A/HRC/34/56 extremism. She stresses the crucial importance of effectively combating fundamentalism, extremism and violent extremism taking into consideration the human rights framework. 13. Some forms of contemporary extremism that have a particular impact on cultural rights focus on myths of a homogenous nation, claims of ethnic or racial superiority or purity, and populist ultranationalism directed against liberal and pluralistic democracy. Much of the contemporary assault on cultural rights from extremism emanates from the far right of the political spectrum, which is ascendant or in power in many places. 14. The Special Rapporteur takes note of a set of indicators to aid in recognition of extremism distilled from social scientists by the former Officer-in-Charge of the Terrorism Prevention Branch at the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The most relevant include that: Extremists tend to … seek to … (re-)establish what they consider the natural order in society — whether … based on race, class, faith, ethnic superiority, or alleged tradition; are usually in possession of an ideological programme or action plan aimed at taking and holding communal or state power; … reject universal human rights and show a lack of empathy and disregard for rights of other than their own people; … reject diversity and pluralism in favour of their preferred mono-culture society; … portray themselves as threatened … 5 15. The United Nations system has focused most of its attention on violent extremism, recognizing that it has multiple “forms and manifestations” (see General Assembly resolution 68/127), but mostly declining to define it. 6 Most commonly, it gives less attention to extremist ideology that might result in similarly severe consequences or ultimately in additional violence and has thus far failed to adequately reference fundamentalism per se, despite its grave impact on human rights. 16. The Special Rapporteur also believes that the links between fundamentalism and extremism on the one hand and violent extremism and terrorism on the other must be recognized, as must the inherently dangerous nature of the underlying ideologies themselves for human rights. Some fundamentalist and extremist forces, including certain transnational political parties, may pass themselves off as “moderate”. Yet, they provide the ground on which militant extremists stand by promoting the very discriminatory laws and practices that the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief finds to have a strong link to incitement to violence in the name of religion (see A/HRC/28/66, para. 11). The Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association noted that fundamentalist “mindsets … can form the ideological basis for such violations” (see A/HRC/32/36, para. 90). 17. Governments must not make the mistake of thinking they can use so-called “nonviolent extremism”, which often includes advocacy of discrimination against women and minorities and fosters violence against them, as a tool to fight what they deem violent extremism. The highest price for such blunders is paid by women. Extremist actors will not be truly disarmed unless their ideology is comprehensively challenged and repudiated. This connection between ideologies contrary to human rights norms and the practices that 5 6 Alex P. Schmid, “Violent and non-violent extremism: two sides of the same coin?” (International Centre for Counterterrorism, 2014), pp. 21-22. An exception is to be found in UNESCO’s “A Teacher’s Guide on the Prevention of Violent Extremism” (2016), p. 11, which defines violent extremism as “the beliefs and actions of people who support or use ideologically-motivated violence to achieve radical ideological, religious or political views”. 5