A grim 10-year anniversary last month did not go unmarked. On July 22, commentators around the world duly commemorated the 77 victims of a Norwegian far-right terrorist who detonated a bomb outside the Norwegian prime minister’s office in downtown Oslo and then massacred teenagers attending a Labor Party summer camp on the island of Utoya.
Most of these analyses aimed to understand the horror by way of the perpetrator’s “closely intertwined anti-Muslim and antisocial democratic sentiment.”
While some expressed relief that he has not inspired more copycats, others used the occasion to indict “neoliberalism” and other monocausal abstractions. Strikingly absent from the punditry was the killer’s evident misogyny.
After more than a decade of witnessing a global resurgence of the far right, we continue to underestimate the importance of gender — especially defenses of patriarchy — as a bridge between extremists and the mainstream conservatives who are increasingly willing to collaborate with them.
Some worry that interpreting a mass murderer’s online manifesto hands him a victory and helps to spread his toxic ideology, but we cannot allow ourselves to be willfully blind to a killer’s mindset, nor should we surrender to the unreasonable fear that terrorists’ ideas are so seductive that they must be suppressed (an argument occasionally employed to justify banning Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf).
Of course, many hate manifestos are just cut-and-paste jobs, which means that the dangerous ideas are already available elsewhere, but if one bothers to compare the diatribes published in conjunction with the Utoya mass murder and the one carried out against Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2019, the similarities are striking. And so, too, are the parallels between these and far-right populist parties’ official programs. After all, far-right politicians have for decades been saying that “our country” is being taken away from “us.”
Here, “our country” is imagined to be a white, Christian nation that is increasingly threatened by Islam. It is said that Muslims are immigrating in increasing numbers and having more children, supposedly to “replace” the rightful inhabitants of the “homeland.”
Yet alongside these nativist conspiracy theories about the “Great Replacement,” one also finds an open admiration for the traditional masculinity supposedly promoted by Islam. Hence, white supremacists at a deadly rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 chanted: “White Shariah now.”
Ultimately, the real problem for many on the far right is liberalism, and particularly the liberation of women from laws and social norms enforcing male domination. In the eyes of its enemies, liberalism does not just mean openness (or at least porousness) and flexibility; what they find threatening is its questioning of traditional authority, especially patriarchal authority to make decisions about women’s bodies.
The Utoya killer left no doubt about his desire to reinstate patriarchy. In his ideal world, women would be rigidly controlled to ensure the reproduction of the white Christian nation.
He detailed how this might be achieved by returning to the 1950s, when men were in charge and women submissive; or with a scheme in which surrogate mothers in poorer countries would be paid (minimally) to have European babies; or by developing an artificial uterus that would render women entirely expendable.
With this fantasy about the complete destruction of women, his plan for July 22, 2011, included the public beheading of former Norwegian prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, the first woman to hold that office, who happened to leave the island earlier than expected on the day of the massacre.
As astute analysts have said, the far right oscillates between benevolent and hostile sexism: Women are either weak vessels who need to be protected, or sly aggressors destroying Western nation-states in the name of gender equality.
The latter depiction makes men into victims, allowing those who turn to terrorism to claim that they did not start the violence. As “victims,” they are entitled to react to others’ aggression and ultimately have permission to annihilate the enemy.
The same logic was also on display in the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol, where men carried out most of the violence and targeted prominent women like US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi (whose office was ransacked).
The far-right Norwegian Progress Party has been at pains to dismiss references to the Utoya murderer’s membership in its youth section as a cynical instrumentalization of the violence. Likewise, US Republicans have accused those who tell the truth about Jan. 6 of “playing politics.”
However, those who loudly proclaim that the homeland is under threat — Progress Party leaders had talked about “sneak Islamization” — and incite hatred of unpopular minorities cannot be surprised by what philosopher Kate Manne has termed “trickle-down aggression.”
When Bjorn Hocke, a lawmaker from the German state of Thuringia who represents the far-right Alternative for Germany party, demands that “we have to rediscover our masculinity, for only then can we become militant,” he knows full well how his rhetoric will be received.
Globally, the far right stands to gain from the massive material and financial support enjoyed by those advancing “family values.”
Far-right populists are also trying hard to make themselves appear acceptable to mainstream conservatives by emphasizing a seemingly shared social agenda. It is no mystery why they would take this approach: They have only ever come to power when more established center-right forces decided to collaborate with them.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has long played this game, appealing to center-right parties with the argument that his autocratic and kleptocratic regime constitutes an authentic version of Christian democracy. Accordingly, his government vigorously opposes same-sex marriage, and works hard to associate homosexuality with pedophilia.
In Hungary’s recent anti-LGBTQIA legislation, Orban has made it all too obvious that incitement of hatred against minorities, rather that fidelity to natural law or supposed “natural order,” is the real objective.
We must recognize that the ideological and emotional appeal of the far right is not reducible to a single element such as hatred of Islam. Far-right parties can be flexible in which of their hate objects they emphasize, while still keeping white Christian supremacy, misogyny and militant anti-liberalism closely intertwined.
This mixture, in any shape or form, should be unacceptable to decent center-right parties.
Jan-Werner Mueller is politics professor at Princeton University and a fellow at the Berlin Institute of Advanced Study.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Taiwan faces complex challenges like other Asia-Pacific nations, including demographic decline, income inequality and climate change. In fact, its challenges might be even more pressing. The nation struggles with rising income inequality, declining birthrates and soaring housing costs while simultaneously navigating intensifying global competition among major powers. To remain competitive in the global talent market, Taiwan has been working to create a more welcoming environment and legal framework for foreign professionals. One of the most significant steps in this direction was the enactment of the Act for the Recruitment and Employment of Foreign Professionals (外國專業人才延攬及僱用法) in 2018. Subsequent amendments in
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
US President Donald Trump on Saturday signed orders to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China effective from today. Trump decided to slap 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada as well as 10 percent on those coming from China, but would only impose a 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy products, including oil and electricity. Canada and Mexico on Sunday quickly responded with retaliatory tariffs against the US, while countermeasures from China are expected soon. Nevertheless, Trump announced yesterday to delay tariffs on Mexico and Canada for a month and said he would hold further talks with
Taiwan’s undersea cables connecting it to the world were allegedly severed several times by a Chinese ship registered under a flag of convenience. As the vessel sailed, it used several different automatic identification systems (AIS) to create fake routes. That type of “shadow fleet” and “gray zone” tactics could create a security crisis in Taiwan and warrants response measures. The concept of a shadow fleet originates from the research of Elisabeth Braw, senior fellow at the Washington-based Atlantic Council. The phenomenon was initiated by authoritarian countries such as Iran, North Korea and Russia, which have been hit by international economic
RSS