NCJ Number
190728
Journal
Studies in Conflict and Terrorism Volume: 24 Issue: 5 Dated: September/October 2001 Pages: 339-359
Date Published
2001
Length
21 pages
Annotation
This document provides a comparative analysis on right-wing extremism and terrorism within a democracy.
Abstract
Democracies, by their nature, are open to debate, political activity, and struggle over resources and power. Some citizens exploit the freedoms for challenging political order, sometimes putting it in serious danger. Most liberal thinkers agree that a democratic regime has a moral obligation to protect itself from its enemies. But the question is how can a democracy protect itself without subverting its own moral foundation and bring society to the edge of a legitimacy crisis. By using three ideal-type models (militant, defending, and immunized democracies) representing distinctly different reactions of democracies to far right challenges in the parliamentary, extra-parliamentary, and social arenas, the United States, German, and Israeli responses were evaluated. It is concluded that the mild policies of the United States, which were supported by strong civil society, brought it very close to the ideal immunized democracy model. Both state and society have all the required means to deal with such challenges effectively and within liberal democratic boundaries. Germany and Israel were much more vulnerable to far right challenges and thus were forced to adopt more militant approaches. Germany seemed quite successful in its attempts to monitor right-wing extremism with few deviations from the liberal framework. Israel was more hesitant in shifting its policies, and was not backed by a strong civil society. It seemed that this society was very vulnerable to different challenges of the right and therefore might regress to much less liberal policies in its fight for survival. 80 notes