Salafi-jihadism and right-wing white supremacist extremism are two of the most visible, active, and threatening violent extremist movements operating in the West today, responsible for dozens of attacks throughout North America and Western Europe. With the increased threat of white supremacist terrorism in the West have also come questions about its relationship to jihadist terrorism. This study provides an assessment of the ideological similarities between the two movements, concluding that they share key traits and political outlooks, some of which have become increasingly widespread over recent years in the Western world and beyond.
Firstly, these forms of extremism are the most violent iterations of their respective movements. Jihadists are the ideological fringe of the wider Islamist movement, while white supremacist extremists emerge from more mainstream, right-wing white identity and supremacist politics. They are both reactionary political movements. They treat any form of social or political progress, reform, or liberalization with great suspicion, viewing these chiefly as a threat to their respective ‘ingroups’. In this sense, jihadists too are extreme right-wing actors even if they are rarely referred to in such terms. Both movements share a similar underlying diagnosis for the ills of their respective societies, placing blame primarily on the forces of liberal progress, pluralism, and tolerance.
Connected to this are white supremacist and jihadist constructions of chauvinist and hypermasculine collective identities and their dehumanization of ‘out-groups’. Both movements have developed a strong, historically grounded collective identity coupled with a sense of superiority and a requirement that the in-group view those on the outside as both inferior and inherently threatening. While these identities differ in their content, there are similarities in their underlying structure. What is on offer in both cases is not only a strong sense of identity and belonging which is rooted in a glorious past, but also new meaning derived from seeing oneself as a historic project to save or cure humanity. Thus, while the term ‘supremacist’ is generally reserved for the extreme right in popular discourse, it too is an accurate description of how jihadists view their position in the world. As both movements share an ultra-conservative reactionary outlook, they also hold similar views on the traditional gender roles of men and women in society. Both movements rely heavily on reinforcing these roles, with a particular interest in supposedly recapturing ‘true’ masculinity through hypermasculine portrayals of their most heroic members.
Jihadists and white supremacist extremists also share similar ways of thinking about the threats they perceive their respective in-groups as facing. In both cases, the threat is viewed as a wide-ranging conspiracy that seeks to annihilate them. For jihadists, Muslims face a “war on Islam,” while white supremacist extremists warn of a “white genocide” or “great replacement” of white populations. While different in context and language, the content of both conspiracy theories is similar, including the virulent antisemitism that undergirds them. Both existential threat conspiracy narratives are also concerned with the preservation of purity, which is seen as under threat due to the deliberate actions of the enemy.
These extremist movements have also made significant efforts to prove both the legitimacy and necessity of violence for the protection of their in-group and its interests. Both seek to either take part in, or be the catalyst of, a violent conflict, be it a race or holy war. Not only must fighting be used to save and protect those under threat, but it also serves as a means to a glorious end in which humanity will live in peace and prosperity.
Thus, through their activism and acts of terrorism, they both hope to achieve the establishment of utopian societies in which their in-group reigns supreme at the cost of most, if not all, others. Due to their reactionary tendencies, they also share a belief that the blueprint for this idealized society can be found in a past civilization or society that was destroyed or dismantled at the hands of nefarious forces pursuing a conspiracy to weaken and subjugate them. The imagined white ethnostate and the Islamic state to which the movements are respectively committed are, in most cases, totalitarian in nature. In order to function as intended, both require strict control over many aspects of citizens’ lives to maintain both the order and purity they desire.
