Abstract
The paper examines the complex relation between anti-democratic forces (“the extremists”) and the broader liberal-democratic institutional environment. The task of containing extremists is analysed both from a theoretical standpoint and in terms of its practical feasibility. I argue that the realities of political communication and the character of political argumentation make containing extremism in practice a much more daunting proposition than is usually understood in the literature. Insights from political philosophy, political science and communication theory are brought together to press these points. As a result, extremists often cannot be stopped from running for office even if the state possesses tools to ban extremist parties. Moreover, once extremist politicians become members of legislative bodies, several democratic and procedural considerations start to apply to them so that it becomes difficult to limit their influence. Their elevated status (given their positions as legitimate representatives of the people, together with the increased media and argumentative platform they gain) complicates attempts at stopping the proliferation of their views. The last part of the paper briefly sketches possible (remnants of) a strategy of containment, arguing that only a combination of informal sanctions can be (partially) successful, including deplatforming, refusal to engage with them, and a pariah status in the legislative assembly.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Farine L, Hassan H, Kinnish N, Saldarriaga DM and Tindale CH What is extremism? (manuscript, presented at Argumentation and Politics Conference, Granada 2022.)
To quote Martin Luther King: “So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice? In that dramatic scene on Calvary's hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime—the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment.” (King 1992).
For original news coverage see https://www.msnbc.com/politicsnation/ryan-generations-men-not-working and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/03/18/paul-ryan-poverty-dog-whistles-and-racism/. Visited on 25.6.2022.
It is important to stress here that the necessary failure of party bans to catch and prosecute all extremist parties does not amount to the uselessness of this tool. Party bans can be (and often are) very valuable in regulating the worst excesses and most obvious cases of extremism. Nonetheless, it would be wrong to think that we can get rid of extremist views in politics by legal regulation.
See Terzian G, Corbalán I, “For the sake of public argument: sincere and manufactured objections in public argumentation” (manuscript, presented at Argumentation and Politics Conference, Granada 2022).
References
Bell DS, Criddle B (1994) The French communist party in the fifth republic. Clarendon Press, London
Berger JM (2018) Extremism. MIT Press, Cambridge
Bermeo N (2016) On democratic backsliding. J Democr 27(1):5–19. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0012
Bhat P, Klein O (2020) Covert hate speech: white nationalists and dog whistle communication on Twitter. In: Bouvier G, Rosenbaum JE (eds) Twitter, the public sphere, and the chaos of online deliberation. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 151–172
Cassam Q (2021) Extremism: a philosophical analysis. Routledge, London
Conway M (2017) Determining the role of the internet in violent extremism and terrorism: six suggestions for progressing research. Stud Confl Terror 40(1):77–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2016.1157408
Friedman M (2000) John Rawls and the political coertion of unreasonable people. In: Davion V, Wolf C (eds) the idea of political liberalism. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, pp 16–33
Gallie WB (1955) Essentially contested concepts. Proc Aristot Soc 56(1):167–198
Gaudette T, Scrivens R, Venkatesh V (2020) The role of the internet in facilitating violent extremism: insights from former right-wing extremists. Terror Political Violence 34(7):1339–1356. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2020.1784147
Haney-López I (2014) Dog whistle politics: how coded racial appeals have reinvented racism and wrecked the middle class. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Helmke G, Levitsky S (2004) Informal institutions and comparative politics: a research agenda. Perspect Politics 2(4):725–740. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592704040472
Jhaver S et al (2021) Evaluating the effectiveness of deplatforming as a moderation strategy on Twitter. Proc ACM Human Comput Interact 5:381. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479525
Jiang J et al (2020) Characterizing community guidelines on social media platforms. Conference companion publication of the 2020 on computer supported cooperative work and social computing. CSCW ’20: computer supported cooperative work and social computing. ACM, pp 287–291
Kaufman RR, Haggard S (2019) Democratic decline in the United States: what can we learn from middle-income backsliding? Perspect Politics 17(2):417–432. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592718003377
Kelly E, McPherson L (2001) On tolerating the unreasonable. J Political Philos 9(1):38–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00117
Kemp T (1984) Stalinism in France: the first twenty years of the French communist party. New Park Publications, London
King MLJ (1992) Letter from Birmingham Jail. UC Davis Law Rev 26:835
Kirshner AS (2014) A theory of militant democracy: the ethics of combatting political extremism. Yale University Press, Yale
Lauth HJ (2015) Formal and informal institutions. In: Gandhi J, Ruiz-Rufino R (eds) Routledge handbook of comparative political institutions. Routledge
Loewenstein K (1937) Militant democracy and fundamental rights, I. Am Political Sci Rev 31(3):417–432. https://doi.org/10.2307/1948164
Matthews DR (1959) The folkways of the United States Senate: conformity to group norms and legislative effectiveness. Am Political Sci Rev 53(4):1064–1089. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952075
McMinimy K et al (2021) Censoring extremism: influence of online restriction on official media products of ISIS. Terror Political Violence. https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2021.1988938
Mill JS (1859) On liberty. The Walter Scott Publishing, London
Misztal B (1999) Informality: social theory and contemporary practice. Routledge, London
Nussbaum MC (2011) Perfectionist liberalism and political liberalism. Philos Public Aff 39(1):3–45
Pitkin HF (1967) The concept of representation. University of California Press, Berkeley
Quong J (2004) The rights of unreasonable citizens. J Political Philos 12(3):314–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2004.00202.x
Quong J (2011) Liberalism without perfection. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Radnitz S (2011) Informal politics and the state. Comp Politics. 43(3):351–371
Rawls J (1996) Political liberalism. Columbia University Press, New York
Rijpkema B (2018) Militant democracy: the limits of democratic tolerance. Routledge, London
Rogers R (2020) Deplatforming: following extreme internet celebrities to telegram and alternative social media. Euro J Commun 35(3):213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323120922066
Rubin RB (2017) Building the bloc: intraparty organization in the US congress. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Sala R (2013) The place of unreasonable people beyond Rawls. Euro J Political Theory 12(3):253–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474885112465248
Spicer RN (2018) Free speech and false speech: political deception and its legal limits (or lack thereof). Springer, Berlin
Stevens AG, Mulhollan DP, Rundquist PS (1981) U. S. congressional structure and representation: the role of informal groups. Legis Stud Q 6(3):415–437. https://doi.org/10.2307/439483
Tyulkina S (2015) Militant democracy: undemocratic political parties and beyond. Routledge, London
Victor JN, Ringe N (2009) The social utility of informal institutions: caucuses as networks in the 110th U.S. house of representatives. Am Politics Res 37(5):742–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X09337183
Waldner D, Lust E (2018) ‘Unwelcome change: coming to terms with democratic backsliding. Annu Rev Political Sci 21(1):93–113. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517-114628
Wigley S (2009) Parliamentary immunity in democratizing countries: the case of Turkey. Hum Rights Q 31:567
Young IM (2002) Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict of interest to disclose, the paper complies with TOPOI’s ethical guidelines.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Cíbik, M. Elected Extremists, Political Communication and the Limits of Containment. Topoi 42, 583–591 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-022-09877-z
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-022-09877-z