----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID: 14@dont-email.me> 448e15dc
@REPLYADDR GOP = THE PARTY OF HATE
<nowomr@protonmail.com>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 GOP = THE PARTY OF HATE
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-Message-ID: 14@dont-email.me>
@TZUTC: -0000
@PID: Xnews/5.04.25
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
In United States politics, the radical right is a political preference that
leans towards Ultraconservatism, white supremacy, or other right-wing to far-
right ideologies in a hierarchical structure paired with conspiratorial
rhetoric alongside traditionalist and reactionary aspirations.[1][2][3][4]
The term was first used by social scientists in the 1950s regarding small
groups such as the John Birch Society in the United States, and since then it
has been applied to similar groups worldwide.[5] The term "radical" was
applied to the groups because they sought to make fundamental (hence
"radical") changes within institutions and remove persons and institutions
that threatened their values or economic interests from political life.[6]
Terminology
Among academics and social scientists, there is disagreement over how right-
wing political movement should be described, and no consensus over what the
proper terminology should be exists, although the terminology which was
developed in the 1950s, based on the use of the words "radical" or
"extremist", is the most commonly used one. Other scholars simply prefer to
call them "The Right" or "conservatives", which is what they call themselves.
The terminology is used to describe a broad range of movements.[5] The term
"radical right" was coined by Seymour Martin Lipset and it was also included
in a book titled The New American Right, which was published in 1955.[7] The
contributors to that book identified a conservative "responsible Right" as
represented by the Republican administration of Dwight D. Eisenhower and a
radical right that wished to change political and social life.[8] Further to
the right of the radical right, they identified themselves as the
"ultraright", adherents of which advocated drastic change, but they only used
violence against the state in extreme cases. In the decades since, the
ultraright, while adopting the basic ideology of the 1950s radical right,[9]
has updated it to encompass what it sees as "threats" posed by the modern
world. It has leveraged fear of those threats to draw new adherents, and to
encourage support of a more militant approach to countering these perceived
threats. A more recent book by Klaus Wahl, The Radical Right, contrasts the
radical right of the 1950s, which obtained influence during the Reagan
administration, to the radical right of today, which has increasingly turned
to violent acts beginning with the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995.[1][2][10]
Wahl`s book documents this evolution: "Ideologies of [today`s] radical right
emphasize social and economic threats in the modern and postmodern world
(e.g., globalization, immigration). The radical right also promises
protection against such threats by an emphatic ethnic construction of `we`,
the people, as a familiar, homogeneous in-group, anti-modern, or reactionary
structures of family, society, an authoritarian state, nationalism, the
discrimination, or exclusion of immigrants and other minorities ... While
favoring traditional social and cultural structures (traditional family and
gender roles, religion, etc.) the radical right uses modern technologies and
it does not ascribe to a specific economic policy; some parties advocate a
liberal, free-market policy, but other parties advocate a welfare state
policy. Finally, the radical right can be scaled by using different degrees
of militancy and aggressiveness from right-wing populism to racism,
terrorism, and totalitarianism."[11]
Ultraright groups, as The Radical Right definition states, are normally
called "far-right" groups,[12] but they may also be called "radical right"
groups.[13] According to Clive Webb, "Radical right is commonly, but not
exclusively used to describe anticommunist organizations such as the
Christian Crusade and the John Birch Society... [T]he term far right ... is
the label most broadly used by scholars ... to describe militant white
supremacists."[14]
Theoretical perspectives
McCarthyism
The study of the radical right began in the 1950s as social scientists
attempted to explain McCarthyism, which was seen as a lapse from the American
political tradition. A framework for description was developed primarily in
Richard Hofstadter`s "The pseudo-conservative revolt" and Seymour Martin
Lipset`s "The sources of the radical right". These essays, along with others
by Daniel Bell, Talcott Parsons, Peter Viereck and Herbert Hyman, were
included in The New American Right (1955). In 1963, following the rise of the
John Birch Society, the authors were asked to re-examine their earlier essays
and the revised essays were published in the book The Radical Right. Lipset,
along with Earl Raab, traced the history of the radical right in The politics
of unreason (1970).[15]
The central arguments of The Radical Right provoked criticism. Some on the
Right thought that McCarthyism could be explained as a rational reaction to
communism. Others thought McCarthyism should be explained as part of the
Republican Party`s political strategy. Critics on the Left denied that
McCarthyism could be interpreted as a mass movement and rejected the
comparison with 19th-century populism. Others saw status politics,
dispossession and other explanations as too vague.[16]
Paranoid-style politics
Two different approaches were taken by these social scientists. The American
historian Richard Hofstadter wrote an analysis in his influential 1964 essay
The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Hofstadter sought to identify the
characteristics of the groups. Hofstadter defined politically paranoid
individuals as feeling persecuted, fearing conspiracy, and acting over-
aggressive yet socialized. Hofstadter and other scholars in the 1950s argued
that the major left-wing movement of the 1890s, the Populists, showed what
Hofstadter said was "paranoid delusions of conspiracy by the Money Power".
[17]
Historians have also applied the paranoid category to other political
movements, such as the conservative Constitutional Union Party of 1860.[18]
Hofstadter`s approach was later applied to the rise of new right-wing groups,
including the Christian right and the Patriot movement.[15]
Trumpism
Main article: 2016 United States presidential election
Further information: Presidency of Donald Trump, Trumpism, and Fascism in the
United States
The political success of Donald Trump has prompted American historian Rick
Perlstein to argue that historians have underestimated the influence and
power on the modern American political right of populist, nativist,
authoritarian, and conspiracy-minded right-wing movements, such as the Black
Legion, Charles Coughlin, the Christian Front, and "birther" speculation;[19]
and have overestimated the more libertarian influence of William F. Buckley`s
limited government, free trade, free market intellectual conservatism, and
the neoconservative pro-immigration and optimistic outlook of Ronald Reagan.
[19]
Current size
Political scientist Gary Jacobson[20] gives an estimate of the "size of the
extremist vote" as a fraction of Republican Party voters (there being
essentially no right-wing extremists in the Democratic party), based on
sympathizers as well as active supporters of the "Proud Boys, Oath Keepers,
QAnon etc.". He points to survey data of Republicans who answered "yes" to
questions such as whether they had a "favorable opinion of the people who
invaded the Capitol on Jan. 6", thought it likely that Donald Trump would
"be reinstated as president before the end of 2021", and whether it was
"definitely true" that ?top Democrats are involved in elite child sex-
trafficking rings.? Based on the results, which were stable over 2020?2022,
he estimated that "20 to 25 percent of the Republican electorate can be
considered extremists".[21]
Social structure
Sociologists Lipset and Raab were focused on who joined these movements and
how they evolved. They saw the development of radical right-wing groups as
occurring in three stages. In the first stage certain groups came under
strain because of a loss or threatened loss of power and/or status. In the
second stage they theorize about what has led to this threat. In the third
stage they identify people and groups whom they consider to be responsible. A
successful radical right-wing group would be able to combine the anxieties of
both elites and masses. European immigration for example threatened the
elites because immigrants brought socialism and radicalism, while for the
masses the threat came from their Catholicism. The main elements are low
democratic restraint, having more of a stake in the past than the present and
laissez-faire economics. The emphasis is on preserving social rather than
economic status. The main population attracted are lower-educated, lower-
income and lower-occupational strata. They were seen as having a lower
commitment to democracy, instead having loyalty to groups, institutions and
systems.[22]
However, some scholars reject Lipset and Raab`s analysis. James Aho, for
example, says that the way individuals join right-wing groups is no different
from how they join other types of groups. They are influenced by recruiters
and join because they believe the goals promoted by the group are of value to
them and find personal value in belonging to the group. Several scholars,
including Sara Diamond and Chip Berlet, reject the theory that membership in
the radical right is driven by emotionality and irrationality and see them as
similar to other political movements. John George and Laird Wilcox see the
psychological claims in Lipset and Raab`s approach as "dehumanizing" of
members of the radical right. They claim that the same description of members
of the radical right is also true of many people within the political
mainstream.[23]
Hofstader found a common thread in the radical right, from fear of the
Illuminati in the late 18th century, to anti-Catholic and anti-Masonic
movements in the 19th to McCarthyism and the John Birch Society in the 20th.
They were conspiracist, Manichean, absolutist and paranoid. They saw history
as a conspiracy by a demonic force that was on the verge of total control,
requiring their urgent efforts to stop it. Therefore, they rejected
pluralistic politics, with its compromise and consensus-building. Hofstadter
thought that these characteristics were always present in a large minority of
the population. Frequent waves of status displacement would continually bring
it to the surface.[24]
D. J. Mulloy however noted that the term "extremist" is often applied to
groups outside the political mainstream and the term is dropped once these
groups obtain respectability, using the Palestinian Liberation Organization
as an example. The mainstream frequently ignores the commonality between
itself and so-called extremist organizations. Also, the radical right appeals
to views that are held by the mainstream: antielitism, individualism, and
egalitarianism. Their views on religion, race, Americanism and guns are held
by a significant proportion of other white Americans.[25]
Conspiracism
Main article: Conspiracy theory
Further information: List of conspiracy theories
Throughout modern history, conspiracism has been a major feature of the
radical right[4] and subject to numerous books and articles, the most famous
of which is Richard Hofstadter`s essay The Paranoid Style in American
Politics (1964). Imaginary threats have variously been identified as
originating from American Catholics, non-whites, women, homosexuals, secular
humanists, Mormons, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, American communists,
Freemasons, bankers, and the U. S. government. Alexander Zaitchik, writing
for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), credited cable news hosts,
including Glenn Beck, Lou Dobbs, the John Birch Society, and WorldNetDaily
with popularizing conspiracy theories. In the Fall 2010 issue of the SPLC`s
Intelligence Report, he identified the following as the top 10 conspiracy
theories of the radical right:[26]
Chemtrails
Martial Law
Federal Emergency Management Agency Concentration Camps
Foreign troops on US soil
Door-to-door gun confiscations
9/11 as government plan
Population control
High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP)
Federal Reserve
North American Union
Common to most of these theories is an overarching belief in the existence of
New World Order intent on instituting a one-world, communist government.[26]
Climate change being viewed as a hoax is also sometimes associated with the
radical right.[27]
Since 2017, the QAnon conspiracy theory has been widely promulgated among
fringe groups on the far-right.[28]
During the COVID-19 pandemic, far-right leaders and influencers have promoted
anti-vaccination rhetoric and conspiracy theories surrounding the pandemic.
[29]
Right-wing populism
Main article: Right-wing populism
From the 1990s onward, parties that have been described as radical right
became established in the legislatures of various democracies including
Canada, Australia, Norway, France, Israel, Russia, Romania, and Chile, and
they also entered coalition governments in Switzerland, Finland, Austria, the
Netherlands, and Italy. However, there is little consensus about the reasons
for this.[30] Some of these parties had historic roots, such as the National
Alliance, formed as the Italian Social Movement in 1946, the French National
Front, founded in 1972, and the Freedom Party of Austria, an existing party
that moved sharply to the right after 1986. Typically new right-wing parties,
such as the French Poujadists, the U.S. Reform Party and the Dutch Pim
Fortuyn List enjoyed short-lived prominence.[31] The main support for these
parties comes from both the self-employed and skilled and unskilled labor,
with support coming predominantly from males.[32]
However, scholars are divided on whether these parties are radical right,
since they differ from the groups described in earlier studies of the radical
right. They are more often described as populist.[33] Studies of the radical
right in the United States and right-wing populism in Europe have tended to
be conducted independently, with very few comparisons made. European analyses
have tended to use comparisons with fascism, while studies of the American
radical right have stressed American exceptionalism. The U.S. studies have
paid attention to the consequences of slavery, the profusion of religious
denominations and a history of immigration, and saw fascism as uniquely
European.[34]
Although the term "radical right" was American in origin, the term has been
consciously adopted by some European social scientists. Conversely the term
"right-wing extremism", which is European in origin, has been adopted by some
American social scientists. Since the European right-wing groups in existence
immediately following the war had roots in fascism they were normally called
"neo-fascist". However, as new right-wing groups emerged with no connection
to historical fascism, the use of the term "right-wing extremism" came to be
more widely used.[35]
Jeffrey Kaplan and Leonard Weinberg argued that the radical right in the U.S.
and right-wing populism in Europe were the same phenomenon that existed
throughout the Western world. They identified the core attributes as
contained in extremism, behaviour and beliefs. As extremists, they see no
moral ambiguity and demonize the enemy, sometimes connecting them to
conspiracy theories such as the New World Order. Given this worldview, there
is a tendency to use methods outside democratic norms, although this is not
always the case. The main core belief is inequality, which often takes the
form of opposition to immigration or racism. They do not see this new Right
as having any connection with the historic Right, which had been concerned
with protecting the status quo.[36] They also see the cooperation of the
American and European forms, and their mutual influence on each other, as
evidence of their existence as a single phenomenon.[37]
Daniel Bell argues that the ideology of the radical right is "its readiness
to jettison constitutional processes and to suspend liberties, to condone
Communist methods in the fighting of Communism".[38] Historian Richard
Hofstader agrees that communist-style methods are often emulated: "The John
Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through
`front` groups, and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war
along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy". He also
quotes Barry Goldwater: "I would suggest that we analyze and copy the
strategy of the enemy; theirs has worked and ours has not".[39]
History
Conspiracy theories
Main article: American political conspiracy theories
See also: Far-right conspiracy theories and List of conspiracy theories
The American Patriots who spearheaded the American Revolution in the 1770s
were motivated primarily by an ideology that historians call Republicanism.
[40] It stressed the dangers of aristocracy, as represented by the British
government, corruption, and the need for every citizen to display civic
virtue. When public affairs took a bad turn, Republicans were inclined to
identify a conspiracy of evil forces as the cause.[41]
Against this background of fear of conspiracies against American liberties
the first Radical Right-style responses came in the 1790s.[42] Some
Federalists warned of an organized conspiracy involving Thomas Jefferson and
his followers, and recent arrivals from Europe, alleging that they were
agents of the French revolutionary agenda of violent radicalism, social
equalitarianism and anti-Christian infidelity.[43] The Federalists in 1798
acted by passing the Alien and Sedition Acts, designed to protect the country
against both foreign and domestic radicals. Fear of immigration led to a riot
in New York City in 1806 between nativists and Irishmen, which led to
increased calls by Federalists to nativism.[42][44]
Anti-Masonic Party
Main article: Anti-Masonic Party
In America, public outrage against privilege and aristocracy in the United
States was expressed in the Northeast by advocates of anti-Masonry, the
belief that Freemasonry comprised powerful evil secret elites which rejected
republican values and were blocking the movement toward egalitarianism and
reform. The anti-Masons, with a strong evangelical base, organized into a
political party, the Anti-Masonic Party that pledged to rid Masons from
public office. It was most active in 1828?1836. The Freemason movement was
badly damaged and never fully recovered; the Anti-Mason movement merged into
the coalition that became the new Whig Party. The anti-Masonry movement was
not "radical"; it fully participated in democracy, and was animated by the
belief that the Masons were the ones subverting democracy in America.[45][46]
While earlier accounts of the antimasons portrayed their supporters as mainly
poor people, more recent scholarship has shown that they were largely middle-
class.[47]
Nativism
Main article: Nativism (politics)
The arrival of large numbers of Irish Catholic immigrants in the 1830s and
1840s led to a reaction among Americans, who were alarmed by the levels of
crime and welfare dependency among the new arrivals, and the use of violence
to control the polls on election day. Nativists began to revere symbols of
Americanism: the Puritans, the Minute Men, the Founding Fathers and people
who they considered true Christians. The immigrants were seen as pawns in a
conspiracy to undermine America. Nativists in New York formed the American
Republican Party. It merged into the Know Nothings in the 1850s. The main
support for the Know Nothings was urban and working class. The party split
over slavery and the northern wing merged into the Republican Party in the
late 1850s.[48][49]
White paramilitary organizations in the Southern United States
Starting in the 1870s and continuing through the late 19th century, numerous
white supremacist paramilitary groups operated in the South, with the goal of
organizing against and intimidating supporters of the Republican Party.
Examples of such groups included the Red Shirts and the White League.
American Protective Association
In the Midwestern United States in 1887, the American Protective Association
(APA) was formed by Irish Protestants who wanted to fight against the power
of the Catholic Church in politics. It was a secret organization whose
members campaigned for Protestant candidates in local elections and it
opposed the hiring of Catholics for government jobs. Claiming to have secret
documents which it obtained from nuns and priests who had escaped from the
Catholic Church, it accused the Pope of absolving Catholics from loyalty to
the United States and it also accused the Pope of asking Catholics to kill
heretics. It also claimed that the Catholic Church ordered Catholics to
emigrate to major U.S. cities where they could assume control and it also
claimed that the civil service was dominated by Catholics who remitted part
of their pay to Rome. The movement was rejected by mainstream Republicans and
it faded away in the mid-1890s.[50][51]
An offshoot of the APA, the Protestant Protective Association (PPA) was set
up in the Canadian province of Ontario in 1891. It drew support from
Orangemen in the 1890s, before it went into decline. Its leaders opposed
Catholic influence and supported the Imperial Federation.[52] A PPA was also
set up in Australia.[53]
Lily-white movement
Main article: Lily-white movement
The lily-white movement was an all-white faction of the Republican Party in
the Southern United States which opposed civil rights and African-American
involvement in the party, and it was active in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries.
Second Ku Klux Klan
The Second Ku Klux Klan, which was formed in 1915, combined anti-Catholicism,
antisemitism, white supremacy, Protestant fundamentalism and moralism with
right-wing extremism. Its main source of support came from the urban south,
the midwest and the Pacific Coast.[54] While the Klan initially drew most of
its members and supporters from the upper middle class, its bigotry and its
violence alienated these members and it came to be dominated by less educated
and poorer members as a result.[55] The Klan claimed that there was a secret
Catholic army within the United States which was loyal to the Pope, it also
claimed that one million Knights of Columbus were arming themselves, and it
also claimed that Irish-American policemen would shoot Protestants as
punishment for heresy. They also claimed that the Catholics were planning to
take over Washington and put the Vatican in power, and they also claimed that
all presidential assassinations had been carried out by Catholics. The
prominent Klan leader, D. C. Stephenson claimed that international Jewish
bankers were behind the First World War and he also claimed that they were
plotting to destroy economic opportunities for Christians. Other Klansmen
claimed that the Russian Revolution and Communism were both controlled by
Jews. The Klan frequently reprinted parts of The Protocols of the Elders of
Zion and New York City was condemned as an evil city which was controlled by
Jews and Catholics. However, the objects of the Klan`s fears tended to vary
by locale and they included Catholics, Jews, African Americans, Wobblies,
Orientals, labor unions and liquor. The Klan was also anti-elitist and it
also attacked "the intellectuals", seeing itself as the egalitarian defender
of the common man.[56]
British subjects who became naturalized Americans were encouraged to join the
"Riders of the Red Robe" and the Klan was successful in establishing branches
in several Canadian provinces, but it disappeared after 1930.[57]
Great Depression
This section relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Relevant
discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by
introducing citations to additional sources at this section. (December 2020)
(Learn how and when to remove this template message)
During the Great Depression there was a large number of small nativist
groups, whose ideologies and bases of support were similar to those of
earlier nativist groups. However, movements such as Huey Long`s Share Our
Wealth and Father Coughlin`s National Union for Social Justice emerged, which
differed from other right-wing groups by attacking big business, calling for
economic reform and rejecting nativism. However, Coughlin`s group later
developed a racist ideology.[58]
The Black Legion, which had a peak membership of 40,000 was formed by former
Klansmen and operated in Indiana, Ohio and Michigan. Unlike the Klan, its
members dressed in black and its organizational hierarchy was based on the
organizational hierarchy of the military, not on the organizational hierarchy
of fraternal organizations. Its members swore an oath to keep "the secrets of
the order to support God, the United States Constitution, and the Black
Legion in its holy war against Catholics, Jews, Communists, Negroes, and
aliens". The organization went into decline after more than fifty members
were convicted of various crimes in support of the organization. The typical
member was from a small farm in the South, lacked a high school graduation
diploma, was married with children and worked in unskilled labor.[59]
Gerald B. Winrod, a fundamentalist Christian minister who founded the
Defenders of the Christian Faith revived the Illuminati conspiracy theory
that was originally introduced into the United States in 1798. He claimed
that the French and Russian Revolutions were both directed by the Illuminati
and he also claimed that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was an accurate
expose of a Jewish conspiracy. He believed that the Jews, the Catholics, the
communists and the bankers were all working together and plotting to destroy
American Protestantism. Although Winrod`s appeal was mainly limited to rural,
poor, uneducated fundamentalist Christians, his magazine The Defender reached
a peak circulation of 100,000 in the late 1930s.[60]
William Dudley Pelley`s Silver Shirts movement was overtly modelled on
European fascism and introduced a populist statist plan for economic
organization. The United States would be reorganized as a corporation, with
individuals paid according to their contributions, although African
Americans, aboriginals and aliens would be treated as wards of the state and
therefore hold a lower status. The organization blamed the Jews for the
depression, communism, and the spread of immorality, but it openly accepted
Catholics as members. Its membership was largely uneducated, poor and
elderly, with a high proportion of neurotics, and it also had a large female
membership. Its main base of support was in small communities in the Midwest
and on the West Coast, and it had almost no presence in the Southern States.
[61]
Charles Coughlin (Father Coughlin) was a Catholic priest who had begun
broadcasting on religious matters in 1926. However, when his program went
national in 1930, he began to comment on political issues, promoting a
strongly anti-Communist stance, while being highly critical of American
capitalists. He urged the government to protect workers, denounced
Prohibition and held the "international bankers" responsible for the
depression. By 1932 he had millions of regular listeners. The following year
he set up the "National Union for Social Justice". Although an early
supporter of the U. S. president, Franklin Roosevelt, he broke with him in
1935 when Roosevelt proposed that the United States join the World Court.
Coughlin then denounced the New Deal, which he claimed had accomplished
little but instead had strengthened the position of the bankers. His
organization became increasingly supportive of European fascism.[62]
In 1936 Coughlin began to endorse candidates for political office and
supported the presidential campaign of William Lemke, who campaigned on the
Union Party ticket. Lemke was also supported by Gerald L. K. Smith, head of
the Share Our Wealth movement and Dr. Francis Townsend, head of the Townsend
Old Age movement. At the time Coughlin claimed that his organization had 5
million members, while Smith claimed that his organization had 3 million
members. In the election however Lemke received fewer than 900,000 votes.[63]
Following this setback, Coughlin became more overtly fascist, attacking trade
unionists and politicians for being pro-Communist, calling for a corporate
state and setting up "Social Justice Councils", which excluded non-Christians
from their membership. His magazine, Social Justice, named Benito Mussolini
as man of the year in 1938 and defended Hitler`s "persecution" of Jews, whom
he linked with Communism. Major radio stations then refused to air his
broadcasts and the Post Office banned Social Justice from the mails in 1942.
Threatened by a sedition trial against Father Coughlin, the Catholic Church
ordered him to cease his political activities and Coughlin retired from
political life.[64]
Huey Long, who had been elected governor of Louisiana in 1928 and was a U.S.
senator from 1932 until his death in 1935, built a national organization,
Share Our Wealth, which had a populist appeal.[65] He combined both left and
right-wing elements.[66] As governor, he removed the poll tax and directed
state spending to the improvement of schools and rural roads. He attacked
"the corporations and urbanites, the `better elements` and the professional
politicians." At the time of his death, his organization had, according to
its files, over 27,000 clubs with a total membership of almost 8 million.[67]
Long never introduced minimum wage or child labor laws, unemployment
insurance or old age pensions, although other states did so at the time. He
actively courted support from big business, and reduced taxes on
corporations. He differed from other right-wingers by making no appeal to
conspiracy theories, nativism, or morality. He worked closely with Catholics
and Jews and never appealed to race issues. However, he chose Gerald L. K.
Smith, who was associated with the fascist Silver Shirts to organize his
Share our Wealth movement. But the movement died out following Long`s death.
[68]
McCarthyism
Main article: McCarthyism
Although the United States emerged from the Second World War as the world`s
most powerful country economically and militarily, communism had also been
strengthened. Communism had spread in Eastern Europe and southeast Asia, and
there were numerous Communist insurgencies.[69] At the same time, Communist
espionage had been found in the U.S. Responding to the fears the new enemy
presented, Joe McCarthy, a Republican U.S. senator from Wisconsin, claimed in
1950 that there were 205 Communist spies in the State Department.[70] The
main target of McCarthyism however was ideological nonconformism, and
individuals were targeted for their beliefs. Black lists were established in
many industries restricting the employment of suspected nonconformists, and
libraries were pressured to remove books and periodicals that were considered
suspect. McCarthy investigated Voice of America and although no communists
were found, 30 employees were fired as a result.[71] The strongest support
for McCarthyism came from some of the German and Irish Catholics, who had
been isolationist in both world wars, had an anti-British bias, and opposed
socialism on ostensibly religious grounds. Catholic support was far from
uniform, and many Catholics were actively opposed to McCarthy and his
methods.[72] Much of the hostility was directed against the Eastern elites.
[73] Following the GOP landslide in 1952, McCarthy continued his
investigations into the new Republican administration until the Republican
party turned against him.[74]
John Birch Society
This section relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Relevant
discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by
introducing citations to additional sources at this section. (December 2020)
(Learn how and when to remove this template message)
The John Birch Society, which was created in 1958, combined economic
liberalism with anti-communism. The founder, Robert Welch, Jr., believed that
the greatest enemy of man was government, and the more extensive the
government, the greater the enemy. To him, government was inherently corrupt
and a threat to peace. He advocated private institutions, local government
and rigid individualism.[75]
Welch wondered why U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower had helped destroy Joe
McCarthy, made peace with the communists in Korea, refused to support anti-
communist movements abroad and had extended the welfare state. His conclusion
was that Eisenhower was either a communist or a dupe of the communists and
that the United States government was already 60% to 80% under communist
control. Welch saw the communist conspiracy as controlled by the Illuminati,
which he thought had directed the French and Russian Revolutions and was
behind the current civil rights movement. They were also responsible for
welfare programs, central banking, progressive income taxation and the direct
election of U.S. senators. Welch identified William Morgan, William Wirt and
Joe McCarthy as people who had been killed for their attempts to expose the
Illuminati. Morgan`s murder presumably by Masons had led to the earlier Anti-
Masonic movement, Wirt had denounced the New Deal and McCarthy had claimed to
have discovered a Communist conspiracy.[76]
American Independent Party
The 1968 presidential campaign of George Wallace created a new party called
the American Independent Party (AIP) which in later years came under the
control of Radical Right elements. In 1969, the party had split into two
groups, the anti-communist American Party under the leadership of T. Coleman
Andrews and another group under the AIP founder Bill Shearer. Both groups
opposed federal intervention into schools, favored police suppression of
domestic disorder and victory in the Vietnam War. The two groups united under
the American Party banner in order to support the 1972 presidential campaign
of George Wallace, but after he withdrew they nominated U.S. Representative
John G. Schmitz.[77]
Constitutional militia and patriot movements
Main articles: American militia movement, Patriot movement, and Christian
Patriot movement
Although small militias had existed throughout the latter half of the 20th
century, the groups became more popular during the early 1990s, after a
series of standoffs between armed citizens and federal government agents,
such as the 1992 Ruby Ridge siege and 1993 Waco Siege. These groups expressed
concern for what they perceived as government tyranny within the United
States and generally held libertarian and constitutionalist political views,
with a strong focus on the Second Amendment gun rights and tax protest. They
also embraced many of the same conspiracy theories as predecessor groups on
the radical right, particularly the New World Order theory. Currently active
examples of such groups are the 3 Percenters and the Oath Keepers. A minority
of militia groups, such as Posse Comitatus and the Aryan Nations, were white
nationalists and saw militia and patriot movements as a form of white
resistance against what they perceived to be a liberal and multiculturalist
government. In the 21st century, militia and patriot organizations were
notably involved in the 2014 Bundy standoff, the 2016 Occupation of the
Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, and in the 2021 United States Capitol
attack.
Paleoconservatism
Main article: Paleoconservatism
Paul Gottfried first coined the term paleoconservatism in the 1980s. These
conservatives stressed (post-Cold War) non-interventionist foreign policy,
strict immigration law, anti-consumerism and traditional values and opposed
the neoconservatives, who had more liberal views on these issues. The
paleoconservatives used the surge in right-wing populism during the early
1990s to propel the presidential campaigns of Pat Buchanan in 1992, 1996 and
2000. They diminished in number after the September 11 attacks, where they
found themselves at odds with the vast majority of American conservatives on
how to respond to the threat of terrorism.
Counter-jihad
Main article: Counter-jihad
Further information: Criticism of Islam, Islamophobia, and Islamophobia in
the United States
In the aftermath of the September 11 attacks in 2001, the Counter-jihad
movement, supported by groups such as Stop Islamization of America and
individuals such as Frank Gaffney and Pamela Geller, began to gain traction
among the American right. They were widely dubbed "islamophobic" for their
vocal condemnation of the Islamic religion and their belief that there was a
significant threat posed by Muslims living in America. They believed the
United States was under threat from "Islamic supremacism", accusing the
Council on American-Islamic Relations and even prominent conservatives like
Suhail A. Khan and Grover Norquist of supporting Islamist groups such as the
Muslim Brotherhood.
Minuteman Project
Jim Gilchrist, a conservative Republican, founded the Minuteman Project in
April 2005. The Minutemen, inspired by the earlier Patriot movement and the
original revolutionary Minutemen, advocated greater restrictions on illegal
immigration and engaged in volunteer activities in the Southwestern United
States against those perceived to be illegal immigrants. The group drew much
criticism from those who held more liberal views on the immigration issues,
with President George W. Bush condemning them as "vigilantes". The Minuteman
Project was similar to the earlier Ranch Rescue organization, which performed
much the same role.
Alt-right
Main articles: Alt-right, Alt-lite, and Fascism in the United States
The alt-right emerged during the 2016 U.S. presidential election cycle in
support of the Donald Trump presidential campaign.[78] It draws influences
from paleoconservatism, paleolibertarianism, White nationalism, the
manosphere, the Dark Enlightenment, identitarianism, and the neoreactionary
movement, and it differs from previous radical right-wing movements due to
its heavy internet presence on sites such as 4chan.[78]
Groypers
Main article: Groypers
Groypers, sometimes called the Groyper Army, are a group of White nationalist
and far-right activists, who are notable for their attempts to introduce far-
right politics into mainstream conservatism in the United States. The group
is led by far-right political commentator Nick Fuentes.
Notable organizations
Three Percenters (2008?2021)
American Freedom Party (2009?present)
Oath Keepers (2009?present)
Traditionalist Worker Party (2013?2018)
Vanguard America (2015?2017???)
Identity Evropa (2016?2020)
Proud Boys (2016?present)
Patriot Prayer (2016?present)
Patriot Front (2017?present)
Groypers (2019?present)
--- Xnews/5.04.25
* Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5058/104 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441