values". However, are these parties really extreme to the extent that they could be
dangerous for a democratic political and social order? If they accept democracy as a
means of governance and problem solving in a society, then they usually do not
represent a real threat to political stability and security, says theory. But what if they
should use democracy only as a tool for achieving their extreme goals after having
seized the political power? One should never forget such historical experiences from
the days of Nazis and communists. Therefore, the agenda of radical political parties'
programmes seem to be even more important than the "way" of their implementation.
In this regard, we can probably agree with C. Mudde (2000: 12) who distinguishes
between "radicalism" and "extremism". According to him, radicalism just opposes the
constitution, while extremism is hostile towards it. However, parliamentary extreme
(in Mudde's term – radical) right- and left-
1
wing political parties have been modern
-
ised in the last 15 years and have become particularly interesting because of some
extreme ideas and attitudes towards the recent history issues such as, for example, the
question of Holocaust, ethnic, religious and other minorities' rights, immigrants etc.
The parties of J. M. Le Pen in France, J. Haider in Austria, and G. F. Finni in Italia are
typical representatives of such parties (Betz, Immerfall, 1998).
There are, of course, also small non-parliamentary groups all over the Europe that have
political programmes and goals which are not in accordance with their respective con
-
stitutions. In such cases, the states usually use their coercive institutions (intelligence
services, police, and prosecutors) to monitor and control them. In the worst case
scenario, even a judicial decision is taken, if necessary, by which organisations and ac
-
tivities of such groups are outlawed, though such cases are rather rare. Namely, the
freedom of expression is probably the most defended human right in today's world, and
extremist groups and individuals that promote racism, intolerance, xenophobia etc. are
quite well "protected" too. If they do not take actions that are deemed criminal and are
stipulated as such in penal codes of their respective states, they usually manage to
continue with their activities. Moreover, they can even commit verbal criminal offen
-
ces: due to the fact that, in such cases, the police and state prosecutors usually take
freedom of expression "too seriously", meaning they are very precautious when having
to prosecute such acts; such extremist groups and extremists stand very good chances
of avoiding any serious punishment.
Another problem (representing first dimension) lies in political and moral motivation
required for definition of those extreme actions that need be either publicly condemned
or defined as criminal offences and as such, incorporated into penal codes. For
example, if we take a look at the issue of different perception of violence in the manner
of T. Bjorgo (1997: 7-8) bringing us D. Riches evaluation of violence connected to
racism and intolerance to immigrants and foreigners, we can see that what the majority
of people would regard as violence against the above mentioned marginal groups,
some members of the same society would perceive as nothing but "struggle", fight",
"self-defence" etc. Since we all know who has the final say, formally, in policy making
process, it is logical to believe that even the highest degree of consensus among
laymen and the professional public regarding the extreme phenomena is not to suggest
that that some law that should manage these phenomena is going to be effective, as it is
often "modified" in a parliamentary and non-parliamentary policy process. Needless to
say, though the aforementioned extreme political parties may, in fact, not represent a
direct threat to security and order, they are not so innocent when it comes to the
political and public debate about extremism in society: jumping to the defence of an
extreme behaviour commonly unacceptable to the great majority is a typical task of
these parties.
3
This item was translated into English by the source and not subject to subsequent editing. Views, opinions, and conclusions
are those of the author and do not imply endorsement, recommendation, or favor by the U.S. Government.