What are you talking about? Even twenty years ago, those were not “far left” positions: they were mainstream liberal.
And by “integration of minorities into society”, you mean…
Oh. You mean “blame a subset of criminal and reactionary individuals among a minority group for systemic problems in achieving social equality and justice for the group as a whole”.
That makes no sense. The misery and death within countries ruled by the far left such as the USSR, Communist China, North Korea, Cambodia, etc. is the highest in history for any ideology. The fact that the far left is still apologized for or excused by anyone in the modern era is bizarre.
That’s demifantasy.
Thanks for letting us know how “left” one’s gotta be to be considered “far left” in your book. 
Oh, right, I always forget that communism has never really been tried and the definition of far left is so specific that it applies to no one. It would be nice if the far left were so pedantic with their definitions of anyone to the right of Mao or Stalin.
There are lots of valid ways that one could define the term “far left”, but you’re not using any of them.
Your problem here is that you’re disingenuously trying to define it specifically enough to mean actual genocidal communist dictatorships, but also broadly enough to mean mainstream American progressives who are unflinchingly opposed to genocidal communist dictatorships. That’s not a reasoned argument, that’s just a propaganda trick.
Apropos of nothing in particular, does anyone remember Cyndi Lauper’s rendition of “True Colors”?
Thank you for this thoughtful and insightful post, Ulfreida. That’s me waving near the edge of the earth.
Examples of “far left” positions I’ve seen advocated online (as examples of what I consider actual extreme left positions to be like):
Forcibly deporting all non-Native Americans from North and South America.
Expertise is a lie, everyone is equal and all jobs should be assigned by sortition (aka, a lottery).
The housing shortage can be fixed by the people building their own housing.
People like nature pictures because of Western Imperialism.
Women are shorter than men because they are systematically starved.
Fixing issues like paralysis is bigoted.
Once the Communist Revolution comes it will endure forever with no need for enforcement, because no one would disagree with Communism without capitalist coercion and manipulation.
The only reason the USSR broke up is CIA subversion.
The people of Ukraine should be exterminated as fascists.
A nuclear war is desirable because Communism would inevitably arise from the ashes.
In my experience the far left has positions a lot more extreme than “gay rights” or whatever. That’s what makes them extremists. The reasonable, rational leftists aren’t “far” left, for the same reason; their reasonableness and rationality disqualifies them.
FYI … AOC <> Pol Pot.
I think there is a difference between “far left” and “extremism,” and it is similar to the difference between “radical” and “militant,” or “strategy and tactics.” Being on the “far left” is a matter of “how democratic and socialist you advocate going” while “extremism” is more about “whatever my goal, I advocate pursuing it fanatically.” So even those in the centre can be “extremists”–like, “if country X doesn’t open its doors to trade with us, we should bomb it.”
I mean that not everyone is automatically advancing the cause of civil rights. If you actually talk to black people, you’ll find a lot who are upset about the subset of black people who cause dysfunction.
I’ve met quite a few gay men who felt some subcultures in the LGBTQ community were extremely toxic and doing more harm than good.
Just as those of us in the left feel that subcultures in the far left are doing more harm than good.
Whether you lack the nuance to understand any of this is not my concern. And your approval isn’t important enough for me to change my behavior to obtain it.
And while we’re talking about this, it’s worth pointing out that the standard conservative-centrist trope of large numbers of black Americans disdaining academic achievement on the grounds that it’s “acting white” has been repeatedly debunked.
TL;DR:
So the idea that black Americans themselves are significantly impeding the cause of racial equality by fostering some kind of genuinely influential “oppositional culture” that tries to sabotage black students’ academic achievement on the grounds that it’s “acting white”, while it may appeal to a lot of white Americans who don’t want to engage with the realities of persistent systemic racism. is a myth.
Whew, white fragility is a helluva drug. In a couple of years @Wesley_Clark will be fully radicalized and MAGA.
He’s the perfect example of how easy it is to convert old “liberal” white dudes to Trump.
I disagree. Once somebody’s positions go far enough, they inevitable require fanaticism due to going against both nearly everyone’s desires and against reality itself. A random person isn’t going to suddenly capable of brain surgery just because they believe really hard it should wok like that. And if they try, they’ll kill people.
If that’s not “fanatic”, it’s a good enough imitation for my standards.
And that fanaticism, which does involve vociferously denying obvious realities, makes the fanatic look like an unhinged loon.
My point is fanaticism has nothing to with “far left” or “far right” or “centre.” Those are questions of power, economics, organization. Fanaticism is about how one holds those ideas and what one is prepared to do about them. A lefty British historian, I forget who, not E.P. Thompson or Eric Hobsbawm, was accused of having “extreme views.” He replied, “I do, but I hold them moderately.” Fanaticism is not a necessary part of “extreme” left or right or centre views, but anyone in any spot on the political spectrum may well be an extremist.
It’s not even new. Nothing I’ve seen here really surprises me about the OP. At best, he’s been naive about some issues to the point of denial. At worst, well, we see some of that here.
Here are some choice quotes from nearly 2 decades ago showing not a lot has changed in the intervening years from somebody who self-described himself in the OP as being far left at about that time period. 
An incredibly…naive …post from 2005 in a closed thread (link deliberately broken: \https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-jews-really-smarter/307900/26)
And from 2006 (another deliberately broken link \https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-which-i-ruminate-on-the-endemic-nature-of-racism-and-ponder-why-some-cant-see-it/357617/53 ):
The internet (and sometimes some of the long time poster memories) never fucking forgets.
Like what? Be specific, or some of us will conclude that we know what you’re not talking about.
If you actually talk to any people, you’ll find a lot who are upset about the behavior of criminal and otherwise antisocial individuals, true.
But to focus on being upset with those individuals specifically for “pushing the movement backwards”, or “sabotaging progress”, etc., is an attempt to duck responsibility on the part of mainstream majority culture.
Individual black criminals, and even gangs of black criminals, as reprehensible as their behavior may be, are not doing anywhere near as much to sabotage progress on racial justice and equality as white racists are still doing.
Sure, just like in any other community. But, again, if we’re focusing on these “subcultures” as the most salient obstacle to overcoming persistent homophobia in American society, we’re not being honest about the problem. The people who are doing by far the most “more harm than good” to LGBTQ people are not any subculture of LGBTQ people themselves.
If we disapprove of the behavior of any particular “subculture” in any group, let’s criticize them for the specific things we think they’re doing wrong, not in general for “holding their people back”.
That’s just a deflection (albeit often an unconscious one) to allow mainstream culture to shift the chief responsibility for persistent discrimination onto the discriminated-against group itself, in the guise of some “subset” of it.
“If you people would only fix your ‘subset’, you wouldn’t be pushing your movement backward so much.”
“I know it isn’t bigoted to say this, because if you talk to a lot of those people you’ll find that they don’t approve of that ‘subset’ either.”
No, I don’t think I’m the one whose lack of “nuance” is causing your problems here.