>For example, for someone like Tate, if the human trafficking charges stick then it's kind of the same ideology you find in people who discriminate against or exploit someone because of their race.

From a little digging I did, because I don't normally follow him (or knew about him that much until the Greta thing and subsequent publicity), it's hard to make head of tails if there's a case or not. I saw two of the girls involved deny any wrongdoing. I doubt a person with 300M+ net worth had a need to do such a scheme. But even if he was a bona fide pimp, both have nothing to do with the "far right". He could be a "far right pimp", but not pimp, thus far right.

>Tate is being accused of exploiting women, which isn't any different from someone who may do that to someone based on other characteristics that they consider "weaker", "stupid" etc.

Millions of people exploit women, murder women (or men), steal, sell drugs, or do whatever other crime, without being far right. Even misogyny is not a far right specific trait. Heck, many apolitical people, leftists, rightists, and centrists have been just that.

My guess is that the label "far-right" is used to describe him and others because their ideology leans towards some kind of extreme. If you listen to Tate's rhetoric (I am only going by snippets here and there), it is very cartoonishly macho. Usually characteristics from that kind of caricature are associated with ideologies that strip women of freedoms and rights, e.g. to birth control or to abortion. So one can assume based on his rhetoric that he's right-leaning at least, and when you couple that with a pugilist personality that gives a "I am always right" vibe, people cannot be faulted for saying that that's a far-right personality.

I think far-right/left is usually used to denote personalities that don't believe in compromise (win-win or lose-lose scenarios), but only dominance of the other (zero-sum outooks).