« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Are you a Rightwing Extremist, too?

(H/T: The Other McCain) Via The Liberty Papers we get a doozy of a document: the Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. It’s supposed to be a Homeland Security document that will be making the rounds pretty quickly: the people reading this may in fact have already gotten an email on the subject. If they haven’t, they will.

Why? Well, it’s a document that discusses the potential threats that we can expect from “rightwing extremists” (no hyphen, for some reason) in the coming months; there’s the usual stuff about guns, illegal immigration, and disgruntled war veterans, plus the new wrinkle of our having elected an African-American President. The report concludes, unsurprisingly, that we have to worry more about “lone wolves and small terrorist cells” than anything else.

Also unsurprisingly, there’s an absence of hard data over just how many people that we’re talking about, here. That particular bit of bureaucratic cover will probably backfire, because of this definition:

Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

As both The Liberty Papers and PoliGazette note, the second clause is both far too broad (as it stands, it could be taken to mean anybody who espouses a federalist position*) and downright offensive (apparently, federalists are as bad as racists & anti-Semites). Unfortunately, it’s also written down - which means that intent doesn’t really come into it. Somebody in the government who gets this document isn’t going to try to figure out what the author(s) meant before they craft policy based on it; they’re going to go with what the text says, because that’s how government officials keep their jobs.

All that being said, now that this report has been leaked, expect a ‘clarification’ on it very, very quickly. Not to mention a quiet, yet vicious search for the leaker, but that’s a whole different post.

Moe Lane

*Liberals, please note: that includes people who argue that individual states have the right to decriminalize marijuana, permit the sale of raw milk, allow assisted suicide, or recognize same-sex marriages. If you’re one of those people, welcome to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy: here’s your accordion.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

COMMENTS

  • $peciallist

    Is this for real?…was this composed by our government?

    This is one of the more Scary things I’ve read….I have a question…did the ‘Talking point’ come first or did this Doc.?

    Is there a report on Leftwing extremism also?..probably not

  • bs

    “Why yes, I *am* a Right Wing Extremist!”

  • seandparnell

    Two points that jump out at me:

    1. The report makes much of rightwing angst over NAFTA and international trade, outsourcing, job losses, etc. as being issues that drive supposed extremism. It’s certainly true that in the 1990′s (which serves as the reference point for much of the discussion) these issues did foment extremism on the fringe right, as well as in the mainstream right. But this seems less an issue of the right than the left these days, kicking off most notably with the 1999 Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization, which were distinctly leftist in nature.

    2. As noted by Moe, the reports authors fail to attach any sort of meaningful numbers to “extremists,” although militias and the Christian Identity movement are referenced. More importantly, it fails to set any meaningful boundaries or definitions on what is and is not extremism. On the issue of immigration, for instance, is everybody that says “No more immigration” or “round all the illegals up and deport them” an extremist? What if they throw in a few anti-hispanic slurs? Is there some meaningful distinction between an extremist and someone who’s merely passionate on the issue?

    I would suggest there is, one that the report touches on but does not include in their definition: the use, advocacy, or tolerance of violence in order to achieve their aims. It’s one thing to advocate a hard-line position on gun rights, “out of my cold, dead fingers” and so forth, but it’s entirely another to go gunning for cops in Pittsburgh.

    Instead the report seizes on the idea that “hate” can somehow be used to identify extremists, the problem being that a sizeable portion of the political left has essentially decreed that failure to adhere to their approved orthodoxy on certain issues is proof that one is motivated by hate. Not all on the left by any means have this perspective, and too many on the right buy into it as well, but the fact remains that a large segment of the American public simply cannot tolerate the idea that others may have legitimate and sincere, if mistaken, beliefs that do not conform to their own. Allowing someone with such a mindset to labeling groups as “hate-based” would lead to potentially horrifying outcomes, particularly given curious ideas about the First Amendment, such as that it doesn’t apply to “lies” or “hate speech.”

    Sean Parnell
    President
    Center for Competitive Politics
    http://www.campaignfreedom.org
    sparnell@campaignfreedom.org

  • bk

    The trick is you have to precede “terrorist” with “rightwing” and you’re golden. If you use oh I don’t know, let’s say “Islamic” in front of it you’re misusing language if not out and out committing a hate crime.

  • DerKrieger

    I suppose they can’t simply come out and say “Any person who doesn’t support the vision for a socialist United States with all power emanating solely from the Federal government.” will be branded a ‘right-wing extremist’.

    Count me in.

  • Achance

    suicide by cop and the authors are trying to make him some archetype of rightwing extremism. Think there’s much of an agenda here? I actually have trouble believeing that the document is real.

  • redinutah

    Since I support the Tea Parties and am proud to be a Conservative Tea Bagger!

  • Alone_in_the_Dotte

    Admittedly, I haven’t completely devoured both documents but isn’t this quite similar to the “report” issued by the Missouri Information Analysis Center that targeted “militias” and “Ron Paul” bumper stickers??

    http://www.privacylives.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/miacreport_022009.pdf

    (I still can’t seem to be able to post a link…arggh.)

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Don’t pretend that you don’t know what I’m talking about, either.

  • Next93

    First, there wouldn’t have been a “leaker”; this is marked as “Unclassified” on it’s cover. I was a little suspicious that it would be maked both “Unclassified” and “For Official Use Only”; the only place I’ve ever seen that phrase is on government office supplies (envelopes, pens, etc). Any document that is intended for restricted distribution would have been marked “Confidential” or “Restricted”, not “Unclassified”.

    Second, all official government documents have control numbers, and any that are marked “Unclassified” as this one is, are available through the Government Printing Office. I checked the number on the cover (IA-205709) with the GPO’s catalog, and found nothing.

    I’m pretty sure this is a hoax; these days an official-looking document isn’t all that hard to fake.

  • Hooah_Mac

    Unclassified is the “security classification”

    FOUO is the distribution restriction

    Most non secret, restricted distribution documents will be marked as both.

  • garymorg

    I?m a novelist whose fourth novel ?Loving Rabbi Thalia Kleinman? has just been published on Amazon.com. It?s about a divorced middle-aged Brooklyn Republican Jewish guy who falls in love with a beautiful rabbi, while still in love with his left-wing ex-wife! Now when was the last time a novel featured a conservative as a main character? I mean, the guy wears a Sarah in 2012 t-shirt under his Fox News Channel sweatshirt, come on!!! So I?m trying to break through the MSM and could use any help from my conservative peeps in getting the word out that there are Republican novelists, too, and we have a lot to say that?s relevant and timely!
    Many thanks to all!!

  • garymorg

    I?m a novelist whose fourth novel ?Loving Rabbi Thalia Kleinman? has just been published on Amazon.com. It?s about a divorced middle-aged Brooklyn Republican Jewish guy who falls in love with a beautiful rabbi, while still in love with his left-wing ex-wife! Now when was the last time a novel featured a conservative as a main character? I mean, the guy wears a Sarah in 2012 t-shirt under his Fox News Channel sweatshirt, come on!!! So I?m trying to break through the MSM and could use any help from my conservative peeps in getting the word out that there are Republican novelists, too, and we have a lot to say that?s relevant and timely!
    Many thanks to all!!

  • Hooah_Mac

    This is standard practice in military organizations, not general government organizations.

    Since this a Department of Homeland Security document, it makes sense that it would be marked in a military manner.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    More accurately, I’m on hold.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    …leads to a full voicemail box. Trying the switchboard…

  • Diogenes314

    As is anyone who prefers Washington, Madison and the rest over Robespierre, Marx and Lenin.

    Count me in.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    This is starting to get funny.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    The fact that I kept getting shunted around argues more that it was real than anything else that I can think of. :)

  • Achance

    at any level of government. Used to drive me nuts when I’d call my own office and get bounced from mailbox to mailbox most with out of date messages saying they were going to be out of the office three months ago. I’d chew some butt and it would improve – until the next time.

  • Next93

    Oooh, goody! The same people who gave us the DMV are going to be running the cardiac care center!

    Can’t WAIT!

  • redinutah

    I don’t get it… but I guess, I’ll stop using the phrase “Tea Bagger” if you want…. Correct?

  • Aaron Gardner
  • ludic7

    Hmmm, I wonder who is more likely to shoot up a McDonalds today. Al Qaeda, or a recently unemployed militia member convinced Obama is coming to convert him to Islam and take away his guns, bolstered in part by Michelle Bachman’s call to armed resistance?

    If we were in Vegas, the odds wouldn’t even be close.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Why do they never listen?

    Blam.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Ciao.

  • Hooah_Mac

    Any other questions?

  • Aaron Gardner

    good to see you posting again,

  • Next93

    More b*lls between the two of them than in the entire Obama cabinet

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    any old way you want to look at it!

  • Next93

    I’ve always wondered about the special source of information that gives you people your sense of arrogant superiority. NOW I understand! You get it directly from your microchip! That would also explain why you spend so much time talking out of your buttocks, as well!

    Thank you for the enlightenment.

  • aesthete

    That was the best you could come up with?

  • mom2oneson
  • http://theminorityreportblog.com David Hinz

    of course. At the same location.

    “What does this ex-ray look like to you!”

    “Don’t ask me, I’m trying to administer a drivers test!”

  • mbecker908

    Because they are liberals. They “feel sure” no one will hold them accountable.

  • Hooah_Mac

    And I am dang proud.

  • DONTREADONME

    Numerous weapons -Check, Government Contractor -Check…
    Out of a Job – wait a minute I am not an extremist, what are you saying I am fired, because of this document, What? I serve my country for the last 10+ years and now you are firing me because I have a DTOM Flag, I am a Conservative, with numerous weapons.

    Simply priceless, no doubt they will be coming for me soon.

  • Next93

    I’m from just across the state line in Hudson. Too bad I won’t be there – I’m working a second-shift tech support position at about 20% of my “real” salary, in order to make it through being laid off without resorting to the Obama “home security” program

  • Hooah_Mac

    I’m a bit upstate of the cities, so rather than travel down there I have made plans to attend a Tea Party here in town.

  • MelZ

    Proudly. Be afraid, be very afraid, be scared of all 5’4″, 115 pounds of me….and my bite is far worse than my bark. Mainly because I am a cardcarrying, gun toting, Coulter reading, Limbaugh listening, crazy person who knows how to create an actual thought in her head.

    Please honor me with adding me to the “list”.

  • Next93

    I was raised a Democrat, but married into a conservative family, and found myself consistently loosing arguments; not because they argue better (I’m an Italian from the East Coast, they’re from the Midwest – arguing is in my genes), but because, dang it, I was just finding it harder and harder to defend what the Democrats stood for. Then came 9/11…

    Truth is, one of the first things I plan to do once I have a full-time job again and we’re back on our feet financially, is to buy a gun, and a LOT of ammunition. Not because I feel I need a gun to protect my family from the government (and God help me if I ever do, cuz, well, “three shots for three kills off the faintail of a destroyer at sea, at night with a few seconds warning” – DANG!). Nope, I want that handgun because it’s my right to own one, and no one has the right to tell me that I can’t (except maybe the wife, but that’s another story)

    Count me in.

  • scottj

    We gun owners who know the 2nd Amendment is about more than hunting and target shooting are John McClaine.

    “Welcome to the party, pal!”

    http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/

  • Menlo

    nt

  • Diogenes314

    I’ll try to be more obtrusive and divisive when ’10 comes near.

    And by divider, I mean the opposite of a uniter. That didn’t work so well.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Hopefully we can be united in our divisive nature…;^)

  • Maggie_in_Indiana

    To what lengths won’t the left go? Now our own government legitimizes undermining the Right as “domestic terrorists” ? So now we are lumped in with loonies and skin heads. If this wasn’t so serious it would be laughable. so when can we expect the Secret Service knock at the door? Watch for the guys with the white ear mics in the crowds at the Tea Parties,and the PTO,and church fish fries.
    Well we knew this coming,time to step it up!
    Thing is the Democrats are standing next to us at these Tea Parties so now are they rightwingers,too?

  • Flagstaff

    If this is real, and if it hasn’t already been mentioned, the scariest thing about this is the fact that somebody in government sees a reason to categorize some “extremists” as “rightwing.” Yet the effect is to convert the term “rightwing” into a synonym for “extremist.”

    Most of the activities mentioned are neither extreme nor illegal; they simply are activities or beliefs that the author disagrees with. The effect works something like (for example)

    “Extremist = Terrorist Wacko = Timothy McVeigh = Returning Military Member = Typical of Military Members = Second Amendment Defenders = …Extremists?”

    None of this is political, yet “rightwing” is by definition political.

    This paper is an attempt to defame a political movement as being somehow extreme, irrational, and illegal, when in fact the individual activities being examined are squarely mainstream and Constitutionally protected.

    In fact, it’s clever propaganda and a dangerous statement of orientation if genuine, and a fantastic parody of the Left’s approach to political debate if it’s fake.

  • Husker

    This passage is very troubling indeed:

    Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.

    Who will be the ultimate arbiter of what is protected speech under the First Amendment and what is deemed hate-orientated extremism?

    I would expect this type of document to come out of the governments of Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, or Saddam Husein.

    It reads like a “How to identify” Gestapo guide or should I dare say O-stapo.