Organizational identity and civil society’s responses against the far right

Abstract

This article examines why civil society organizations operating within the same local political context respond differently to far-right extremism. Existing research explains civil society mobilization through external factors, political opportunities, institutional environments, and resources, while paying less attention to organizational dynamics. Drawing on theories of organizational identity and social movements, the article argues that understandings of “who we are” and “what we do” shape perceptions of legitimate action and the interpretation of opportunities and resources. The study uses a comparative case design focusing on three civil society organizations in Ludvika, Sweden, responding to the neo-Nazi Nordic Resistance Movement (NRM). The findings reveal differences in tactical repertoires despite similar conditions. Clowns Against Nazism emphasized satire and symbolic confrontation; the Church of Sweden prioritized dialogue and inclusion; and the Swedish Red Cross stressed cooperation, education, and humanitarian engagement. Resources, positions, and networks influenced organizations’ capacities for action but did not fully explain their divergent responses. Organizational identity shaped how opportunities, constraints, and resources were interpreted and translated into tactical choices. The article shifts attention from whether and how civil society responds to far-right extremism toward why organizations facing similar conditions adopt different counter-strategies, highlighting implications for democratic resilience and civil society diversity.