III%ers
By Péter MARTON
I am really no expert of the US militia movement but for an academic roundtable discussion I have to prepare a briefing about paramilitary-like groups in Hungary (as much as there are any that are active as well as, strictly speaking, paramilitary in nature, these days -- this is rather difficult to assess...). So I was interested to learn more of what similarities or differences one may observe between the two paramilitary scenes, and I was happy to come across a fresh video report from Vice News (related to this article) about the III%er (Three Percenter*) movement. It offers some insight into the life of an associate group in Georgia, led by Chris Hill ("General Holy War").
I still have my homework to do -- only a couple of quick thoughts follow.
The tendency of the far right to fracture is on display even in (and related to) this short video about a single group in Georgia. Their leader conceives of political identity in terms of a set of political ideas anyone may be free to subscribe to. Racism for him is unacceptable -- he has a Chinese-American wife, his group has a Black member (Phillip King), and he is happy to quote Gandhi, even if that quote attributed to Gandhi is out of context and misinterpreted, actually. For him as well as for other members of the group Christianity v. Islam is the key faultline (they emphasise the First and the Second Amendments to the US Constitution related to this), and their identity is updated with reference to terrorist attacks around the world, including outside America. But then Hill is earning scorn for this from others outside the group but within the larger movement, as well as from across the far right. His group had/has its defectors from time to time. Meanwhile, they have loose relationships with other groups that may have views different from theirs, about racism for example.
In the video, as well as in another, earlier NYT report about the group, one may encounter their more specific political views on a range of issues.
Similarities I see with the Hungarian paramilitary scene, based on what one is aware of from open sources, include their desire to connect to a certain, stylised past ("the guarding of traditions", or hagyományőrzés in Hungarian), their being keen on practicing for scenarios where their "services" may be needed to maintain law and order, and enjoying being out in the forest in a "brotherhood" of sorts that is like a parallel society of theirs.
For a difference: on the issue of relations with other ethnic groups/racism, most Hungarian far right groups are anti-Roma. One can come across lighter variations of this where some will say things like "I have no problems with law-abiding Roma people," but so far I am not aware of a Hungarian far right group that would be (or in the past would have been) open to admitting Roma members based on adherence to a set of ideas, or a religion, or, say, having a law enforcement or military background.
* Connected to how the movement sees itself playing a vanguard role within society, three-percenters' nominal identity rests on the assumption that only about 3% of the colonial population actively fought the British empire in the American War of Independence.
I am really no expert of the US militia movement but for an academic roundtable discussion I have to prepare a briefing about paramilitary-like groups in Hungary (as much as there are any that are active as well as, strictly speaking, paramilitary in nature, these days -- this is rather difficult to assess...). So I was interested to learn more of what similarities or differences one may observe between the two paramilitary scenes, and I was happy to come across a fresh video report from Vice News (related to this article) about the III%er (Three Percenter*) movement. It offers some insight into the life of an associate group in Georgia, led by Chris Hill ("General Holy War").
I still have my homework to do -- only a couple of quick thoughts follow.
The tendency of the far right to fracture is on display even in (and related to) this short video about a single group in Georgia. Their leader conceives of political identity in terms of a set of political ideas anyone may be free to subscribe to. Racism for him is unacceptable -- he has a Chinese-American wife, his group has a Black member (Phillip King), and he is happy to quote Gandhi, even if that quote attributed to Gandhi is out of context and misinterpreted, actually. For him as well as for other members of the group Christianity v. Islam is the key faultline (they emphasise the First and the Second Amendments to the US Constitution related to this), and their identity is updated with reference to terrorist attacks around the world, including outside America. But then Hill is earning scorn for this from others outside the group but within the larger movement, as well as from across the far right. His group had/has its defectors from time to time. Meanwhile, they have loose relationships with other groups that may have views different from theirs, about racism for example.
In the video, as well as in another, earlier NYT report about the group, one may encounter their more specific political views on a range of issues.
Similarities I see with the Hungarian paramilitary scene, based on what one is aware of from open sources, include their desire to connect to a certain, stylised past ("the guarding of traditions", or hagyományőrzés in Hungarian), their being keen on practicing for scenarios where their "services" may be needed to maintain law and order, and enjoying being out in the forest in a "brotherhood" of sorts that is like a parallel society of theirs.
For a difference: on the issue of relations with other ethnic groups/racism, most Hungarian far right groups are anti-Roma. One can come across lighter variations of this where some will say things like "I have no problems with law-abiding Roma people," but so far I am not aware of a Hungarian far right group that would be (or in the past would have been) open to admitting Roma members based on adherence to a set of ideas, or a religion, or, say, having a law enforcement or military background.
* Connected to how the movement sees itself playing a vanguard role within society, three-percenters' nominal identity rests on the assumption that only about 3% of the colonial population actively fought the British empire in the American War of Independence.
Comments
Post a Comment