Psychology of Far-Left Extremism

 

The Psychology of Far-Left Extremism: Hysteria, Subconscious Authoritarianism, and the Paradox of Political Resistance

Abstract

This paper explores the psychological and sociological dimensions of far-left extremism, particularly focusing on hysterical attacks against perceived far-right entities as a manifestation of deeper mental health dynamics. Drawing from psychoanalytic, personality psychology, and sociological frameworks, it argues that such behaviors stem from subconscious desires for external authority to compensate for internal lacks in self-discipline and accountability. The analysis extends to the paradoxical invitation of more authoritarian forces, such as through opposition to parties resisting Islamic influence in Britain, and examines how individual hysteria spills into collective manipulation. Sources from psychology and sociology substantiate these claims, revealing shared traits between ideological extremes.

Introduction

Far-left extremists often exhibit hysterical responses to perceived authoritarianism, targeting political groups they label as “far-right” regardless of accuracy. This behavior, as posited in the query, inadvertently invites more severe authoritarianism, such as from Islamic influences, which are argued to be more rigid than indigenous British parties seeking to preserve sovereignty. From a psychological perspective, this hysteria signals a subconscious yearning for imposed discipline to resolve internal chaos stemming from poor self-control and aversion to accountability. Sociologically, this friction escalates into community-wide phenomena, manipulable for political ends. This paper delves into these topics, integrating insights from key sources to provide a comprehensive analysis.

Section 1: Political Hysteria and Histrionic Traits in Far-Left Activism

Hysteria in far-left activism can be understood through the lens of histrionic personality disorder (HPD), characterized by excessive emotionality and attention-seeking. In political contexts, this manifests as dramatic moral theatrics and black-and-white thinking, often amplifying perceived threats to garner sympathy and dominance. As noted in discussions of Cluster B personality disorders influencing society, “Histrionic personality disorder exhibits excessive emotionality, sexual provocation, and attention-seeking, often to serve a pathological need for sympathy.”  This trait spills over into activism, where individuals escalate conflicts to maintain emotional intensity, perverting the quest for equilibrium into polarized attacks.

Sociologically, such hysteria aligns with models of political extremism under stress. Personal exposure to threats, real or perceived, heightens psychological distress, which in turn fosters exclusionist attitudes. “We argue that the personal exposure to political violence that results in psychological distress affects political worldviews.”  In far-left groups, this distress manifests as hysterical targeting of “authoritarian” symbols, symptomatic of unresolved internal conflicts rather than rational ideology. The collective amplification creates a feedback loop, where individual histrionics gain power through group resonance, leading to manipulable forces directed against convenient targets.

Section 2: Subconscious Desire for Authoritarianism

Psychoanalytic theory, particularly Freudian perspectives, illuminates the subconscious mechanisms driving far-left extremism. Extremist ideologies fuse primitive drives (id) with an authoritarian superego, allowing aggressive impulses to be morally sanctioned. Applied to politics, this suggests far-left hysterics subconsciously seek external authority to impose the discipline they lack. “Extremist ideology arises from the fusion of primitive drives (id) with an authoritarian superego… allowing violent or taboo impulses to be experienced as divinely justified acts.”  In secular contexts, this translates to a yearning for absolutist structures to end personal hysteria.

Research on left-wing authoritarianism (LWA) supports this, revealing traits like antihierarchical aggression and top-down censorship, akin to right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). “LWA attitudes are characterized by favoring punishment of those who dissent from group opinion, desiring to overturn existing hierarchies.”  Subconsciously, this reflects a need for collective security amid threat, where anti-authoritarian norms clash with innate authoritarian tendencies. “A long history of theory and research in psychology reveals a strong connection between authoritarianism and threat. This work suggests that authoritarianism often emerges in response to threatening circumstances – either threats to security or threats induced by uncertainty.”  Far-left individuals, perceiving societal chaos, subconsciously invoke authoritarianism to restore balance, perverting their liberty rhetoric into calls for imposed order.

Section 3: Lack of Self-Discipline and Accountability

A core psychological driver is the refusal of accountability, rooted in low self-control and emotional reactivity. Far-left ideologies often emphasize freedom without boundaries, masking an inability to self-regulate. LWA correlates with narcissism and psychopathy, fostering aversion to personal responsibility. “Based on existing research, we expected individuals with higher levels of left-wing authoritarianism to also report higher levels of narcissism.”  This lack exacerbates internal friction, leading to hysteria as a maladaptive coping mechanism.

Sociologically, this manifests in group dynamics where accountability is externalized onto “oppressors,” allowing unchecked behaviors. “The key predicate of an external locus of control is a generalized sense of powerlessness or a perceived lack of self-efficacy.”  In far-left collectives, this refusal amplifies, creating environments where hysteria thrives on unaccountable emotional outbursts, further entrenching the need for external authority.

Section 4: The Paradox: Attacking Authoritarianism While Inviting Greater Threats

The horseshoe theory elucidates the paradox: far-left attacks on “far-right” parties resisting Islamic influence inadvertently invite more authoritarian elements. “Proponents of horseshoe theory argue that the far-left and the far-right are closer to each other than either is to the political center.”  Both extremes share authoritarian leanings, such as intolerance and desire for control. “As the political horseshoe theory attributed to Jean-Pierre Faye highlights, if we travel far-left enough, we find the very same sneering, nasty and reckless bully-boy tactics used by the far-right.” 

In Britain, opposing parties preserving sovereignty is seen as inviting Islam, which sociological analyses link to higher authoritarianism. “The evidence presented here, however, reveals a link that is too stark and robust to ignore, neglect, or dismiss.”  “At the present time, however, the evidence shows that Muslim countries are markedly more authoritarian than non-Muslim societies, even when one controls for other potentially influential factors.”  This paradox stems from subconscious projection: attacking symbolic authority while craving absolutism.

Section 5: Sociological Implications: Community Spillover and Manipulation

Individual hysteria spills into communities, gaining manipulable power for political ends. “Such psychological distress, in turn, exacerbates perceptions of threat, which further invoke ‘threat buffers’ such as political exclusionism.”  In far-left networks, this creates echo chambers where histrionics resonate, perverting equilibrium-seeking into extremism.

Sociologically, this force is targeted against symbols of needed discipline, manipulable by elites. “The basic idea that left- and right-wing extremists share a range of psychological similarities is consistent with theories of extremism and radicalization.”  Collective well-being suffers as unaddressed lacks foster cohesive yet dysfunctional groups.

Conclusion

Far-left hysteria reflects a subconscious quest for authoritarianism amid self-discipline deficits, paradoxically inviting greater threats. Integrating psychological and sociological insights reveals a pathway to equilibrium through accountability. Future research should explore interventions addressing these dynamics.

Index of Titles and Authors

•  Finding the Loch Ness Monster: Left-Wing Authoritarianism in the United States - Conway et al.

•  The Cluster B Society - Christopher F. Rufo

•  A Freudian Analysis of Religious Extremism - Rishikesh Pelluri

•  Islam and Authoritarianism - M. Steven Fish

•  The Psychology of Left-Wing Authoritarianism - Joseph P. Forgas

•  The Curious Case of Left-Wing Authoritarianism: When Authoritarian Persons Meet Anti-Authoritarian Norms - Luciano García-Conway et al.

•  Is the Myth of Left-Wing Authoritarianism Itself a Myth? - Thomas H. Costello et al.

•  Horseshoe Theory - Jean-Pierre Faye (attributed)

•  A New Stress-Based Model of Political Extremism - Daphna Canetti-Nisim et al.

•  Psychological Features of Extreme Political Ideologies - Kirsten van Kessel et al.

•  Relations to the Dark Personality Traits, Altruism, and Social Justice: Understanding Left-Wing Authoritarianism - Ann Krispenz and Alexander Bertrams

•  Exploring the Well-Being Costs of Leftist Ideology - Elizabeth A. Schultheis

•  American Hysteria: The Untold Story of Mass Political Extremism in the United States - Andrew Burt