Mark Charan Newton

A very interesting point indeed, on what we think of the left and far-right, and how actually, the far-right is very left, when looked at on the genuine political spectrum—and something I always wondered about. I’m not sure how accurate this is, but it’s just one of those things you might find interesting, if you follow these sorts of discussions on terminologies. Either way, at the root of the article, very glad to see fascists can’t get their act together. Wasn’t it all rather inevitable?

Why are these parties called “Right-wing”? There is nothing in their programme remotely conservative, or remotely small-government. On the contrary, they come from Europe’s radical and corporatist tradition. They are, as a rule, anti-monarchist and anti-clerical. They believe in a massive extension of state power, including nationalisation and import controls. They want socialism, at least in the narrow sense that they believe the state should redistribute income to enforce social equality. They march on May Day, waving red flags. They are, in the literal sense, revolutionary, in that they aim to overturn the established order. And, of course, they hate capitalism, which is why they tend also to be anti-American and anti-Semitic.

It is telling that these parties almost never refer to themselves as Rightist. The BNP makes much of being “the Labour Party your parents voted for”. Hitler’s party more or less shared its name with our own Socialist Workers’ Party. Yes, they are nationalist, but not because of a patriotic attachment to familiar institutions; rather, because they are attracted to the state as an instrument of corporatism.

Share: