Introduction: Throughout Europe, the Middle East and Asia, rightwing governments have increasingly adopted extremist socio-economic policies, slashing social expenditures, labor and welfare legislation, while increasing corporate subsidies and reducing taxes for the elite.
The rightwing has launched increasingly reckless military interventions via-invasions, proxy wars and massive weapon build-ups on the frontiers of Russia, China and Iran, while engaging in military provocations.
In this essay we will outline the scope and depth of rightwing extremism on a global scale, analyze its consequences and then evaluate the successes or failures of the ‘hard right’. In discussing the rise of hard-right socio-economic regimes and policies, we include traditional social democratic parties, which have pursued extremist agendas.
Washington as the Center of the Hard Right Policies and Militarization
US empire building has been at the forefront promoting military confrontations, invasions, occupations and proxy wars. Washington’s direct involvement has been magnified through its alliances with regional powers and client regimes, which provide soldiers and weapons.
The US military empire-building has led to the growth and consolidation of similar policies among follower regimes throughout the world. Likewise US longstanding reactionary socio-economic policies have served as templates and ‘standards’ for its followers in Europe and Asia as they shred the social ‘safety nets’ and civil contract with their citizens.
In other words, US empire building sends ripple effects throughout the world; its military and pro big business postures have been incorporated, to a large degree, into Baltic, Scandinavian, Eastern and Western European, Middle Eastern and Asian regimes, whether run by traditional, rightwing or social democratic parties. Their policy decisions are largely a result of internalprocesses: Dominant classes, international bankers and multi-national corporations set the socio-economic agenda while local military elites, with long-standing ties to NATO, have assimilated US military goals.
Among US allies and clients, hard-right militarist and confrontational politics are driven by the notion that they will have their share of imperial booty and that they will benefit from a redrawn geo-political map. The hard-right policies and the assimilation of US militarist doctrines by European, Middle Eastern and Asian regimes are an ‘insurance policy’ for their own survival as well as a weapon to deflect domestic class discontent. In sum, the military build-up is a weaponof regional expansionism and a tool to secure domestic cohesion and maintain power.The continuance of Thatcher-Reagan neoliberal neo-conservative globalization, but people like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz cut their teeth in the Nixon Administration. Sew the wind, reap the whirlwind.
Petras is more optimistic about the right peaking now than I am. I think the cycle has a way to go — at least until the next major crisis hits.
James Petras Website
Rightwing Radicalization, Militarization and the Boomerang Effect
James Petras | Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, New York and adjunct professor at Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia
@Tom said "Petra is more optimistic about the right peaking now than I am. I think the cycle has a way to go."
ReplyDeleteSame here. How is change possible when both major parties have bought into the neoliberal / neocon philosophy, and the media is controlled by oligarchs?
Meanwhile the few lefty governments like Syriza and Venezuela are not exactly inspiring. What passes for the left in the U.S. doesn't like guns and thinks it can change things by waving cardboard signs and signing petitions.
Change may not come in my lifetime. Not the good kind of change, anyway.