Definition of far-right in 2022

In the wake of Giorgia Meloni’s fantastic win in Italy yesterday, the MSM have gone into overdrive, screeching and screaming how Meloni is “far-right”.  So I thought to myself, what do the left and their mouthpieces mean when they smear someone as “far-right”? Well, I have come up with the following.  The definition of “far-right” in 2022 is….

  1. A person who believes there are only two genders – male and female.
  2. A person who believes a woman is an adult, human female.
  3. A person who believes a man is an adult, human male.
  4. A person who believes you cannot change your biological sex.
  5. A person who believes a woman cannot have a penis.
  6. A person who believes someone is not assigned sex at birth.
  7. A person who believes biological males should not compete against biological females.
  8. A person who believes transgender women are not women.
  9. A person who believes transgender men are not men.
  10. A person who believes males prisoners should not be imprisoned in female prisons.
  11. A person who believes children should not be mutilated into the cult of gender ideology.
  12. A person who believes children should not be sexualised by exposure to sexual perverts and exhibitionists such as drag queens.
  13. A person who believes that it is parents, and not the state, who are the best custodians and decision makers for their children.
  14. A person who believes carbon emission are not destroying the planet.
  15. A person who believes in fossil fuels.
  16. A person who believes in nuclear energy.
  17. A person who believes renewables such as wind and solar are unreliable and will never provide base load energy.
  18. A person who believes in lifting humanity out of poverty, not confining them to poverty.
  19. A person who believes in free speech.
  20. A person who believes in small limited government.
  21. A person who wants government to stay out of their lives.
  22. A person who believes in fiscal responsibility.
  23. A person who believes in individual liberty.
  24. A person who believes in religious freedom.
  25. A person who believes in the significant role small and medium sized businesses should play in a country’s economy.
  26. A person who believes in legal but limited immigration.
  27. A person who does not believe in open borders.
  28. A person who believes countries must have strong borders.
  29. A person who believes in the nation state.
  30. A person who believes in patriotism.
  31. A person who believes men are not evil.
  32. A person who believes white people are not evil.
  33. A person who believes that what is important in a fellow human is the content of their character, not the colour of their skin.
  34. A person who believes the West has been an enlightening presence in the world.
  35. A person who believes western history is not one long horror story.
  36. A person who believes in a strong military.
  37. A person who believes in free fair markets.
  38. A person who believes in Western Civilisation.
  39. A person who believes in the Judaic Christian tradition, a tradition which underpins the West.
  40. A person who believes in the primary role of the family in any society.
  41. A person who believes that marriage is between a biological man and a biological woman.

I don’t think the above points are particularly reactionary. Please feel free to add to the above list. In the meantime I have a confession to make, I believe in ALL the above. So, since the MSM, the left, various progressive scum like the two I confronted on Oxford Street the other day, academia, entertainment and numerous others, insist on smearing and labelling you, me and others as “far-right”, all because we believe in some or all of the above, then we need to come out of the closet, we need to stand up and we need to be proud. To paraphrase Kramer from one of my favourite Seinfeld episodes….

“Oh, it be so everybody, I’m far-right, I’m proud and I’m loving every minute of it”.

78 thoughts on “Definition of far-right in 2022”

  1. “Far Right” seems to have become like “Deplorable” and “Ultra MAGA” to be worn as a badge of pride. It is a shame the language (and history) is being bastardised like this as it divides us further into tribes and makes good faith dialogue much more difficult. It makes you think on how civil wars start….gradually then at some point, all of sudden.


    Report comment

    16
  2. A person who knows their grandparents were not less moral than themselves.
    A person who knows ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ are interchangeable terms for the two sexes.


    Report comment

    11
  3. .

    It is a shame the language (and history) is being bastardised like this as it divides us further into tribes and makes good faith dialogue much more difficult.

    This!


    Report comment

    6
  4. I do like Hayek’s definition of fascist in The Road to Serfdom. The discussion is detailed but it does not really matter whether one is left or right. We can put those terms aside.

    Socialism of the Marxist type is really a fiction – a-will-‘o-the-wisp – and has never seen the light of day. It is a conjured phantom. Stalinism, Hitlerism, democratic socialism and like movements lead away from individualism (i.e. methodological individualism), freedom and liberalism of the older type to nationalisation and collectivism (i.e. methodological holism), with certain self-styled elites leading the way onward and upward into the bright new morning day of utopia. Fascist. But Gil Eliot’s “Twentieth Century Book of the Dead” has shown that 100 million or so dead shows that lie for what it is worth.

    You could argue that what passes for democratic socialism today is the creeping movement of nationalisation, such as what has occurred in Venezuela, with self-styled elites using the democratic process to increase the size, reach and power of the state and its bureaucratic machinery, as it seeks to dictate every crevice and nuance of life and re-mold man into the neo-serf. That same is occurring in Victoria: the Labor Party by definition does not care about its constituents, as it uses them to get into power and then votes along party lines to remain in power by using subterfuge and dubious moral means to buy allegance and votes.

    The key issue is a greater (i.e. fascism) or lesser (i.e. older type of liberalism) centralisation of the state and its bureaucratic machinery. The new Italian Prime Minister seems to be pursuing a minimalist role for the state and the EU and a greater role and return to that most hated of instutions, the family!


    Report comment

    18
  5. I believe that transgender men should not be able to enter women’s toilets. I’ve seen this happen in Canberra with young girls running out traumatised.

    Good work Cassie, ignore the pedants.


    Report comment

    28
  6. Related, maybe redundant, maybe repetition is a good tool to break through some pinko skulls.
    I’m getting attracted to the US meme of being “based”, though I’m being careful about figuring out exactly what it is. As far as now, I reckon it’s got a lot to do with knowing thyself, having the words prepared, and not pandering one bit to the feelz of the screechers.


    Report comment

    6
  7. All the list demonstrates is that pretty much everything on it was entirely “uncontroversial”* mainstream thought as recently as about 2005.

    Even a useless narcissistic knobhead like keating recognised this with his comment about two poofters and a shitzu not constituting a family.

    The other infuriating aspect of the list is the prominence of the utterly insane tranny stupidity – this ridiculous offensive misogynist rubbish was never tolerated in the soviet union or if you prefer a more contemporary example, bloody china. Talk about gross destructive decadence.

    *As opposed to “controversial”, the braindead lamestream meeja’s preferred smear of anyone holding normal run of the mill beliefs.


    Report comment

    12
  8. Recently someone on Tucker Carlson recently said that the protest movement is now on the right and is becoming cool. I agree with that, we have the cool songs, think Let’s Go Brandon, and will eventually become a home for rebellious kids. What could be more cool than believing things and associating with people of whom their parents disapprove?


    Report comment

    11
  9. Don’t know how to tell you this Cassie, you’re normal, like most of us here. Yes, we have our own little foibles but that’s what makes us us. Please never change.


    Report comment

    17
  10. The Left is into projection in a big way. It seems to be a fairly recent strategy they’ve developed. So whenever they accuse a righty of being something you can sure they are projecting.

    In this case the people who fit the definition of fascists are the very people accusing Meloni of being a fascist.


    Report comment

    11
  11. Hillary got out-memed. “Deplorables” got limited traction. The use of the pejorative “far – right” means it’s an easier segue to “nazi” and/or “fascist”. The little darlings all “know” that Adolf was a “right winger”. Funnily enough, no one seems to be branded “far-left” these days. Tells you everything…


    Report comment

    9
  12. Shorter form – far right means a person who believes in things that have been believed in and foundations of the West often since time immemorial, but certainly that have underpinned it for centuries.

    Even absolute free speech is a relative newcomer, but goes back at least as far as the enlightenment.

    So, if you have beliefs that have been at the core of our civilisation, going back generations, for which people have fought and died, then you are part of a strange fringe who are a threat to civilisation.

    On the other hand, if you think the family should be dissolved, and that a person’s sex is as changeable as a mood (even to the point that physical sexual traits are irrelevant), that children who have no sexual drive yet need to be pre-programmed with something to forestall nature, and that thoughts in someone else’s head that you don’t agree with is violence, then you are a guardian of civilisation.


    Report comment

    7
  13. Good post Cassie.

    As Rabz points out, almost everything you say would not have been considered remotely controversial twenty years ago.

    Like most ‘far right’ persons, my opinions on the basic tenets you list have not significantly changed in the past 20-30-40 years but now I’m an ‘old white guy’, a veritable dinosaur, with opinions that are no longer politically or socially valid/acceptable.

    I can’t help but be pessimistic on the long-term future of the West, and not because we now seem to have little in common, but because our enemies have recognised our decline and are exploiting every weakness eventually leading to our economic (and military) subservience. Where will be be in 20-30-40 years from now?


    Report comment

    5
  14. Or is it more a case far right is shorthand for ‘far too right’ (as in correct). In which case can we now change the word (political) ‘left’ to either ‘wrong’ or ‘evil’?


    Report comment

    3
  15. “I can’t help but be pessimistic on the long-term future of the West, and not because we now seem to have little in common, but because our enemies have recognised our decline and are exploiting every weakness eventually leading to our economic (and military) subservience. Where will be be in 20-30-40 years from now?”

    Agree.

    I would also argue that our enemies have always exploited our niceness, our decency and in many cases, our cowardice. Think of the abuse, both physical and verbal, that Australian conservative and/or right of centre politicians and commentators have experienced.

    Has anyone seen any Labor or Greens’ politician assaulted, like Tony Abbott was in broad daylight? No, didn’t think so.

    Has anyone seen any Labor or Greens’ politician assaulted by having eggs smashed on their heads from behind, just like Scott Morrison and Fraser Anning had? No, didn’t think so.

    Has anyone seen any ABC commentator attacked from behind, whilst walking to a lunch in broad daylight, just like Andrew Bolt was? No, didn’t think so.

    Anyone seen any Labor or Greens’ politician endure the same kind of vicious verbal abuse and stalking that Nicolle Flint endured in the 2019 election and afterwards? No, didn’t think so.

    In all of the above cases, the progressive left thought that the physical and verbal assaults dished our were a hoot.

    Whilst I’m not advocating physical violence, I am advocating that we on the right stop turning the other cheek to this abuse, that we stand up and say NO and that we call them out for their vicious ugly hypocrisy. And the first place to start would be for all conservative/right of centre politicians and commentators to boycott their ABC until the day arrives (which may be never) when they’re prepared to host a balanced panel on such gunk as Q&A and The Dumb.


    Report comment

    17
  16. Bruce of N

    In this case the people who fit the definition of fascists are the very people accusing Meloni of being a fascist.

    Yesterday we had that EU petty fascist Ursula Von derived Leyen claiming that Meloni following the wishes of the voters was a breach of “democratic principles”. She has no capacity at all for self-awareness.


    Report comment

    14
  17. Bruce of N

    In this case the people who fit the definition of fascists are the very people accusing Meloni of being a fascist.

    Yesterday we had that EU petty fascist Ursula Von der Leyen claiming that Meloni following the wishes of the voters was a breach of “democratic principles”. She has no capacity at all for self-awareness.


    Report comment

    1
  18. I used to play soccer on the right wing so right wing it is for me. Whether far or near it doesn’t really matter to me.

    Never liked playing at right back (right back where I started) or left back as that usually meant I was left back in the dressing room.


    Report comment

    5
  19. I should also add that the smearing of opponents by the left, their use of terms such as “far-right”, is not just designed to smear and silence, it is also a deliberate tactic to incite violence against conservatives and others who might disagree with the progressive left.


    Report comment

    14
  20. tommbell

    Funnily enough, no one seems to be branded “far-left” these days. Tells you everything…

    Time to revive the old “Card carrying member of the Communist Party” slogan?


    Report comment

    4
  21. I guess 32. can get a bit complicated/problematic in a multicultural countries. With for example stratification of complexity, i.e. some strange and amusing opinions/inferences can emerge and given social perceptions of identical twins- given one works full time in the sun and the other in an office.


    Report comment

    1
  22. BTW, where is the Glorious New Leader of the Conservative Forces in Oz (aka Dutton) in all of this? Haven’t heard a word from him. At least Abbot was an effective Leader of the Opposition. Dutton seems to be MIA.


    Report comment

    14
  23. Lesson is, don’t cede the linguistic whip hand to the Left Lizards in your life. Gramcsi’s minions have been creeping through media, government, education, corporations, and legislation… if there’s guerillas in our midst, be prepared to put them to the sword with a sharp tongue.
    A good handbrake on rampant revisionism is to ask for definitions.
    What do you mean when you use the old established word “fascism”? Oh righto, i can see your confusion, you’ve left the Fontana far behind there etc etc…


    Report comment

    10
  24. BJ,
    I think Von der Leyen means “democratic” in the context of:
    The Democratic Republic of…(insert name). So, not democratic.

    Cassie, great post!


    Report comment

    4
  25. BBs,
    Hitler also believed in democracy as did Lenin & Stalin, don’t believe me? Tik has an interesting video on this very topic https://youtu.be/_-lznzuPK8I , well worth a watch.

    What these 3 despots were against was parliamentarianism , ie what we would call democracy. They believed in a “higher nobler” form. Just like von dere Leyen


    Report comment

    3
  26. Cassie,
    Could I add the following to your list?
    – A person who believes that an accused is innocent until found guilty by a jury of his/her peers
    – A person who believes that the punishment should fit the crime and rehabilitation comes second after punishment
    – A person who believes that another person should not be punished by their employer for holding unpopular beliefs


    Report comment

    12
  27. Has anyone seen any Labor or Greens’ politician assaulted, like Tony Abbott was in broad daylight? No, didn’t think so.

    There was that assassination attempt of a NSW MP in the eighties.

    Although TBF, that wasn’t a right winger attacking a left politician, just someone that was going through a mental illness and I do believe was a labor voter anyway.


    Report comment

    1
  28. 42. A person who believes that an accused is innocent until found guilty by a jury of his/her peers
    43. A person who believes that the punishment should fit the crime and rehabilitation comes second after punishment
    44. A person who believes that another person should not be punished by their employer for holding unpopular beliefs

    Thank you Diogenes.


    Report comment

    3
  29. Katzenjammer

    A person who knows ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ are interchangeable terms for the two sexes.

    I thought it was completely to do with language. As far as I can see, “sex” is the word for who is either male or female.

    noun: A grammatical category, often designated as male, female, or neuter, used in the classification of nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and, in some languages, verbs that may be arbitrary or based on characteristics such as sex or animacy and that determines agreement with or selection of modifiers, referents, or grammatical forms. [my bold]


    Report comment

    1
  30. Nope. Free speech is what got us into this mess. It’s what the left used to destroy our institutions, which is why they once were all for it.

    Garbage. It wasn’t free speech at all.


    Report comment

    3
  31. tommbell says:
    September 28, 2022 at 12:40 pm
    BTW, where is the Glorious New Leader of the Conservative Forces in Oz (aka Dutton) in all of this? Haven’t heard a word from him. At least Abbot was an effective Leader of the Opposition. Dutton seems to be MIA.

    Forget about Dutton, he is not one of us or is interested in anything we have to say. After the memorial in Canberra last Thursday he was in the group of the cool kids in the Great Hall, chatted and laughed with them, nowhere near any Libs or Nats. I wrote him off right there and then.


    Report comment

    5
  32. I scored 85% on the Definition of Far Right in 2022 According To The Left According To Cassie scale.
    Which probably makes me Far Left in her view.

    Notable troublespots on Cassie’s list were:
    1. her misuse of the word gender where she really meant sex. Gender is a linguistic and social construct, the sex is the biological bit. But conservatives have taboos against sex so they don’t like saying the word sex, which leads them into this mistake.
    24. Religion in practice has to have some limitation for basically the same reason government has to have a limitation. No pure ideological goal gets an unlimited free pass. You might think religious freedom was a good idea if you had never heard of any religion other than your own.

    Some others I didn’t fully agree with but not as strongly.
    The phrasing was imprecise in several. e.g. Only agreed with 17 because technically they cannot do it by themselves but in theory could do with enough storage, it’s just topographically and economically prohibitive.
    Nuance, bro!


    Report comment

    2
  33. “Which probably makes me Far Left in her view.

    Notable troublespots on Cassie’s list were:
    1. her misuse of the word gender where she really meant sex. Gender is a linguistic and social construct, the sex is the biological bit. But conservatives have taboos against sex so they don’t like saying the word sex, which leads them into this mistake.”

    Oh dear, a comment reeking of smugness and elitism.

    Firstly, you’re wrong to assume I think you’re “far-left”, that’s your own projection, or dare I say, your own attention seeking.

    Secondly, there is no misuse of the word “gender”, I know exactly what the linguistic difference is between “sex” and “gender’. But we’re now living in a time where the word “sex” has been deliberately confined to the linguistic dustbin and it’s been replaced with the word “gender”.

    Thirdly, as for your statement “But conservatives have taboos against sex so they don’t like saying the word sex, which leads them into this mistake“, that’s the kind of nonsensical adolescent crap I’d expect from a third year arts student at some third rate university. Perhaps it’s you who should grow up. Oh and what makes you think that I and others here are all conservatives? I’m right wing but I have some “non-conservative” beliefs.

    Here’s a thought, why don’t you abandon the sneering, it’s tedious?.


    Report comment

    9
  34. I dont mind wearing “deplorable” as a badge of pride, it is the Anglo Saxon way to wear the insults of the enemy and turn around the meaning. But accepting Far Right as a tag is getting a bit dangerous. Its only a step to “Semi Fascist” and then “Nazi”. That means the real Fascists and Nazis can get in under the radar.


    Report comment

    6
  35. But conservatives have taboos against sex so they don’t like saying the word sex

    I presume you mean taboos against promiscuity.

    If we’re going to split hairs on usage, let’s do it right proper.*

    * I’m picking up the local lingo


    Report comment

    5
  36. BTW…the above definitions are a list of how the left define “far-right” in 2022. Just saying your believe in small government means, according to the left, that you’re a “far-right” fascist. They aren’t meant to be orthodox beliefs of libertarianism or or conservativism.


    Report comment

    5
  37. “I presume you mean taboos against promiscuity.

    If we’re going to split hairs on usage, let’s do it right proper.*

    * I’m picking up the local lingo”

    Indeed calli.


    Report comment

    2
  38. There was no intention to sneer, although my invocation of the Far Left was perhaps unfairly cynical.
    I refuse to join the Duelling Thread, so I will not respond further to Cassie this evening!


    Report comment

    3
  39. “There was no intention to sneer, although my invocation of the Far Left was perhaps unfairly cynical.”

    I like a lot of what you write. Yes, your use of the “far-left” was a tad cynical and my reaction was a tad….reactionary!


    Report comment

    4
  40. Von der Leyen means “democratic” in the context of

    in the late 1800’s, Viktoria had a very noisy ‘democratic’ voice.

    can’t quite remember where I read it, perhaps Don Garden’s book … but back then democratic loosely meant communist

    and being ‘democratic’ wasn’t very polite at all


    Report comment

    3
  41. Gender is a linguistic and social construct, the sex is the biological bit.

    thousands of years in the genesis, language just ‘is’

    this whole ‘construct’ gibber has only been in the conversation for maybe 30 years

    the reason I take you to task Berka, is because for the most part, you sound exactly like a radical feminist from the 90’s

    language is mine, not yours

    (check my pronouns)


    Report comment

    5
  42. Some of the most conservative people I know have been given to touting leftist ideals such as trans-sexuality, climate Armageddon in conversation etc. But when you look at their lives they have taken no risk, have worked in boring desk jobs and not exploited their potential in any way. It’s as if they need to identify with the left at a superficial level to convince themselves that they are progressives when they are the dead opposite in real life.


    Report comment

    7
  43. Maybe there should be a list of the foibles of the left. Can I give a few starters:-
    1. When they can’t find anything wrong call the person ‘racist.’
    2. When they are in a corner cry ‘fascist.’
    3. When they speak of weather it’s ‘Climate change.’
    4. When they don’t like your different point of view you are silenced.
    5. They have no scientific knowledge of anatomy or chromosomes.
    6. They have no basic moral compass.
    7. Many have no conscience in areas like abortion or euthanasia.
    8. Lying is seen as essential.
    9. Control is seen as virtue.
    10. Fanaticism is considered normal.
    11. Violence is acceptable and encouraged.
    12. Covert and sinister behaviour is acceptable.
    Please add to the list.


    Report comment

    10
  44. Any media outlet that describes a mainstream elected politician as “far right” is not a news organisation. It is a propaganda factory pretending to be a news organisation.

    Most “news” organisations willingly push leftist propaganda. That is because 90-99% of journalists are leftists who don’t vote or think like mainstream society.


    Report comment

    11
  45. Maybe there should be a list of the foibles of the left. Can I give a few starters:-

    Point 5 needs to include a total absence of knowledge about agriculture, thermodynamics and power engineering


    Report comment

    7
  46. “11. Violence is acceptable and encouraged.”

    Need to split this one.

    Violence against the other side is free speech – we are for free speech!
    Free speech by the other side is violence – we are against violence!


    Report comment

    1
  47. Borders are fascist, but only if the country is “white”.

    And ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH A SOCIALIST IS A FASCIST!!!

    That’s the kind of morons we’re dealing with. I even had a moron claim a spectrum is bendable, like a one dimensional object identifying as a two dimensional one. These people exist!


    Report comment

    3
  48. Tell you what, Adam, we’ll have a fair fight. I get a stick and a stone; I use the stone to smash your kneecaps, and the stick to smack you in the balls. You get to call me all the names you like. Fair enough?

    The reason your parents taught you that “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me” is because it’s true. And if it isn’t apparently so for you because calling you names really hurts you terribly, then you ought to man up.


    Report comment

    3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.