Political extremists want to redefine and narrow who belongs and who does not in a society, often by trying to push groups such as immigrants, other ethnic groups, races, or religions out. This is what far-right extremists try to do. Redefinition can also mean trying to pull one’s own group out of society. This is what radical Islamists in Western societies try to do. Extremists of whatever variety have a common interest in fracturing the public sphere where broad-scale public deliberation is engaged. Non-deliberative approaches to extremism include bans and restrictions on extremist expression and consensus institutional designs to induce moderation. After noting their limitations, Chapter 5 turns to deliberative responses, beginning with the (limited) prospects for direct engagement with extremists. A multilayered approach involves starting with possibilities for reaching those who might be attracted to extremism (but also be attracted to other possibilities), deploying discursive psychology in the interests of building bridges. This approach then moves on to contemplation of the role that designed deliberative forums might play and finishes with a look at how performances by political leaders can try to set terms of discourse in the public sphere that can negate extremist appeals.

This chapter discusses extremist side-switchers to the extreme of the far-right ideological spectrum, including neo-Nazism, white supremacism, fascism, and more fluid online extreme-right milieus on platforms such as IronMarch or Discord. Case studies and personal transition narratives for Benito Mussolini, Horst Mahler, Iris Niemeyer, and Julian Fritsch (aka the neo-Nazi musician MakssDamage) form the core of the chapter. Furthermore, an in-depth exploration of extreme-right online milieus and virtual discussions among their members about integrating former left-wing extremists is used to complement the case studies and deliver insights into virtual traces of extremist side-switching. For most defectors in this category, anti-Semitism, nationalism, and far-right conspiracy theories are key features of their side-switching narratives from the far left to the far right. The extreme right appears to be surprisingly open to integrating defectors from the far left, as can be seen in the discussions in online milieus about this issue.

This chapter supplements the previous one and focuses on side-switchers to the far right as well. Here, the case studies that are presented come from intellectual defectors from the extreme left to the extreme right. Those side-switchers, all of them from Germany originally, have rarely committed extremist crimes, even though they provided significant legitimacy and intellectual standing for the far-right environment. In many cases, they have transported key strategies, ideas, and concepts to the extreme right and helped this milieu to build its own intellectual current. The convictions of all those presented in the case studies have shifted from far or extreme left in the beginning to supporting various forms of extreme-right ideology at a later stage their lives. Key motives in the narratives of those defectors are anti-Semitism, feelings of betrayal and loss of status in the far left, personal conflicts, and fierce anti-establishment or anti-democratic opposition.