Description
This paper explores the role of political myth within the manifestos of far-right activists who claim to be acting in defence of a constructed white-European collective self against a claimed undesirable other. In these manifestos, the “Great Replacement” argument becomes a political myth not because of the false claims, but because it functions as a cognitive, integrative, and mobilising force that appeals to existential needs for significance. Target readers are effectively re-positioned as part of a collective struggle that supersedes themselves, promising a place in a radically simplified ongoing tale of good and evil. While many of the claims made by those propagating the idea of the “Great Replacement” can be challenged, doing so through standard critique is less likely to succeed while the existential appeal remains. By analysing the manifestos of Brenton Tarrant and Peyton Gendron, the paper elucidates how far-right actors mythologise the “Great Replacement” as a “legitimising” tool for violence. It further demonstrates that the literature on political myth has much to contribute for analysing the language of such manifestos and the plausible appeal they may hold for some people.
