The role of science in countering extremism
We talk to the renowned editors of the yearbook Extremism & Democracy about current challenges for our democratic systems. Prof Dr Uwe Backes, Prof Dr Alexander Gallus, Prof em Dr Eckhard Jesse and Prof Dr Tom Thieme provide insights into the development of extremism and populism as well as concrete recommendations for action to make democracy more resilient.
The occasion
The Science Year 2024 is dedicated to the value and meaning of freedom in a wide variety of dimensions and contexts. In view of the current crises, the question arises: How resilient is our democracy? What role can science play in strengthening the resilience of democracy against extremist threats?
“From a scientific perspective, groundwork should be done. It may clarify, both historically and systematically, the extent to which democracy is the state-political order that has best contained violence and ensured peace to date. Organised through free elections and pluralistic parties, it seems most suitable for giving organised expression to the – by no means closed – will of the people in today’s mass societies. It has proven to be salutary in this context to contain the sovereignty of the people in a constitutional and constitutional state, not least to protect human and minority rights. The dictatorships of the 20th century, responsible for devastating wars and genocides, trampled on these rights. This bitter historical experience should not be forgotten in the 21st century and should constantly remind us anew of what a valuable achievement the democratic constitutional state represents. And this despite the fact that it sometimes presents itself to us as being as complicated as it is abstract and can only partially guarantee social justice. If a realistic, less idealistic understanding of democracy prevails, democracy should also prove to be more resilient in times of crisis.”
A look back
The yearbook Extremism & Democracy, which you edit, has been published by Nomos Verlag since 1993. What has changed in the field of extremism over the past 30 years?
“Until the end of the “short” 20th century, the antagonism between democracy and extremism was usually striking. Nowadays, the dividing line is more difficult to draw – not least as a result of the loss of significance of the classic extremist ideologies of National Socialism/fascism and communism. Extremist actors often no longer form ideologically cohesive cadre organisations in which all members are aligned in order to spread the true doctrine among the people. Instead, they are usually heterogeneous organisations in which moderate and radical positions coexist. The parties on the right and left that are successful throughout Europe operate in a kind of grey area between democracy and extremism. In addition, anti-democratic phenomena that defy the classic right-left distinction are increasingly appearing. This applies to religious fundamentalist endeavours, separatist tendencies, so-called lateral thinkers and the radical fringes of the climate protection movement.”
The snapshot
How do extremism and populism relate to each other?
“Due to the grey area problem, the use of the term “populism” has become established in politics, the media and academia as a quasi extremism-light variant. But such an understanding is misleading. Extremism is the antithesis of the democratic constitutional state, populism emphasises the antagonism between the people and the elite. The terms extremism and populism are therefore not on the same level. Consequently, there are four variants: 1. democratic and populist; 2. democratic and non-populist; 3. extremist and non-populist; 4. extremist and populist. However, populisms harbour an extremist tendency if they claim to help the will of the people (conceived as homogeneous) to prevail against a political class (conceived as a unit) (establishment, “block parties”). This is a classic topos of anti-pluralism.”
An outlook
What new challenges do you see for democracy in 2024 and in the coming years (also with a view to the super election year)?
“In Germany, as in other European democracies, populist parties with more or less pronounced extremist tendencies have gained ground and are putting the party systems under pressure. The danger lies less in a rapid tipping over into autocratic forms than in a gradual dismantling of democracy, which initially occurs gradually and then in increasingly dramatic forms. Extremism research provides diagnostic tools to recognise such dangers at an early stage.”
The recommendations
What specific recommendations do you have for politicians, civil society and citizens to take action to combat extremism and strengthen democracy?
“The democratic parties should reflect on what they have in common and stand united against extremist endeavours and developments of any kind. At the same time, they need to take a far-sighted approach to extremism by offering convincing political solutions. Bans can only be a last resort and can in no way replace political debate. Instead of blanket rejection, we need an open culture of debate without premature stigmatisation. Anyone who refuses to engage in debate with populists/extremists on principle is promoting precisely the kind of black-and-white thinking that benefits extremists. In this way, their prejudices about the aloofness and cowardice of those “up there” are reinforced. Confronting the anti-pluralism of extremists and debunking the claim to represent the “true will of the people” in a contentious dialogue may not be fun. However, there is no democratic alternative. What is needed, therefore, is the permanent strengthening and further development of democratic competences. These include knowledge of the political system and the constitution, but even more so social skills such as tolerance of ambiguity, the ability to deal with conflict and respectful behaviour towards political dissidents.”
The Yearbook Extremism & Democracy is aimed at both academics and the interested public. How can a broad public be sensitised to the topic of extremism and democracy?
“The problem lies less in the public’s lack of awareness. The demonstrations against right-wing extremism since the beginning of the year have impressively shown that the “fed-up centre” is no longer willing to stand idly by and watch the political and social brutalisation by a rabble-rousing minority. What is needed politically, in the media and publicly, however, is a more responsible approach to the concept of extremism. Unfortunately, its instrumentalisation and misuse has increased in recent years. This makes it all the more important not to leave the sovereignty of interpretation of the relationship between extremism and democracy to the enemies of freedom. This also includes not stigmatising every unpopular but essentially democratic view as extremist. Conversely, consideration for certain extremist positions is forbidden – whether out of opportunism or conviction. It is crucial not to apply double standards. Because anyone who does so makes themselves untrustworthy.”
