremism also was on the rise throughout much of the world. But rather than emphasizing the degree to which the right-wing economic model had been revealed by the economic implosion it caused, it was the left that often was vilified and mocked, and it is the left that already bears some of the brunt of the mounting anger and tension-- an anger and tension that likely would have been mitigated had the economic prescriptions of the left actually been enacted. And even many who are neither conservative nor are fooled by conservative propaganda seem comfortable with the scapegoating of liberalism, which is curious in several different ways.
We can't change the past, we can only attempt a wiser path to the future. And it has to begin with honesty. It has to begin with acknowledging that whatever went wrong in the last few years wasn't because public policy suddenly embraced economic liberalism, because liberalism wasn't embraced and conservatism wasn't fully rejected. Too much of what went wrong was allowed to continue, and far too little of what was needed was enacted. And we are all paying for it. And we must begin by acknowledging it. We must acknowledge that the anger percolating on the left is in no way similar to the dangerous and all too eerily familiar rage on the right. There is no equivalency. The anger on the left is based on facts, and is mostly expressed rationally. The anger on the right is being manipulated and directed by the same people who helped create the continuing economic crisis, and who depend on a confused public blaming identifiable Others, including those who adhere to the always marginalized political ideologies that paradoxically have the best record of actually making things better. And it is inevitable that an anger so displaced from history and reality would evolve into such extreme and irrational forms.
As Rich wrote:
Don’t expect the extremism and violence in our politics to subside magically after Election Day — no matter what the results. If Tea Party candidates triumph, they’ll be emboldened. If they lose, the anger and bitterness will grow. The only development that can change this equation is a decisive rescue from our prolonged economic crisis. Not for the first time in history — and not just American history — fear itself is at the root of a rabid outbreak of populist rage against government, minorities and conspiratorial "elites."
So far neither party has offered a comprehensive antidote to our economic pain. The Democrats have fallen short, and the cynics leading the G.O.P. haven’t so much as tried. We shouldn’t be surprised that this year even a state as seemingly well-mannered as Connecticut has produced a senatorial candidate best known for marching into a wrestling ring to gratuitously kick a man in the groin.
These are dangerous times. We must do all we can to prevent the Republican electoral bloodbath that many are predicting, but we also must not delude ourselves into believing that things suddenly are going to get better if we do. The only thing that can begin to calm the fury is a true economic recovery-- a recovery that reaches wide and deep, releasing the pressure by alleviating the very real economic fears and hardships, without which the manipulations and allures of extremism would find no fertile ground. The Republicans and the conservatives offer but a carefully crafted mirage, but desperate people often cling to such desperate delusions. And it is in the Republicans' political interests that such desperation continue and deepen. There has to be a better future on a visible horizon. The only real solution is the one that has been proven to work. And if those in positions of political power cannot come to terms with the fact that conservative economic theory has earned its place in the septic tank of history, while a liberal economic agenda is the only path to a better future, they will fail themselves and everyone else. It's not good enough to be better than the worst, when not being as good as the moment demands might result in the empowerment of the worst.