Is there a word for the entitlement that people on the far right (and maybe the far left) seem to feel

Considering it in the abstract, without reference to the far right, I‘d call it an absence of epistemic humility and caution - the sincere inability to consider the possibility that one might be mistaken about the facts.

That’s it in a nutshell. They’re convinced that they’re absolutely, irrefutably right, and that everyone else who doesn’t agree is just stupid, corrupt, or confused. Very black/white thinking, and it leads to a sort of tunnel vision effect, where being SO right, they discount information that doesn’t reinforce that viewpoint.

In reality it’s all shades of gray and few people are actually that stupid, corrupt, or confused, but rather perceive something that the self-righteous people on the ends of the spectrum do not, and their positions are less extreme as a result.

I don’t see it as a left or right position, but more of something that happens with extreme positions on either side. Or with religion (or lack thereof), for example.

I think it’s the opposite. Both the far right and far left are furious because they think good things are happening to bad people, and bad things are happening to good people.

Some who tend to be sufficiently far on the left maintain themselves in perpetual rage against the Democrats; no legislative accomplishment is enough. It’s like swing districts don’t exist.

Handy chart:

There are a lot of concepts that lack an English term or punchy label. Sometimes you even need to explain in a paragraph.

Maybe not as bad as that chart, but I’ve read leftists who are disgusted with how comfortable liberals have become with being rich, and with upholding the economic and political system that keeps them rich. They consider the mainstream Democrats to be sellouts.

Aggrieved entitlement”, defined as “the guttural response of anger against those you think are trying to take away benefits you think you are entitled to”, seems to fit the bill here.

Note that “benefits you think you are entitled to” can (and usually does in this context) include unearned positions of privilege.

One manifestation of aggrieved entitlement worth mentioning is covered in this comic:

I think this isn’t just an American phenomenon. In Britain, for example, there seems to be a tacit belief that the Conservatives are the default party of government, and their rule is periodically, but only temporarily, interrupted by Labour getting in for a while. Since the Labour party has been in existence, by my count there have been 17 Tory Prime Minisiters (granted, that’s been skewed by them having three in the last two years), while there have been eight from Labour. And the entitlement the OP is talking about was fully on display with the last batch of Etonians, particularly Johnson, who felt that he was naturally going to be installed in Number 10.

In the U.S., I think it’s maybe not so much entitlement as resentment. With Watergate, the break-in wasn’t so much basic cheating as the Nixon White House, anti-communist furor in their blood, believed that the country wouldn’t survive anyone on the nominal left being in charge. Since then, the coalition of GOP’ers that are angry over Nixon, then Bork, then actually getting called out over Iran-Contra, teamed up with Christian Conservatives who are pissed that they don’t get to call all the cultural shots any more and resentful at every element of civil rights progress, are simply willing to do anything they can to keep progressivism at bay, and effectuate some payback in the process.

On a broader level, one quirk of human psychology is that the more fervently convinced people are that they are right, the more they tend to believe or assume that others are on board with the same views. Think of how often Marjorie Taylor-Greene, for instance, claims to be speaking for “the American people” even when her proposals are often heavily voted down.

I recall, back in October 2020, reading posts written by Trump voters on a college-football message board (often a surprising hotbed for political views.) These Trumpers were predicting, in total and utter seriousness, that Trump would carry the states of New York and California and win 70% of the popular vote. In their minds, Trump was obviously good and right, so how could any more than a small minority of America not be on board with him!?

The far-left and far-right have the common trait of being more self-assured and self-certain of their correctness than centrists or moderates.

This has been my experience, and then when that overwhelming support doesn’t materialize it is always because the other side cheated. It can never be because US voters are actualized adults capable of making their own decisions, because they must agree with Trump. Therefore the only answer is that everyone wants Trump to be president, but the other side cheated and invented votes.

I agree its a phenomena on both the left and the right, but it seems worse on the right. And I agree its an international phenomena like veryfrank said when discussing the UK.

Yes, the Faragists are even now insisting that Reform must have won more seats in Parliament than the five they got and that the difference is due to (some vague, indeterminable) cheating.

Also: Laurence Fox. 'Nuff said on that subject.

Electorally Oblivious Entitlement. EOE.

I call it Perpetual Victimhood. I don’t think it’s appropriate to apply bothsidesism to this, it’s virtually exclusive to the right wing. Everything they see is through the lens of PV- OMG they took OUR prayers out of schools and we can no longer force THOSE people to say OUR prayers- they’re oppressing my religion! OMG some of my tax money is going to THOSE people, they’re stealing from me! OMG everybody I know voted for OUR candidate, THEIR candidate must have cheated! They’re taking away my vote! And so on and on and on. Everything that changes in their lives is terrible and THOSE people are to blame. Unfair!