Extreme Right tests justice and limits of democracy in Europe

The indefinition generated surprise. After all, isn’t it evident that AFD is an far right party? Why do you still hesitate to call them by name? Part of the answer lies in the effort-today almost reflex-of academics and politicians to create typologies for reactionary groups, as if the urgency were in classifying them, not to face them. This creates a taxonomy that ends up complexifying what, deep down, should be simple.

“Fifty shades of fascism”

In the academic debate, it is usually distinguished different types of ultra-right-the so-called “fifty shades of fascism.” In this typology, the extreme right from the radical right is separated. The theoretical difference between them would be this: the far right is characterized by seeking power through force. Already the radical right, although also undemocratic in their values, operating primarily within the electoral and institutional rules.

This distinction may have some use in the conceptual ground. But in practice, it has been used to relativize the concrete risks these groups pose, normalizing them. In the end, this taxonomy helps us little to understand the past, nor the present – and even less to prepare for the future.

Historically, the far right resorted to all means to reach power. The case of Germany of the 1930s is exemplary: the far right ascended by legal roads, with decisive support from the center right, which normalized and believed to be able to control it.

The result was the destruction of republican institutions inside. Even today, elected leaders do not hesitate to flirt with AutoGolpe as soon as they consolidate their position. The debate on banishing or not the far right of political life is not restricted to Germany, where the legal framework explicitly foresees this possibility.