In English, the word “root” traces its etymology from Latin, radix. From radix comes “radical,” a term used to describe thinkers who want to change institutions from the ground up; thus, they seek to fix the root of problems. Today, the word is used – often incorrectly – to describe new and unorthodox beliefs, a trend which has given the word a negative connotation. In any case, the recent surge in radicalism is not unique to history; we can recognize the patterns by which it arises. Without further ado, let’s delve into the current political atmosphere – here and abroad – and see which radical figures and organizations have taken the spotlight.
Radical US Politicians
Rising presidential candidate Bernie Sanders does not fit in well with the Democrats. Traditionally, the party has been closely associated with the center-right, so Sanders (as a center-leftist) is seen as “radical” in the modern sense. He supports universal healthcare, tuition-free college, and many other new ideas, trying to replace the norms that are deeply ingrained in American society. Sanders calls his ideology “democratic socialism,” a term that reconciles some democratic moderates with those farther left but evokes criticism from conservatives.
The right wing is also developing extreme ideas. The first example that comes to mind for many is President Donald J. Trump, who suddenly appeared on the political scene in 2015, as a new face to the Republican Party. After his ascent, the Republican Party-which had long been heralded as the “Party of Lincoln” was no more – the Trump administration has been shifting the Republicans further and further right.
Trump is a radical, in every sense of the word. His tax cuts for the high income earners as well as his trade war with China have drastically shifted the economy. Early in his campaign, Trump began calling for border reform, but using severe measures – simply put, “The Wall.” Since his inauguration, he and his administration have been working to completely reverse acts made by previous presidents. The Trump cabinet has notably cut funding for schools as well as the EPA; currently, they are working hard to dismantle Medicare.
Several congresspeople have promoted radical ideas, too. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez emerged victorious in the 2018 midterm elections, becoming the youngest woman to ever serve in congress. Ocasio-Cortez and Representative Rashida Tlaib are self-proclaimed democratic-socialists – with Rep. Ilhan Omar and Rep. Ayanna Pressley, the four politicians form the “Squad.” According to news outlets like Politico, they can be considered the four most left-leaning congresspeople currently in office. Each woman has taken great strides to guarantee universal healthcare, promote environmental causes, and abolish Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Radical Organizations
Figureheads aside, there are numerous radical groups who have been lurking in the shadows of American politics for years. The current political situation has shed some light on these groups and their activities. After decades of dissolution and fragmentation, the infamous Ku Klux Klan has risen to the surface once again. The Klan began in the aftermath of the Civil War, ushering in the reign of white supremacy and anti-black sentiments. By the turn of the twentieth century, the group had begun targeting African-American leaders in the Jim Crow south.
The Klan used lynchings to spread terror among people of color, ravaging both the north and south through the 1920s; then, the group collapsed again under a slew of scandals. After being dismantled for thirty or so years, the KKK regained prominence during the Civil Rights Movement to oppose African-American political and economic rights, acting under the same white supremacist principles. This aspect of the Klan still exists today, and is especially active in the south.
Consisting of extreme left and anti-fascist militant individuals, Antifa has picked up speed on the left. It arose as a result of white supremacy movements in the Southern United States, and its members oppose right-wing and capitalist ideas. Antifa members believe they embody the ideals of communism and anarchism. Through their urging of physical violence and militant ideology, Antifa has become the definition of radicalism on the left.
Radicalism Abroad
In 2011, the Spanish people were fed up with their government. They launched a four-year campaign (the “anti-austerity” or “indignados” movement), which saw droves of youth calling for reform in the system. Most of all, they had had enough of economic disparity, the outdated two-party system, corruption, and capitalism. With as many as eight million people involved, the protests sent ripples throughout the world. These nation-wide protests influenced the Arab Spring movement, in which wide-scale, radical protests in the Arab world swiftly toppled dictatorships and established democracies.
In May of 2011, the “indignados” occupied La Puerta Del Sol Square in Madrid, chanting “sí, se puede” – yes, it can be done. In 2015, however, the chant was modified to “podemos” – we can. This was the rallying cry of the brand new left-wing party, which had been born a year earlier. Anticipating the 2016 general election, Podemos merged with the decades-old United Left to form Unidas Podemos; in that election, the coalition won 71 seats, occupying a fifth of the Spanish Congress. However, another party had also come to challenge the two party system, but on the other side of the political spectrum.
Splitting from the historically dominant People’s Party, Vox was founded in late 2013, mainly because members thought the Party should have been further right. Vox had little influence or success until 2017, when the party saw a spike in membership following a terrorist attack in Barcelona. Later, in the 2019 general elections, Vox earned 52 seats in Congress. That victory put Vox in 3rd place, far above Unidas Podemos, who has recently been sinking in the polls.
Vox leader Santiago Abascal’s rhetoric has generated considerable controversy. He is openly antifeminist, islamophobic, and slightly Eurosceptic. Notably, he has supported a second “Reconquista” to expel Spanish Muslims, and a gender violence act. Additionally, the party has called for all mosques to be shut down, and for Spain to harshly restrict its immigration policies.
In the 2018 Brazilian presidential elections, two radicals faced off in a bid to lead the massive nation. Jair Bolsonaro, a polarizing nationalist from Saõ Paulo, took on Fernando Haddad, who represented the Workers’ Party. Upon emerging victorious, Bolsonaro immediately began insulting his opposition. In a speech, the former military official threatened to exterminate and deport any “red outlaws” (socialists); he also made an allusion to the former Brazilian dictatorship, which had slaughtered rebels indiscriminately. He believes that the country thrived under that dictatorship – it was merely a “democratic intervention.”
Fiercely pro-business, Bolsonaro has pushed for stronger logging efforts in the Amazon rainforest. As a result, habitats for wild animals are becoming increasingly scarce, and wildfires are at an all-time high. In order to extract rich ores and minerals, he has invaded forest territory, jeopardizing the rights of indigenous people. “We are going to integrate them into society,” he plainly remarked about these actions. He has targeted people of color, refugees, homosexuals, women, and the poor – inequality between these groups and the “normals,” he feels, is essential.
So why is it that radical ideas are assuming greater prominence now than ever before? According to some journalists and political experts, the answer lies in unprecedented globalization and, in the case of the United States, significant demographic change.
The Roots of Radicalism
The United States has been seen as a symbol of opportunity by many foreign individuals. Now, with comparatively relaxed immigration laws and safe travel opportunities, individuals outside of the United States can enter America with greater ease. This trend has accounted for America’s demographic change: for the first time in American history, the white Christian population is being matched in size by racial and ethnic minorities.
These minority groups are becoming more significant in the political realm as they demand that their voices be heard through the exercise of their civic rights. But alas, no one likes a sudden change. Some have proposed that fear of this change has caused a rift between conservative and liberal groups, resulting in an extreme ideological shift. As other rich countries are increasingly influenced by globalization, they may follow a similar pattern.
Some have questioned the legitimacy of this result. Is radicalization a reasonable response to demographic change? Moreover, will it continue to grow more extreme in the United States as American minority groups increase in number? We cannot make certain predictions, but there is certainly something to be said about how society should handle conflicting radical ideas.
Is Radicalism Beneficial?
What is the price we pay for increasingly radical positions? The mainstream media, particularly in the United States, has repeatedly harped upon divided domestic interests and rising polarization. Political division has also been associated with misinformation, as evidenced by Facebook’s political ad controversy. Radicalism can indeed cause political and social division, which is not good in excess.
Even though humans naturally dislike it, division is not inherently negative. It is the central theme of political debates that affect changes in policy and innovative disputes that introduce scientific progress to the world. Division causes conflict, which can be constructive or destructive to progress.
For many historical cases, it has been constructive. In the Civil Rights Movement, for example, African-American citizens were clearly at odds with the discriminatory and disenfranchising policies directed against them at the time. Reverend Martin Luther King, taking action for the movement, became one of the leaders of the March on Washington and exposed the contradictions in America’s political system – that blacks were unable to enjoy the same social and economic freedoms of whites – to all of the nation. When one idea triumphs over another in a conflict, progress is created. In King’s case, the March on Washington was a milestone in the Civil Rights Movement that led the Black cause to success.
A century prior to the Civil Rights Movement, America witnessed devastating destructive conflict. The northern states, concentrated with abolitionists, had opposed slavery while the southern states, whose economies relied on slave labor, supported it. The opposing sides could not handle the conflict peacefully, and America was hurled into the Civil War, a period of bloody division that witnessed the deadliest battles on American land. Even so, in the end, progress had been achieved. Blacks were still disenfranchised, but slavery was officially ended with a Constitutional Amendment.
Conclusion
When radical ideas clash, conflict is the inevitable result. It is how the two sides of conflict choose to manage their dispute that determines if the conflict is to be constructive. While not many can say for sure whether or not radical ideas will continue to rise, society must embrace them for now and learn to use conflicting ideas to its own benefit.
0
0
Average Rating