Why is racism associated with Right-Wing ideology?

I don't get it. Most groups of people that would be described as "Extreme Right" (KKK, Nazis, etc.) are avowed racists. Where as those of the "Extreme Left" (Communists, Anarchists, etc.) are not.

I want to know why this is, because i'm sure that there are some racist elements of left-wing ideology as well.

Discuss.

P.S. PLEASE keep the cynical/sarcastic witticisms to a minimum. A few are acceptable, but don't threadjack.

thats the way the communists want it.

HighlandWarrior said:

thats the way the communists want it.

Click to expand...

You clearly didn't read my post script.

Ahh well.

My simpleton explanation: the right wing, i.e. conservatism is concerned with preserving the status quo, with preserving tradition. Racism and prejudice are very much routed in traditional society. The left wing, i.e. liberals and socialists, are concerned with changing the status quo to a (presumed) better world, which is not routed in traditions. Thus, lefties need to defeat these traditional blocks to achive their better society.

The difference is that the far left denies that they are prejudiced, but practices it behind the scenes. The supposed "far right" (in quotations as ideologies like Nazism are fundamentally socialist in every form) takes pride in their prejudice and actually follows through with that rhetoric.

One could also make the case that the far left's attitude towards killing is indiscriminate, allowing anyone to be murdered if they stand in the way of their order. They certainly don't have a problem doing this now, albeit they use slander and libel rather than guns and bombs.

Right-wing ideologies tend to be racist. That's pretty much it.

Pasi Nurminen said:

Right-wing ideologies tend to be racist. That's pretty much it.

Click to expand...

What a wonderful non-explanation.

Extreme right people are nationalists, and nationalism is close to xenophobism, whick is close to racism

It's not in the extreme left ideologie (communism) to be nationalistic ("The Internationale") , although it hasn't always been respected by them in history.

rmsharpe said:

The difference is that the far left denies that they are prejudiced, but practices it behind the scenes. The supposed "far right" (in quotations as ideologies like Nazism are fundamentally socialist in every form) takes pride in their prejudice and actually follows through with that rhetoric.

Click to expand...

This sort of ignorant statement crops up form time to another and it is no fun shooting it down anymore, so a small comment should be sufficient here.
Fascism in general and German Nazism in particular are obviously right-wing ideologies.
Big Business had a great time under the protecting wings of NSDAP, which is a small wonder considering the amount of money they contributed to said party:

One could also make the case that the far left's attitude towards killing is indiscriminate, allowing anyone to be murdered if they stand in the way of their order. They certainly don't have a problem doing this now, albeit they use slander and libel rather than guns and bombs.

Click to expand...

I think this posters knowledge about Fascism as well as the far left can easily dance on the head of a pin.

Racism is a right-wing phenomena because it is an idea associated with hierarchy, inequality and chauvinism.

Because in the 1880's conservative ideology took over racism as a seemingly scientific argument for social status quo.

Traditional conservatism relies on God for arguing for keeping society "like it's always been" (it never not been changing wildly, but that's what they think they want).

But basing this on Christian religion also means you have to accept everyone as technically equal in the eyes of God. The bible and the Catholic church in particular have been pretty clear on the subject. So there's a problem ideologically with keeping slaves for instance.

In the 19th c. all this meant conservatism could be attacked by liberals basing their world view upon science. And science "told" them that slavery and racism was only natural. Up until the 1880's racism as part of scientism was a liberal speciality. (The "American school of anthropology" in the 1850's being the excpetion, arguing for slavery using science, but they were unpopular with the Christian slave-owners in the south.)

But in the 1880's conservatism coopted "scientific racism" as part of their own agenda. Liberalism and socialism eventually ditched in favour of more open-ended and dynamic views using concepts like "culture" and "society".

Not right away though, as in the 1910's you find conservatives, liberals and socialists all tinkering with eugenics and racial biology, but only the conservatives kept at it after the 1930's and the spectacle of Nazi racial ideology.

So intellectually racism is a cast off from liberalism taken up by conservatism.

Very simply put:

If you envision a slider with "left" on the left and "right" on the right than that slider largely matches a different slider with "Equality" on the left and "Inequality" on the right. Inequality means that there are political differences between men and women, nobility and non-nobility, between races, ages, location, religion, income, education, and whatever minute difference exist between 2 individuals etc.
If your basis is that there is inequality, than racism, sexism, intolerance, etc. are also your basis. Hence racism is part of the Right-Wing ideology or a consequence of the Right-Wing ideology.

Of course; this is all very black and white and the reality is a lot more subtle and shaded, but this holds true for the IDEOLOGY.

I would say racist groups are associated with the right wing because those groups consider the right to be the "least bad" of what are, for racists, all unpleasant choices.

The left is more easily associated with minority rights, mostly as a matter of image. In the U.S., both the Democrats and Republicans respect the rights of minority groups (though they have differing ideas on the mechanisms that should be used to protect those rights, i.e. Affirmative Action). In the end, the Democrats are the ones who chant "minority rights" the most loudly.

Those racist groups that choose to involve themselves in American politics will naturally choose the party that gives them the least urge to puke. In any case, the Republicans, being further to the right, appear "closer" to racist groups, whether the latter choose to involve themselves in legit politics or not.

Um, am I the only one who has heard of the oppression that commie Russia (ie, extreme lefties), forced upon Jews, Georgians, and basically anyone who wasn't an ethnic Russian? Racism is not the exclusive domain of the extreme right wing by any means.

By the way, I wish the title would be changed to "extreme right-wing" at the very least. I'm very conservative/right wing and really get tired of the "you're a racist" crap just because I won't vote for hold your hand governments.

Don't sweat it, VRWC. I'm sure moderate liberals are steamed at us conservatives for labelling them Pinkos and anti-American and Commies and such while the Cold War was in full swing. Both sides got it equally.

Theres as much racism on the Left as there is on the Right. The only difference is that the Right says, "Theyre inferior, we must enslave them." While the Left says, "Theyre inferior, we must save them."

VRWCAgent said:

Um, am I the only one who has heard of the oppression that commie Russia (ie, extreme lefties), forced upon Jews, Georgians, and basically anyone who wasn't an ethnic Russian? Racism is not the exclusive domain of the extreme right wing by any means.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how the USSR in any way should be termed as the extreme left. It was a hierarchical, authoritarian state with an exploiting elite as well as being chauvinistic and militaristic.

VRWCAgent said:

Um, am I the only one who has heard of the oppression that commie Russia (ie, extreme lefties), forced upon Jews, Georgians, and basically anyone who wasn't an ethnic Russian? Racism is not the exclusive domain of the extreme right wing by any means.

Click to expand...

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Russia was not "extreme left", it was authoritarian. Anyway, I don't think anyone ever claimed racism was the exclusive trait if the far-right, just that it tended to be their stomping ground as it tends not to be the stomping ground of the left.

Bozo Erectus said:

Theres as much racism on the Left as there is on the Right. The only difference is that the Right says, "Theyre inferior, we must enslave them." While the Left says, "Theyre inferior, we must save them."

Click to expand...

I wonder what left-leaning groups you mean?

Come on out with it! Tell us these left groups that say "They're inferior, we must save them"?

Cos I can list a bunch on the right that do actually say what you attribute to them.

It seems only fair you back up your (literally absurd) accusation.

And as for not meaning it literally, show me figurativly how they do this instead cos I'm stumped.

@luceafarul and anarres: You take either left or right and go extreme and you'll end up with authoritarian governments.

<--commie--socialist--left leaning--center--right leaning--jingoistic--fascist-->

EDIT: Actually, it would probably be best to start bending those arrows towards one another like a circle.

anarres said:

I wonder what left-leaning groups you mean?

Come on out with it! Tell us these left groups that say "They're inferior, we must save them"?

Cos I can list a bunch on the right that do actually say what you attribute to them.

It seems only fair you back up your (literally absurd) accusation.

And as for not meaning it literally, show me figurativly how they do this instead cos I'm stumped.

Click to expand...

IMO, so far there have been two phases of Colonialism (I see no difference between colonialism and racism). The first phase was carried out by what we today would consider to be the Right impulse in the West. The second phase, which we're living in today, is a project of the Left. The Left believes that non Westerners arent capable of running their own affairs. If non Westerners are happy, its because of something that we in the West have done right, if theyre unhappy, its because we've done something wrong. Why is it unthinkable to cut off 'aid' to Africa? What will happen if we stop supporting them economically?

VRWC: that is not true. The left-ideology is non-authoritarian and perfectly democratic - unlike the right-ideology. It's kinda ironic that reality morphs ideologies into something else in practice...