RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $6000Goal: $6000
Information icon.svg The 2018 moderator election has started! We are electing 6 moderators and 2 alternatives to serve in 2019. Nominate users here and read their campaign slogans here!

Talk:Far right

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Move to "far right"?[edit]

AFAIK, it's the more common use in English.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree with that. Spud (talk) 16:08, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Vague....[edit]

There are way too many instances of "sometimes," "in some cases," "might be," and "possibly." This article needs grounding in actually-existing examples that use words like "is" and "are." otherwise, it's just a wishy-washy list that says very little of substance. PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.Moderator 13:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Removed Third Way comments[edit]

If anything, the Third Way is centrist to center-right, not far-right. As a centrist who could fall roughly into that category, I take great umbrage at the conflation of the Third Way and wingnuttery. The statement that "the moderate welfare state is only there to serve the ruling class" smacks of bullshit to me, and "moderate welfare state" is a pretty ambiguous term to begin with (e.g., IIRC, the social safety net in the United States is less extensive than that of the United Kingdom, which is in turn less extensive than that of Sweden). IMHO, anyone who thinks Third Way policies are "far right" has an ideological ax to grind. (I can think of a myriad of other cases where extremists on either side of the spectrum love to portray centrists as sellouts to, or even agents of, the opposite extreme.) The One They Call Mars (talk) 21:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Third way is sometimes what fascists call themselves. Fascists are placed into the far-right category. That was probably the rationale.--"Shut up, Brx." 21:38, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Careful! There are two ideologies that are referred to as Third Way! One is indeed the sort of not-really-social-democracy anymore the likes of Blair and Schröder tried to impose on the social democratic movement. Third Way here stands for "between democratic left and democratic right". But Third Way also describes an ideology that tries to be a third way between communism and capitalism. This has a long tradition from before WW1. It was strangely popular among German conservatives (considering how many supporters of the Conservative movement were entrepreneurs), especially after WW1 when communism was seen as Russian, capitalism as Western and neither really "German" (whatever that means). That economical ideology was also reflected in the Strasserite 'left' wing of the NSDAP (which got purged by Hitler), which is where most more... intellectual minded Neo-Nazis claim ideological continuity from. So, yeah. Don't mix up the Blair/Schröder "Third Way" and the Neo-Nazi Third Way. The Far Right does in fact largely follow the Third Way, but the latter variant is meant. Octo8 (talk) 21:50, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Are you sure you aren't thinking of third positionism? I have never heard "third way" used like that. Wehpudicabok [話] [変] [留] 21:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
...I, uh, might have, actually. Hm. Though in my defence, the deleted content might have meant the same. Though since it talked about "social welfare", probably not. Okay, mea culpa ;) Octo8 (talk) 22:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't think they were referring to Third Positionism. The content mentioned something about the moderate welfare state only existing to "serve the ruling class," indicating the author intended to attack the centrist movement espoused by Clinton, Blair, Schröder, etc. The One They Call Mars (talk) 00:43, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Bias[edit]

At times this article seems to be saying that any resistance to change is evidence of far right politics.

Only it's not just any old change we're talking about, it's the causes beloved of the new left, who seem to love calling themselves "progressive" (because it sounds as though they're marching forward purposefully)

In my opinion, "far right" is another ad hominem used to silence opponents. "If you disagree with us you're Hitler" (only it's hard to accurately place Hitler on any objective left-right spectrum).

Basically, I came here looking for a definition and didn't find one.86.162.41.236 (talk) 20:28, 27 July 2016 (UTC)