A Methodological Reorientation to Studying Right-Wing

Thinking Beyond Extremism: A Methodological Reorientation to Studying Right-wing Nationalism and the Far-right Movement in Canada by Justin Everett Cobain Tetrault A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Sociology University of Alberta ©Justin Everett Cobain Tetrault, 2021 Abstract Right-wing nationalist movements have gained traction in Westernized countries such as France, Greece, Hungary, Austria, the United States, and Germany, where political figures or groups have mobilized nationalist ideas and right-wing populist sentiment to gain governmental power and/or influence public policy (Mudde 2014, BBC News 2019, Perry & Scrivens 2018: 177). Contrary to Canada’s benevolent international reputation, Canadians have demonstrated increasingly exclusionary politics in the last decade. Anti-Islam rhetoric, for instance, has substantial legitimacy in popular discourse and Canadians are increasingly skeptical of the country’s federal multiculturalism policy (Angus Reid 2017, Braun 2018, Andrew-Gee 2015; Angus Reid 2010, Canseco 2019, Todd 2017). Academics, journalists, and public figures assert that Canada is experiencing “similar trends” to Western Europe’s wave of right-wing populism, pointing to the “growing threat” posed by Canadian far-right groups, also referred to as “right- wing extremists”, “hate groups”, and sometimes the “alt-right” (Perry & Scrivens 2018: 177, Boutilier 2018, Mastracci 2017, McKenna 2019, Habib 2019). Upon closer scrutiny, dominant scholarly and popular discourse tends to reduce this discussion to a problem of white nationalist ideology and the public safety risks posed by these groups, such as terrorism, hate crime, threats and intimidation, and hate speech. Experts struggle to explain how right-wing and far-right groups operate as a social movement seeking mainstream legitimacy in Canada, and the dominant fixation on “extremism” in the form of white nationalism and criminality sometimes obfuscates significant trends in right-wing organizing. Using Canada’s yellow vests movement as a case study, this project identifies and critiques three broader trends in scholarship on right-wing and far-right social movements: 1) ii the passive acceptance of the ambiguous concept “hate” as an explanation for right-wing mobilizing (chapter 3); 2) the growing popularity of criminological or security-centric methods for understanding how right-wing groups mobilize as a social movement (chapter 4); and 3) Eurocentric scholarship that defines right-wing populism as inherently ethnonationalist and illiberal (chapter 5). I use empirically informed analysis based on semi-ethnographic data to argue that the preceding three trends can hinder our understanding of right-wing politics and nationalist movements. My ethnographic approach involves 35 semi-structured interviews with 42 Canadian right-wing activists (RWAs) (ten of which I consider “far-right” or white nationalists), and over 40 hours of observational fieldwork at 20 right-wing political rallies and meetings in Alberta, almost all of which were organized by my participants. My findings show that, contrary to dominant expert narratives, the Canadian right-wing nationalist movement is not primarily white nationalist nor promotes vigilante violence. Instead, the most successful right-wing nationalist groups in Canada foreground liberal ideas and fetishize law and order politics (rather than being anti-state/anti-authority), with the objective of ultimately delegating violence to the state, such as demanding increased policing and surveillance of certain marginalized groups, such as Muslims and undocumented immigrants. Moreover, rather than right-wing groups being “anti-” or “ill-” liberal, my findings show how aspects of liberalism and liberal multiculturalism can serve as fertile ground for chauvinist nationalism and right-wing populism. Dominant approaches to studying right-wing and far-right groups are rarely attuned to capturing the messiness of social movements (Plows 2008, Law 2006). By examining how right- wing nationalism is practiced on the ground and debated between and among groups, this iii project shows how ethnographic methods are an effective tool for capturing the fluid structure, political contradictions, rapid changes, unanticipated elements, and mainstream appeal that characterizes contemporary right-wing nationalist movements. iv Preface This dissertation follows the journal-article format (sometimes called a “paper-based” thesis or dissertation by article) as specified by the Faculty of Graduate Studies at the University of Alberta. The dissertation is composed of three articles (chapters 3, 4, and 5) along with contextual sections including the introduction (chapter 1), methods (chapter 2), and conclusion (chapter 6). Each article is a self-contained discussion of different conceptual and methodological problems in how we study and understand right-wing social movements. Chapters 4 and 5 are currently under review in academic journals and Chapter 3 appears as the following publication: Tetrault, J. E. C. (2019). What’s Hate Got to Do with It?: Right-Wing Movements and the Hate Stereotype, Current Sociology, 1-21. This dissertation is an original work by Justin EC Tetrault. The research project, of which this dissertation is a part, received research ethics approval from the University of Alberta Research Ethics Board, project name “Nationalism and Rightist Activism in Canada”, ID Pro00065590, October 26 2016. v Acknowledgements This dissertation would not have been possible without the support of my friends, family, and colleagues. I would like to thank the staff and faculty of the Department of Sociology at the University of Alberta for their support. I am indebted to my supervisor, Dr. Kevin Haggerty, for his invaluable guidance in scholarship, writing, and navigating the university. I could not have asked for a better mentor. I would also like to thank Dr. Sandra Bucerius for her advice and support throughout this process. I want to thank my committee members, Drs. Dominique Clément, Rob Aitken, and Harvey Krahn. Thank you to Dr. Holly Campeau for chairing my defense, and to my external examiner, Dr. Sara Thompson, for her insights. Thanks to my friends and colleagues for their kindness and helpful comments over the years, especially Drs. Michael Granzow, Jonathan Simmons, Luca Berardi, Shama Rangwala, Ajay Sandhu, Marta Urbanik, Kelsi Barkway, and the UAPP crew. I also could not have done this without the support of Chyana Deschamps, Jean- Phillipe Crête, Ashley Kohl, Prof-Collins Ifeonu, and Miranda Pachal. Finally, thank you to Drs. Heidi Rimke and Kirsten Kramar for believing in me and encouraging me to pursue graduate studies. I am deeply thankful to my family – Mom, Dad, Nana, and Granda – for their constant love and support throughout the years. vi Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ ii-iv Preface ...................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ vi Table of Contents ................................................................................................... vii-ix Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1-28 Social problem: thinking beyond extremism .............................................................................. 1 Development of subject matter ............................................................................................ 11 Scope and literature review .............................................................................................. 14 Terminology and theoretical orientation .................................................................. 21 Chapter 2: Methodology ......................................................................................................... 29-49 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 29 Methods summary and analysis ............................................................................................ 30 Choosing ethnographic methods and identifying a sample ............................................. 32 Access, recruitment, and positionality ................................................................. 35 Ethnographic data ..................................................................................... 40 Limitations of methods...................................................................... 46 Ethical considerations ................................................................... 58 Conclusion ............................................................................. 59 vii Chapter 3: What’s Hate Got to Do with It?: Right-wing Movements and the Hate Stereotype ............................................................................................................................... 50-74 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 50 Defining hate ........................................................................................................................

Load more