What is objectionable, what is dangerous about extremists, is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I'm not an extremist, you know.
Political extremism involves two prime ingredients: an excessively simple diagnosis of the world's ills, and a conviction that there are identifiable villains back of it all.
I mean, I really don't want the federal government to be determining whether or not a person who feels certain ways about the environment or about animals or about certain religious issues should be considered an extremist. That to me is a type of thought control, mind control, which is very dangerous.
Non-violent extremism is essentially the increase of intolerant and bigoted demands made by groups seeking to dominate society.
Extremism in defense of liberty is not a vice, but I denounce political extremism, of the left or the right, based on duplicity, falsehood, fear, violence and threats when they endanger liberty.
To me extremism is targeting endangered whales in a whale sanctuary in violation of a moratorium. That, to me, is extreme.
Our ideals are under the constant threat of extremism, whether in the form of radical Muslim groups or the emergence of other elements seeking to deny the rights and freedoms of others.
Extremes are dangerous.
I've been called an extremist.
I don't think people by nature are extremists. You will never find a population of extremists. Extremists have existed throughout the centuries on all religions. And what happens is, extremists start to have more leverage when the situation is bad.