RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Category:Extremism

Category:Extremism | Result: Suppressed with overwhelming force[edit]

This word is so vague a descriptor that it tells you more about what the people labeling a movement or ideology "extremist" think than the actual movement. We already deleted the "political insanity" and related categories. I recommend deleting this one too. To give an example of this: anarcho-pacifism. Anarchopacifism is obviously anarchist, so it rejects hierarchies. It also abhors violence. Do we classify anarchopacifism as extremist? What about Salafism? Quite a few Salafist movements are quietist, they disavow violence and politics entirely. Are these quietist Salafist movements extremist? How do we even measure something as extremist? According to a Western view Salafism is extremist, but it's the norm in certain areas of the Muslim world. Carthage (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Basically a return of political insanity. The category isn't even super useful besides, containing no pages and only four subcategories, only two of which really apply (I believe there's a difference between simply being far-left/right and extreme left/right). Plutocow (talk) 04:12, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Bongolian (talk) 08:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

This category is different from 'political insanity' whose reference point is ambiguous. The 'Extremism' category should only be used in a few categories or articles that are universally considered extremism, such as far-right politics, far-left politics, and Islamic extremism. It is not used simply for racist or radical politicians or groups. For example, this category should not be used simply because a particular group is racist, homophobic, or radical. There is no problem if you set a reference point for the category to be used. In particular, we should not use the 'Extremism' category in articles involving living people. Umaru16 (talk) 03:25, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Suggest that it might be better as an article, not a category - as pointed out above, it's currently more an anti-category than anything else [anything not within the Overton Window is normally deemed 'extremist', though is often used as a snarl-word by governments too etc]. Perhaps start by using the bit out of 'political spectrum' as a stub and links to the various types [also suggest Hard Green, reactionary and Dominionism for entries/links. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:54, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
I know that you deleted your response in the "keep" section, but I do think it's worth pointing out that what's considered "extremist" is historically contingent on a very specific set of culture-specific (in this case, Western) conditions. We consider Salafism to be "extremist," but it is the mainstay in certain parts of the Muslim world. Likewise libertarian socialism is the mainstay in the Zapatista autonomous communities. Anti-Putinist resistance in Russia is considered "extremist" by the Russian political establishment. "Extremism" is a very relative term, at best. And yes, many mainstays of our society today were at one point considered "extremist." Extremism is not a description of the truth value of the claims advocated by so-called "extremists," it's a value judgement. Carthage (talk) 19:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)