User:PalMD/sandbox3

Conservapedia on Extremism (Students' Annotated Edition, 2007)
In the Dictionary of Political Thought, Roger Scruton defines extremism as:


 * 1) Taking a political idea to its limits, regardless of unfortunate repercussions, impracticalities, arguments, and feelings to the contrary, and with the intention not only to confront, but to eliminate opposition.
 * 2) Intolerance toward all views other than one’s own.
 * 3) Adoption of means to political ends which show disregard for the life, liberty, and human rights of others.

John George and Laird Wilcox, two of the foremost analysts of right and left-wing extremism, state that this definition reflects a common proposition about extremist behavior: it is more an “issue of style than of content.” What the extremist believes is less important than what behavior he exhibits. Rather, extremism can cut across the political spectrum. George and Wilcox look at extremists as persons psychologically prone to extremism, regardless of political affiliation: Both of us have had the feeling many times that the Bircher with whom we were talking could just as easily have been a Communist and viceversa. It may be merely a question of who “gets to them” first. We tend to view the existence of an extremism-prone personality as a more reasonable hypothesis than attempts to account for the “pathology” of a particular point of view.

Most people can hold radical or unorthodox beliefs in a more or less reasonable and rational manner. Extremists present their views in uncompromising, bullying, and often authoritarian ways.

Traits of the extremist
George and Wilcox list twenty-two common traits of extremists. While all people exhibit some of these traits at times, the important distinction is that “with bona fide extremists, these lapses are not occasional.” The traits are:


 * (1) character assassination;
 * (2) name calling and labelling;
 * CP editors were blocked with the message "Subhuman cabal member" here (insert link)


 * (3) irresponsible sweeping generalizations;
 * (4) inadequate proof for assertions;
 * insert example (take your pick!)
 * insert example


 * (5) advocacy of double standards;
 * (6) tendency to view opponents and critics as essentially evil;
 * (7) Manichean worldview;
 * (8) advocacy of some degree of censorship or repression of opponents and/or critics;
 * (9) a tendency to identify themselves in terms of who their enemies are: whom they hate and who hates them;
 * (10) tendency toward argument by intimidation;
 * (11) use of slogans, buzzwords, and thoughtstopping cliches;
 * (12) assumption of moral or other superiority over others;
 * (13) doomsday thinking;
 * (14) a belief that doing bad things in the service of a “good” cause is permissible;
 * (15) emphasis on emotional responses, and, correspondingly, less importance to reasoning and logical analysis;
 * (16) hypersensitivity and vigilance;
 * (17) use of supernatural rationale for beliefs and actions;
 * (18) problems tolerating ambiguity and uncertainty;
 * (19) inclination toward "groupthink";
 * (20) tendency to personalize hostility;
 * (21) a feeling that the “system” is no good unless they win; and
 * (22) tendency to believe in far-reaching conspiracy theories.