Miroslav Mares. Journal for the Study of Radicalism. Volume 2, Issue 1, 2008.
Introduction
Environmental radicalism and extremism grew out of the social protest movements of the 1960s and 1970s in Western Europe and North America. Today this phenomenon has spread all over the world. In post-communist Europe the development of environmental radicalism took place in a manner specific to the region, influenced by various historical processes-including the existence and fall of the communist regimes, the post-communist political and economic transformation, and the Westernization of post-communist societies.
Here I will analyze the main trends and characteristics of environmental radicalism in the European post-communist environment, and explain its contemporary influence and potential future development in Central and Eastern European societies. In what follows, I compare the development of environmental radicalism in the post-communist area with the phenomenon as it exists in the traditional Western democracies. As an area-oriented case study, this article contributes to the understanding of environmental radicalism as a global phenomenon.
Data for this analysis have been taken from:
- International media of environmental radicals and extremists from post-communist Europe (Animal Liberation Front websites, Journal Abolishing the Borders from Below, and others)
- Secondary sources about the whole environmental movement in Eastern and Central Europe
- Various case studies on topics related to the main issue
- Personal monitoring of radicalism.
Definitions of Environmental Radicalism, Extremism, and Terrorism
Researchers with comparative goals in social science need to work with exact definitions. However, the term “environmental radicalism” has been used for the description and analysis of a very wide range of activities and subjects. The term covers a lot of ground in the world, and is often used synonymously with other terms such as “environmental extremism,” “environmental terrorism,” and “eco-warriors.” The terms “ecological” and “green” are often used interchangeably with the term “environmental.”
There exists no clear and generally accepted definition and delimitation of these terms in Europe, North America, or elsewhere. In this paper I prefer the term “environmental” because it is related to the subjective interest of people in protecting the environment, whereas the term “ecological” is connected with ecology as a scientific discipline (even though the short “eco” is connected with radicalism, extremism, or terrorism). The term “green” could be used synonymously with both terms; however, it is more journalistic and could lead to various confusions.
The distinction between extremism and radicalism is also difficult. In some political science communities, mostly in Europe, a general concept of the terms “extremism” and “radicalism” is accepted, according to the terminology used in relatively homogenous research on extremism encouraged mainly at a number of German institutes. (This conceptualization is sometimes not very correctly designated as a theory of extremism.) In connection with environmental issues, however, the use of these terms is usually confused even within this specialized branch of research.
Despite these difficulties, it is possible to use the terminology of extremism for research purposes to arrive at a definition of environmental extremism and radicalism. However, the traditional research on extremism is aimed at right-wing extremism, left-wing extremism, or religious extremism, and in such cases, many researchers use the term “environmental extremism” relatively rarely and not very precisely.
Political extremism is defined as an antithesis of the democratic constitutional state in the context of this research, which is based on the work of German political scientists Uwe Backes and Eckhard Jesse. The term “political radicalism” is used for activities that are within the constitutional democratic area, however close to the boundary; on one hand, these could represent a positive contribution to the regeneration of the regime, on the other hand, they might destabilize the existing democratic order.
This conceptualization is primarily focused on extremist and radical goals, not methods. However, radical or extreme methods of representing political interests (such as nonviolent direct action or various violent activities) are very often connected with radical and extremist thinking, and the goal of all extremists is violent dictatorship, even if gained by democratic instruments in elections. Of course, moderate democratic ends (such as resisting dictatorship) may also be pursued through nontraditional methods, including militant ones.
Extremists often use terrorist methods. Terrorism might be defined as the excessive violent pursuit of interests with the primary goal of seriously threatening the broader public rather than hitting only at primary targets (victims) of attacks.
Any conceptualization of environmental extremism and radicalism must focus on radicalization or extreme stances taken on environmental issues. Environmental extremism is related to antidemocratic biocentrism, a model of subjectively defined environmental protection that strikes fanatically and intolerantly at values of a modern constitutional democratic state such as pluralism, individual freedom, and free enterprise. The final stage of environmental extremism is environmental dictatorship (whether authoritarian or totalitarian).
Environmental radicalism, however, is connected to an important environmental change in the modern democratic constitutional state and its society with respect to democratic values and constitutional development. The common term for environmental extremism and radicalism could be environmentalism, and its supporters environmentalists. A specific subtype of environmentalists are animal rights activists.
Excessive violent pursuit of environmentalist issues with the primary goal of seriously threatening broader groups of people (mostly the enemies of environmentalists, such as owners of various companies, all vivisectionists, and state officials) by means of attacks on property or the health or lives of primary targets, can be called environmental terrorism or eco-terrorism.
The most common tactic of eco-terrorists is monkeywrenching, which threatens mostly the economy, with no damage to the health or lives of human beings or animals. However, some environmentalists carry out terrorist attacks against human beings as well. Not every act of violence on the part of environmentalists can be labeled as eco-terrorism; spontaneous violence during mass demonstrations is an example. A campaign of subversion by an environmentalist group, supposedly on behalf of the earth and claiming to have the support of the people, can be designed as eco-guerilla (or eco-partisan). Plans by some eco-extremists to annihilate parts of the world’s population for the purposes of protecting the environment should be designated as environmental genocide (ecocide). The common term for militant activities by environmentalists is environmental militancy or eco-militancy.
Environmental extremism and radicalism may also be connected with various political currents and environmental conceptions. Some people (activists more than scholars) use the term “revolutionary environmentalism” for all environmentalist activities with revolutionary goals. For them, environmental extremists and radicals are oriented toward radicalization and extreme stances related to the concepts of deep ecology and/or toward biocentric issues, without respect to the needs of the majority of humankind. These goals are often substantiated with the help of various religions (Native American, Eastern, Christian, pagan, and so forth).
Other environmental extremists and radicals are linked to other variants of extremism or radicalism with a primarily societal, not a biocentric, orientation. The most important variants are environmental anarchists (ecoanarchists) and environmental Marxists (eco-Marxists) on the leftside of political spectrum, and environmental fascists (eco-fascists) on the right side. The environmental anarchists demand the dissolution of the modern constitutional democratic state and wish to create an environmentally oriented anarchist society. Eco-Marxists demand a revolutionary abolishment of the free market economy and democratic state, and wish to create a socialist and later communist society with an environmentalist order. Eco-fascists demand strong environmental protection within the fascist state; however, this protection is exclusively reserved only for some ethnic groups, races, or other elite groups (subjectively defined). In the most extreme forms of eco-fascism, the elimination of all races or nations is demanded with the aim of protecting the environment and the wealth of elite nations or races.
Extremists and radicals of various political orientations (right-wing, left- wing, ethnic, religious, and so forth) may also address environmental issues in a nonradical or nonextremist manner. Such activities therefore cease to constitute environmental radicalism or extremism. The party manifestos of neofascist or Marxist-Leninist parties include environmental passages; however, their environmental demands are not extremist or radical.
Specific Conditions Shaping of the Origin of the Environmental Movement in the Communist Era
The roots of present-day environmental radicalism and extremism in post-communist Europe differ somewhat from those in Western Europe and North America, although some similarities can also be found. In the Western world, the environmental movement was created mostly in the 1970s as a successor to the radical social movements of the 1960s (student movement, antiwar movement, feminist movement, and so forth). The environmental movement in the West was generally radical at the start.
Some groups of environmentalists (mostly in Western Europe) started their development with the green parties and a social environmentalist ideology. Over the space of several years these parties turned to moderate politics, although in the 1980s many members of the green parties supported extremist ideologies as well as militant actions. Another trend in Western environmentalism dating to the 1970s is an extreme, deep ecology current, sometimes with eco-terrorist attributes.
In communist Europe, the first roots also grew in the 1970s. However, the social basis of the movement was different than that of the large social movements in the Western world. The societal alienation in several socialist states created a milieu for the development of an environmental spectrum. The eastern environmental activists were mostly very moderate compared to those of the West. Some came from the scientific sphere, others from the alternative or youth subcultures. The communist regimes saw the environmental movement negatively, and tried to take official control over some activities, mostly over the environmental projects of young people. Despite such control, these young environmental activists were able to maintain some distance from the communist regimes. Their goals and their methods were not radical, although the regimes saw their existence as a threat.
The environmental issue became an important part of the politics of dissident movements in communist Europe. Their activists tried, moderately and cautiously, to confront the communist regimes, to expose the gap between the officially declared protection of the environment and the real catastrophic environmental situation in many regions of the communist world.
In the 1980s the Western environmentalists (the German Greens, among others) looked behind the Iron Curtain for partners. Various contacts were made; however, many Eastern European activists did not understand the anticapitalist and eco-socialist rhetoric of Western environmentalists, because the goal of dissent among Eastern Europeans was to establish a democratic regime as then existed in the Western European states.
In several cases the environmental issues were used by nationalist movements opposed to communist internationalism or to Russian supremacy, such as the green parties in Baltic republics of the Soviet Union or in Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine, where the Green Party was one of the strongest supporters of sovereignty and independence. The most significant such case was the protest of Hungarian organizations against the dam on the Danube at Gabèíkovo-Nagymaros, which was built on the basis of an earlier contract between the Hungarian and Czechoslovak governments. The famous Russian writer Valentin Rasputin, long a defender of the Siberian wilderness, was associated with the nationalist organization Pamya?
The roots of real environmental radicalism in its contemporary meaning started at the end of the 1980s as a result of Western influence on Eastern European youth: these influences were even stronger at the time of Perestroika and Glasnost. East-West interactions within the punk subculture led several Polish punkers to support the Animal Liberation Front. A more sophisticated protection of the environment (partially with deep ecological influence) with proclaimed methods of direct action began among some young radical activists in the Czech Republic, such as the “Rainbow Movement” (Hnutí Duha) in 1989.
The Environmental Movement in the Post-communist Era Between Moderation and Radicalism
After the fall of communism, the environmental movement in European countries developed in various ways. Some parts of the movement continued in their moderate politics and so followed mainstream environmental dissent. The weak and nonradical green parties in the post-communist arena were not able to strengthen themselves in the way that green parties did in the environmental movement in 1980s in Western Europe.
Other groups of environmental activists tried to radicalize their ideology as well as their methods, but most turned to moderate means after several years. Only a relatively small segment of the Eastern and Central European environmental movement can be labeled as eco-radical or eco-extremist, and these groups were formed under the strong influence of Western models.
Some ecological experts from the former anticommunist opposition became part of the new political establishment after the overturn of communism. They worked in the new political parties of various ideological orientations (from conservative to liberal) and won relatively strong influence in the new legislatures. These people have neither the reason nor the ideological background to be radicals or extremists. This is the case of the Czech activist and former Minister of the Environment Josef Vavrousek.
The Western European green parties’ step-by-step evolution toward moderate politics in parliamentary structures during the 1980s (the so-called march on the institutions) cannot be found in post-communist Europe in the 1990s. The green parties in post-communist Europe did not have a large social base. Many members were technological experts in the ecological field, not “Earth fighters” with radical political thinking.
Despite the fact that citizens of post-communist states care about the environment, in the era of economic transformation these postmaterialist issues were not important enough to lead to massive voting for green parties. The primacy of the socioeconomic ideological dimension in party competition led to the marginalization of such parties. Only in a few countries, in a few states, were the green parties successful, and often only temporarily. In contrast to Western Europe, some green parties were not left leaning but instead took on a centrist or even conservative orientation. Radical or extremist elements within their politics were and still are rare.
At the beginning of the 1990s, environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) found themselves at the crossroads between moderate and radical politics. They mixed moderate as well as radical goals and methods of political actions. Some of the environmental NGOs were primarily of domestic origin; others were established as national branches of transnational organizations (such as Greenpeace).
Despite some radical, even extremist elements that can be found in the politics of various environmental NGOs and in their ideological backgrounds (eco-Marxist intellectuals or deep-ecologist, sometimes re-emigrants from western countries), and despite the fact that there exist various types of environmental NGOs in Eastern and Central Europe (some more oriented toward grassroots structures and democracy, others toward professional lobbing and the scientific-technological aspect of environmental protection), the thesis outlined by Adam Fagan in his research on the Czech environmental movement is valid for a majority of them:
The economic climate created by … the variant of neo-liberal capitalism has exerted a profound impact on social movements. Rather than stimulate protest and mobilization, job insecurity, high unemployment, rising inflation and the continual decline of social welfare have deterred social movement activists from making radical demands.
Some Eastern and Central European organizations (such as the Hnutí Duha in the Czech Republic) rejected cooperation with militant environmentalists and eco-anarchist organizations because they were afraid of discrediting themselves among the dominant political forces.
The environmental NGOs in post-communist authoritarian regimes or in regimes with strong nondemocratic tendencies (Serbia under Milosevic, Slovakia under Meciar, Belarus under Lukashenko, Russia under Yeltsin and Putin) have held a specific position that has determined their goals and methods. They have usually been an integral part of the civic societal opposition, and have tried to oppose nondemocratic politics by means of serious democratic politics without radical elements. Their position is somewhat similar to that of the environmental dissidents under communist regimes.
Eco-Marxism has the strongest chance of radicalizing a more extremist environmental movement in the future. It is not as strong in post-communist Europe as in Western Europe, because social scientists and the media have generally tended more toward a conservative orientation after the fall of communism, and were not under the influence of 1960s activists as they were in the West. On the other hand, several Marxist-Leninists in post-communist Europe have changed their orientation to environmentalist issues. Deep ecology has a very limited range in post-communist Europe because it is deemed unrealistic in the industrial materialist milieu. Radical deep ecologist groups were stronger only in Poland.
Eco-Anarchist Activities in Post-communist Europe
Militant environmental radicalism and extremism in Central and Eastern Europe were formed under the strong influence of trends in Western Europe and North America. A milieu for the mobilization of potential members of environmental radical and extremist structures in post-communist countries is formed mostly by radical youth subcultures with radical left and anarchist elements-punk, hard core, and anarcho-autonomy. These subcultures are strongly connected with the Western scene. Environmental issues (including animal liberation) play a strong role within their ideological background.
Much of the commentary, analysis, and debate between radical deep ecologists and social environmentalists in Central and Eastern Europe have reflected those in the West, albeit with a delay of several years. Some disputes between Western European New Left eco-militants and “primitive ecologist” North American activists also have influenced the post-communist arena.
At the same time, some influences on the post-communist environmentalist subculture are, from an ideological and strategic point of view, confused. Due to the interconnection between militant environmentalism and anarchist subcultures, eco-anarchism with social goals (as opposed to the primitive anarchism connected with biocentric views) has become the most influential ideology behind radical and extremist activities in Eastern and Central Europe. The North American model of deep ecology does not strongly inspire the large majority of Eastern European eco-militants, who are mostly human societal and not biocentric-oriented radicals and extremists (despite the fact that some superficial deep ecological mottos, such as “Fight for Mother Earth,” are frequently found within the post-communist environmentalist scene).
Militant eco-anarchism in post-communist Europe is connected mostly with the activities of Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which is the most important militant environmental network in this arena. As in the West, the fringes of more extreme organizations (Animal Rights Militia, ARM) or organizations with larger interest (Earth Liberation Front, ELF) grew out of the ALF.
As in North America and Western Europe, there exists no strong organizational connection between individual cells of the ALF (or the ARM or the ELF), neither on the national nor international levels. The organization could be defined as a free-cell structure. Transnational visits and joint activities among individual activists from Western Europe and Eastern Europe, as well as among activists of the various post-communist states, frequently occur.
The first organizational base of the ALF in Central and Eastern European area was probably that formed in Poland within the punk subculture at the end of the 1980s, largely as a result of British and North American influence. The monkeywrenching activities of the ALF are still more prevalent in several regions of Poland than in other post-communist countries. The ELF also has a chapter in Poland.
The influence of the Polish ALF played a role in popularizing this organization within the Czech anarcho-autonomous subculture at the beginning of the 1990s. The Czech chapter of the ALF was probably established in 1994, and in 1995 it realized its most spectacular action-the bomb attack on a funicular near the town of Blansko that was thought to damage the environment. New generations of ALF activists carried out several attacks on laboratories and breeding farms in the years 2002 through 2005. The Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) also operated in the Czech Republic at this time. The ALF also exists in Slovakia, but its activities are mostly limited to propaganda.
The most active chapter of the ALF in the post-communist arena is found in Russia. It was established in 2000 and its first action was to paint graffiti on the walls of the Sochi meat plant. In 2003 the Russian ALF Supporters Group opened the website “Earth and Animal Liberation.” The RALF has carried out many monkeywrenching actions against vivisection laboratories and other facilities and organizations responsible for (in their view) the exploitation and killing of animals. It is also responsible for sending 100,000 protest messages to email addresses of the Huntingdon Life Sciences in 2003. On 29 May 2005, the Russian chapter of the Animal Rights Militia started to operate by attacking a breeding farm in the village of Andreevka near Moscow.
Chapters of various transnational networks and organizations with an eco-anarchist influence (although not necessarily violent) flourish throughout Eastern and Central Europe, including Reclaim the Streets! (in the Czech Republic under the name Ulice jsou nase!) and Food Not Bombs (in Belarus, the Czech Republic, Poland, Russia, Serbia, and Ukraine). Domestic environmentalist organizations in post-communist Europe were also formed at national and regional levels, such as Action Against Animal Holocaust in the Czech Republic, Green Collective in Lithuania, and Ecoresist in Belarus.
A transnational radical environmental organization specific to Eastern Europe is the movement Chraniteli Radugy or Rainbow Keepers. It was formed in Russia at the beginning of the 1990s, partially inspired by Earth First! from the United States. This organization found supporters in the Czech Republic, where it was personally interconnected with local Earth First! activists (the EF! also used the Czech name Zemì pøedevsím!). The Rainbow Keepers undertook many direct actions in Russia, and since 2002 they have been the main organizers of the radical ecological protest camps in Otradniy.
Environmental issues are a very important part of the politics of the antiglobalization movement, which has also created specific structures within post-communist Europe. As early as 1998, with the organization of the first People’s Global Day by People’s Global Action (PGA), environmentalist groups (mostly the Rainbow Keepers) have played a significant role. Later the Eastern European PGA was founded.
Eco-anarchist environmentalists were also among the main organizers of various mass antiglobalization and antiwar actions in post-communist Europe, such as the protests against the International Monetary Fund-World Bank summit in Prague in September 2000, protests against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit in Prague in November 2002, protests against the Council of Europe summit in Warsaw in May 2005, and protests against the G8 summit in Saint Petersburg in July 2006.
These groups were strongly connected to the antiglobalization movement. For some actions, however, Eastern and Central European anarchists (including eco-anarchists) created their own specific structures, such as the militant Eastern European Anarchist Bloc (EEAB). The magazine Abolishing the Borders from Below: Anarchist Courier from Eastern Europe (edited in Berlin) is an important medium of communication for the Eastern European anarchist antiglobalization movement as well as for other protest activities.
The fact that there exist so many eco-anarchist organizations in post-communist Europe cannot overshadow the reality that the actual number of activists in the major countries ranges in the dozens, probably excepting Poland and Russia, where there are several hundred activists. Their real influence on politics is marginal.
More prominent eco-anarchist scenes exist primarily in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Russia, and somewhat in some other East-Central European and European post-Soviet countries as well (with the exception of Moldavia). In the other countries, mainly in the Balkans, some anarchist structures are working, but eco-anarchist activities are stronger in Northeastern Europe. The reason is probably the weak presence of postmaterialist conflict lines within society as a whole, as well as among young people, leading to a weaker anarchist scene with neither the motivation nor the resources to build an infrastructure. By contrast, environmental anarchist activists in the above-mentioned countries of Central and Northeastern Europe engage frequently in various other campaigns (antiracist, antiwar, gay and lesbian, pro-immigrant, and so forth).
Environmental Issues of Central and Eastern European Political Radicals and Extremists
Although environmental issues are not very important for the politics of traditional political extremists in post-communist Europe, these issues are included in their manifestos and propaganda. Dogmatic communists have their base in a geriatric electorate that has no serious interest in postmaterialist issues. The pride they once took in industrializing the nation during the communist era, and in suppressing information on damage to the environment during the communist era, persists in various attitudes unacceptable to young environmentalists (for example, the dispute about communist nuclear power stations, which were seen very positively from the communist point of view). On the other hand, several small communist youth organizations involved in the antiglobalization movement often criticize the exploitation of nature as neoliberal.
Right-wing extreme nationalist parties and organizations mostly tend to prefer other topics over environmentalism although, the protection of the environment is an integral part of their politics. Small nationalist groups focusing on environmental issues have even been established, such as the National Ecological Union in the Czech Republic and the Independent Ecological Federation in Poland. Within the Central and Eastern European neo-Nazi scene, the “greening of brown politics” has been attempted under the influence of German neo-Nazis by, for example, remembering Hitler’s vegetarianism or the several environmentalist movements during the Third Reich.
The protection of “ancient heritage” is part of the neopagan ideology underlying “Slavonic Power.” It is linked with pagan metal and black metal music (partially with a national socialist inspiration). Various religious cults and sects active in post-communist Europe have proclaimed an interest in nature and the environment. As a curiosity, we might mention the 2004 attempt by a small Czech group “Call 4 Justice Crew” (one member, known as “da Muslim,” was a convert to Islam) to link Islam and the militant animal liberation struggle (partly inspired by American animal rights extremists). Other Islamists in post-communist Europe praise the alleged Muslim “moderate” way of killing of animals, in contrast to the allegedly “brutal” Jewish way of killing animals.
Countering Environmental Radicalism and Extremism in Post-communist Europe
The birth of environmental radicalism and extremism has produced a reaction on the part of various opponents in post-communist Europe. Attempts to fight this phenomenon come mostly from the police and intelligence agencies at the level of security policy, and from neoliberal and conservative political forces at the level of political discourse. At the same time, a certain amount of restrained tolerance exists for some activities of eco-radicals, mostly on the left side of the intellectual spectrum.
Fighting the more problematic aspects of the environmental movement has sometimes been accompanied by measures against various environmental activities that are not extreme at all. Placing some environmental organizations on official lists of extremist organizations has led to political scandals. The term “eco-terrorism” is often used indiscriminately with the aim of discrediting all activities by environmental NGOs. Putting pressure on the democratic environmental spectrum is common in post-communist authoritarian regimes, particularly in Belarus and Russia.
Police and intelligence agencies specializing in left-wing extremism are responsible for countering some of the environmentalist excesses that have been a logical consequence of the linkage between the militant environmental and left-wing extreme scene. This is mostly considered part of anti-extremist policy, not of anti-terrorist policy (as in the United States). However, state repression of environmental extremism in democratic post-communist countries is aimed at unlawful methods used by environmentalists (illegal direct actions, violence, and so forth), not at their ideological goals.
Sophisticated political opposition to environmentalism is undertaken by the neoliberal and conservative parts of the political spectrum and related think tanks. Ideological arguments are often transferred from America and Western Europe to Eastern and Central Europe. By contrast, the conservative Czech president Vaclav Klaus is internationally known for his castigation of nondemocratic aspects of environmentalism; he argues that environmentalism has replaced communism. His arguments were even used in March 2007 in the debate in the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce, on the issue of the contribution of human activity to global warming and climate change to counter the opinions of Albert Gore and his supporters. His arguments were well received among U.S. Republicans. However, Klaus’s point of view is not characteristic of the whole political spectrum, neither in the Czech Republic nor in rest of post-communist Europe. Despite Klaus’s citing his personal experience of living in the communist era, he is not representative of post-communist Europe; he is rather an important individual participant within one current of the global ideological discussion of environmental issues.
Conclusion
Environmental radicalism and extremism have become a small yet established part of the political spectrum within the post-communist countries; radical and extreme environmentalist structures have operated since the end of the 1980s. However, their political influence is generally weak, and the number of activists very limited; it is a small fringe of the environmental movement, lacking a social base and any significant grassroots network. In Western Europe, radical components of the environmental movement are also weak, however the movement as a whole has significant political power. The range and medial impact of radical and extreme environmental activities in the United States is greater.
Radical and extreme activities in post-communist Europe were strongly inspired by Western models and are among the results and signs of the Europeanization, westernization, and globalization of post-communist societies. At present, some segments among the environmental extremists and radicals of several Eastern and Central European countries (Poland, Russia, the Czech Republic) are involved in the phenomenon on the global level.
Amid the external influence, some features specific to post-communist environmentalism can be found. An important ideological characteristic of post-communist militant environmentalism is the dominant ideological background of socially oriented anarchism, not deep ecology or biocentric eco-anarchist primitivism as in North America, nor environmental neo-Marxism as in Western Europe. The future prospects for environmentalism in post-communist Europe, as well as efforts to counter its activities, are linked to the global ideological and organizational development of the environmental movement and its radical and extreme fringe, and with environmentalist demands as they are reflected in mainstream global politics.