The Australian Intelligence and Security Organisation (ASIO) has recently raised the terror threat to ‘probable’.
As well as religious extremism, Australian governments have become increasingly concerned about Right Wing Extremism (RWE).
While followers of RWE vary considerably, they tend to share certain beliefs. These include an ideological commitment to: violent social revolution, a hatred of Islam and other forms of cultural diversity, homophobia, a deep suspicion of the democratic state, and a contorted exaltation of the principle ‘survival of the fittest’.
There is also a deep hatred of nature and green-progressive politics.
The difficulty for governments and security agencies is that these beliefs are not in themselves illegal. Agencies can only constrain RWE followers when they act on their beliefs and breach the law.
Camouflage
Violence and hate speech, in fact, are merely the surface of a more treacherous promulgation of ideas and aspirations.
RWE affiliates spread their ideas through visible and less visible media systems, as well as more conventional political processes.
Camouflaging their violent core, RWE affiliates present themselves as rational and legitimate political players – that is, as the far right.
Far-right politics, therefore, represent the true power and danger of RWE.
Such power may be evident in the electoral popularity of US and European far-right politicians like Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni and Alice Weidel. Presenting itself as a slap and tickle celebrity like Trump or in the nurturing guise of womanhood, the far-right deftly obscures the insidious violence of its core.
This power is also evident in the assemblage of far-right policies, ideas and politics within Australia.
While many of the political parties who contested the 2022 federal election might reject the ‘far-right’ label – their policies often parallel the aspirations of RWE.
These far-right ideas may have been camouflaged by the specific party’s more conventional or centred policies.
Even so, we can see the tracts of far-right ideas in a range of electoral options. These include Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (727,000 primary votes); United Australia Party (604,000); The Great Australia Party (30,000); The Informed Medical Opinions Party (20,000); Australian Christians (20,000); Katter’s Australian Party (56,000); Shooters and Fishers (18,000).
Individual ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty’
Like violent RWE, much of the far-right rhetoric is coded into a particular conception of ‘freedom’.
RWE and far-right politics exalt the individual as a ‘sovereign citizen’ who should be permitted to determine his or her own life choices without interference by governments and their oppressive majorities.
This politics of individual freedom is conjured around a discourse of ‘rights’. For example – the right to exclude Asian, African or Muslim migrants; the right to shoot ducks, exclude transgender children from your school, annul vaccination controls, or avoid paying tax.
Freedom is therefore conceived in terms of individual prosperity and power beyond any sense of social responsibility or justice.
The far right, that is, perverts the ideals of 19th century liberalism and the more restrained politics of the contemporary centre right.
Even in its democratic guise, far-right politics endorse the right of powerful individuals to dominate and deny the freedom of other humans and non-human life forms.
As Nazis and other military states demonstrate, this radical individualism is a deception. The seizure of power by RWE relies on alliances between violent individuals and groups.
These alliances lead to the formation of violent elites and a complete corruption of the ‘individual liberty’ they claim to represent.
In this way, the ‘freedom’ that is espoused by Trump, Le Pen and others is simply an illusion. It’s a way of promising something that can never be delivered because it can never exist.
Nevertheless, the far right has always evinced a genius for convincing vulnerable citizens that their grievances and suffering can be resolved by an affiliation with the power of an élite.
So how do these far-right politicians attract believers?
Reducing complexity
The French philosopher Jacques Derrida pointed out that western languages evolved through ‘binary structures’ e.g. good-evil; right-wrong; us-them; perpetrator-victim; success-failure; freedom-constraint.
As language functions in a complex world of action, the limitations of these structures become exposed as gaps in meaning. This is where ideology rushes in to fill the void with its force of conviction and simplified truths.
Far right ideology, specifically, creates a meaningful truth narrative which is deftly welded onto real or imagined grievances and social anxieties.
Once these grievances are impounded by ideology, potent far-right leaders offer solutions which the vulnerable citizens can easily comprehended and embrace.
The far-right narrative, therefore, is able to blame government, the rule of law, outsiders, the state, and expert systems like medical science.
All of this takes place within a broader social context where hierarchy, deception, self-interest, exclusion and violence are actually normalised.
With high poverty rates (15-20 per cent) and a deep-rooted devotion to the ideals of freedom, the Northern Rivers might seem particularly susceptible to far-right conspiracy theories, ideas, and ideology.
The region has also experienced consistent assaults by state and federal governments which impose their development objectives over local interests and ecological priorities.
It’s not surprising, therefore, that many residents in the region feel deeply cynical about democracy and state power.
The problem is: this cynicism can so easily turn on itself, leading to far-right solutions and the popularity of politicians like Donald Trump.
♦ Dr Belinda Lewis is a health anthropologist from Monash University. Professor Jeffrey Lewis is an anthropology professor. He is a former Research Dean at RMIT and Professorial Fellow at the London School of Economics.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
