The examples and perspective in this articledeal primarily with the United States and do not represent aworldwide view of the subject. The specific issue is:Focuses heavily throughout on American views, including in sections on other countries where the United States' position on an issue is often given. Requires a thorough rewrite to address US focus. You mayimprove this article, discuss the issue on thetalk page, orcreate a new article, as appropriate.(November 2025) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
The political termsLeft andRight were first used in the 18th century, during theFrench Revolution, referencing the seating arrangement of theFrench parliament. Those who sat to the right of the chair of the presiding officer (le président) were generally supportive of the institutions of themonarchistOld Regime.[21][22][23][24] The original "Right" in France was formed in reaction to the "Left" and comprised those supporting hierarchy, tradition, andclericalism.[5]: 693 The expressionla droite ('the right') increased in use after therestoration of the monarchy in 1815, when it was applied to theultra-royalists.[25]
Earlycommunists used the term "right-wing" in reference to conservatives, placing the conservatives on the right, the liberals in the centre and the communists on the left. Both the conservatives and the liberals were stronglyanti-communist, although the conservatives' anti-communism was much stronger than liberals'. The history of the use of the termright-wing about anti-communism is a complicated one.[26]
ByWorld War I, in most European monarchies, thedivine right of kings had become discredited and was replaced byliberal andnationalist movements. Most European monarchs became figureheads, or they yielded some power to elected governments. The most conservative European monarchy, the Russian Empire, was replaced by the communistSoviet Union. TheRussian Revolution inspired a series of othercommunist revolutions across Europe in the years 1917–1923. Many of these, such as theGerman Revolution, were defeated by nationalist and monarchist military units. During this period, nationalism began to be considered right-wing, especially when it opposed the internationalism of the communists.[27][28]
AfterWorld War II, communism became a global phenomenon and anti-communism became an integral part of the domestic and foreign policies of theUnited States and itsNATO allies. Conservatism in the post-war era abandoned its monarchist and aristocratic roots, focusing instead on patriotism, religious values, and nationalism. Throughout theCold War, postcolonial governments inAsia,Africa, andLatin America turned to the United States for political and economic support. Communists were also enemies of capitalism, portrayingWall Street as the oppressor of the masses. The United States made anti-communism the top priority of its foreign policy, and many American conservatives sought to combat what they saw as communist influence at home. This led to the adoption of several domestic policies that are collectively known under the termMcCarthyism. While both liberals and conservatives were anti-communist, the followers of Senator McCarthy were calledright-wing and those on the right called liberals who favoured free speech, even for communists,leftist.[27][29]
Early forms of corporatism would be developed inClassical Greece and used inAncient Rome. Plato would develop the ideas oftotalitarian andcommunitarian corporatist systems of natural based classes and social hierarchies that would be organised based on function, such that groups would cooperate to achieve social harmony by emphasisingcollectives interests overindividual interests.[30][31] Corporatism as apolitical ideology advocates the organisation of society bycorporate groups—such as agricultural, labour, military, scientific, or guild associations—based on their common interests.[32][33]
In post-revolutionary France, the Right fought against the rising power of those who had grown rich through commerce, and sought to preserve the rights of the hereditary nobility. They were uncomfortable with capitalism, the Enlightenment, individualism, and industrialism, and fought to retain traditional social hierarchies and institutions.[21][34] In Europe's history, there have been strongcollectivist right-wing movements, such as in the social Catholic right, that have exhibited hostility to all forms ofliberalism (includingeconomic liberalism) and have historically advocated for paternalist class harmony involving an organic-hierarchical society where workers are protected while class hierarchy remains.[35]
In the 19th century, the Right had shifted to support the newly rich in some European countries (particularly Britain) and instead of favouring the nobility over industrialists, favoured capitalists over the working class. Other right-wing movements—such asCarlism in Spain and nationalist movements in France, Germany, and Russia—remained hostile to capitalism and industrialism. Nevertheless, a few right-wing movements—notably the FrenchNouvelle Droite,CasaPound, and Americanpaleoconservatism—are often in opposition to capitalist ethics and the effects they have on society. These forces see capitalism and industrialism as infringing upon or causing the decay of social traditions or hierarchies that are essential for social order.[36]
In modern times, "right-wing" is sometimes used to describelaissez-faire capitalism. In Europe, capitalists formed alliances with the Right during their conflicts with workers after 1848. In 1871, the Austrian school came to be with the work ofCarl Menger,Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk,Friedrich von Wieser, and others,[37] originating from methodologically opposition to theHistorical school, in a dispute known asMethodenstreit.[38] The Austrian school opposition to beheterodox,[39][40][41] advocating strict adherence tomethodological individualism, the concept that social phenomena result primarily from the motivations and actions of individuals along with theirself interest. Austrian-school theorists hold that economic theory should be exclusively derived from basic principles of human action.[42][43][44]
Right-wing nationalism was influenced byRomantic nationalism in which the state derives its political legitimacy from the organic unity of those who it governs. This generally includes the language, race, culture, religion, and customs of the nation, all of which were "born" within its culture. Linked with right-wing nationalism iscultural conservatism, which supports the preservation of the heritage of a nation or culture and often sees deviations from cultural norms as an existential threat.[48][page needed]
Traditionalism was advocated by a group of United States university professors (labelled the "New Conservatives" by the popular press) who rejected the concepts ofindividualism,liberalism,modernity, andsocial progress, seeking instead to promote what they identified as cultural and educational renewal.[52]
Right-wing populism is a combination ofcivic-nationalism,cultural-nationalism and sometimesethno-nationalism,localism, along withanti-elitism, using populist rhetoric to provide a critique of existing political institutions.[53] According to Margaret Canovan, a right-wing populist is "a charismatic leader, using the tactics of politicians' populism to go past the politicians and intellectual elite and appeal to the reactionary sentiments of the populace, often buttressing his claim to speak for the people by the use of referendums".[54][page needed]
In Europe, right-wing populism often takes the form of distrust of theEuropean Union, and of politicians in general, combined withanti-immigrant rhetoric and a call for a return to traditional, national values.[55] Daniel Stockemer states, the radical right is, "Targeting immigrants as a threat to employment, security and cultural cohesion".[56]
In the United States, theTea Party movement stated that the core beliefs for membership were the primacy of individual liberties as defined by the Constitution of the United States, preference for a small federal government, and respect for the rule of law. Some policy positions included opposition to illegal immigration and support for a strong national military force, the right to individual gun ownership, cutting taxes, reducing government spending, and balancing the budget.[57]
In Indonesia, Islamic populism has a significant impact on right-wing politics.[58] This is largely due to the historical context which Islamic organisations had during the 1960s in destroying the Indonesian Communist Party.[58] Whilst the party is adopting democratic processes with neo-liberal market economies, socially pluralist positions are not necessarily adopted.[58] The Islamic populism in Indonesia has boosted its influence in 1998 after the demise of the Suharto authoritarian regime.[58] Islamic populism in Indonesia has similar properties with Islamic populist regimes like in the Middle East, Turkey and North Africa (MENA).[58] The emphasis on social justice, pluralism, equality and progressive agendas could be potentially mobilised by Islamic cultural resources.[58]
In India, supporters of theBharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have more authoritarian, nativist, and populist ideas than other Indian citizens. Under Narendra Modi, populism is a core part of the party's ideology. The party's rhetoric reflects the idea is that the ordinary, "good" individuals are continuously under attack from "bad" political forces, the media, etc. Since Narendra Modi became the leader of the BJP, it has increasingly been considered a populist radical right party (PRR) and has also been considered a Hindu nationalist party.[59]
InThe Possessed (1872) andThe Brothers Karamazov (1880),Fyodor Dostoevsky portrayed socialism as an attempt to build a kingdom of Man as opposed tokingdom of God. According to Dostoevsky himself, the intention of the latter book was to portray "the seed of the idea of destruction in our time in Russia among the young people uprooted from reality". This seed is depicted as: "the rejection not of God but of the meaning of His creation. Socialism has sprung from the denial of the meaning of historical reality and ended in a programme of destruction and anarchism".[60]
In his 1931 encyclicalQuadragesimo Anno,Pope Pius XI wrote that "true socialism" was irreconcilable with the teachings of theCatholic Church "because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth", stating:[61]
"For, according to Christian teaching, man, endowed with a social nature, is placed on this earth so that by leading a life in society and under an authority ordained of God he may fully cultivate and develop all his faculties unto the praise and glory of his Creator; and that by faithfully fulfilling the duties of his craft or other calling he may obtain for himself temporal and at the same time eternal happiness. Socialism, on the other hand, wholly ignoring and indifferent to this sublime end of both man and society, affirms that human association has been instituted for the sake of material advantage alone"
American right-wing media outlets oppose sex outside marriage andsame-sex marriage, and they sometimes reject scientific positions onevolution and other matters where science is perceived to disagree with theBible.[62][63]
Outside the West, theHindu nationalist movement has attracted privileged groups which fear encroachment on their dominant positions, as well as "plebeian" and impoverished groups which seek recognition around a majoritarian rhetoric of cultural pride, order, and national strength.[66]
American political philosopherRussell Kirk in 1962
Right-wing politics involves, in varying degrees, the rejection of someegalitarian objectives ofleft-wing politics, claiming either thatsocial oreconomic inequality is natural and inevitable or that it is beneficial to society.[51] Right-wing ideologies and movements supportsocial order. The original French right-wing was called "the party of order" and held that France needed a strong political leader to keep order.[24]
Conservative British scholar R. J. White, who rejects egalitarianism, wrote: "Men are equal before God and the laws, but unequal in all else; hierarchy is the order of nature, and privilege is the reward of honourable service".[75] American conservativeRussell Kirk also rejected egalitarianism as imposing sameness, stating: "Men are created different; and a government that ignores this law becomes an unjust government for it sacrifices nobility to mediocrity".[75] Italian scholarNorberto Bobbio argued that the right-wing is inegalitarian compared to the left-wing, as he argued that equality is a relative, not absolute, concept.[76]
Right-libertarians reject collective or state-imposed equality as undermining reward for personal merit, initiative, and enterprise.[75] In their view, such imposed equality is unjust, limits personal freedom, and leads to social uniformity and mediocrity.[75]
In the view of philosopherJason Stanley inHow Fascism Works, the "politics of hierarchy" is one of the hallmarks offascism, which refers to a "glorious past" in which members of the rightfully dominant group sat atop the hierarchy, and attempt to recreate this state of being.[77]
Theneo-liberal right sought to combine a market economy and economic deregulation with the traditional right-wing beliefs inpatriotism, elitism and law and order.[10][page needed]
Neoauthoritarianism is a current of political thought that rose in China in the late 1980s and came into ascendancy after the death ofDeng Xiaoping; it advocates a powerful state to facilitatemarket reforms.[84] It has been described as right-wing,classically conservative even though it incorporated some aspects of Marxist–Leninist andMaoist theories.[85][86]
ThroughoutFrance in the 19th century, the main line dividing the left and right was between supporters of the republic and those of the monarchy, who were often secularist and Catholic respectively.[24]
The dominance of the political right ofinter-war Hungary, after the collapse of a short-lived Communist regime, was described by historianIstván Deák:
Between 1919 and 1944 Hungary was a rightist country. Forged out of a counter-revolutionary heritage, its governments advocated a "nationalist Christian" policy; they extolled heroism, faith, and unity; they despised the French Revolution, and they spurned the liberal and socialist ideologies of the 19th century. The governments saw Hungary as a bulwark againstbolshevism and bolshevism's instruments:socialism,cosmopolitanism, andFreemasonry. They perpetrated the rule of a small clique of aristocrats, civil servants, and army officers, and surrounded with adulation the head of the state, the counterrevolutionaryAdmiral Horthy.[87]
Althoughfreedom fighters are favoured, the right-wing tendency to elect or appoint politicians and government officials based on aristocratic and religious ties is common to almost all the states of India.[88][89][90][91] Multiple political parties however identify with terms and beliefs which are, by political consensus, right or left wing. Certain political parties such as theBharatiya Janata Party, identify with conservative[92] and nationalist elements. Some, such as theIndian National Congress, take a liberal stance. TheCommunist Party of India,Communist Party of India (Marxist), and others, identify with left-wing socialist and communist concepts. Other political parties take differing stands, and hence cannot be clearly grouped as the left- and the right-wing.[93]
In British politics, the termsright andleft came into common use for the first time in the late 1930s during debates over theSpanish Civil War.[94]
TheConservative Party, one of the country's two main political parties, is placed on the centre-right[101] to right-wing[108] of the left–right political spectrum.Reform UK is situated on the right-wing of the political spectrum, generally to the Conservative Party's right.[109][110][111][112]
In 2019, the United States populace leanedcentre-right, with 37% of Americans self-identifying asconservative, compared to 35% moderate and 24%liberal. This was continuing a decades long trend of the country leaning centre-right.[114]
TheUnited States Department of Homeland Security defines right-wing extremism in the United States as "broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favour of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration".[115]
British academicsNoël O'Sullivan andRoger Eatwell divide the right into five types: reactionary, moderate, radical, extreme, and new.[118]Chip Berlet wrote that each of these "styles of thought" are "responses to the left", including liberalism and socialism, which have arisen since the 1789 French Revolution.[119]
The reactionary right looks toward the past and is "aristocratic, religious and authoritarian".[119]
Themoderate right, typified by the writings ofEdmund Burke, is tolerant of change, provided it is gradual and accepts some aspects of liberalism, including the rule of law and capitalism, although it sees radicallaissez-faire and individualism as harmful to society. The moderate right often promotes nationalism and social welfare policies.[120]
Radical right is a descriptive term that was developed after World War II and it was applied to groups and ideologies such asMcCarthyism, theJohn Birch Society,Thatcherism, and theRepublikaner Party. Eatwell stresses that this usage of the term has "major typological problems" because it "has also been applied to clearly democratic developments".[121] The radical right includesright-wing populism and various other subtypes.[119]
Other authors make a distinction between the centre-right and the far-right.[124]
Parties of the centre-right generally support liberal democracy, capitalism, the market economy (though they may accept government regulation to control monopolies), private property rights, and a limited welfare state (for example, government provision of education and medical care). They support conservatism and economic liberalism and oppose socialism and communism.
^Johnson, Paul (2005)."Right-wing, rightist".A Politics Glossary. Auburn University website. Archived fromthe original on 19 August 2014. Retrieved23 October 2014.
^abT. Alexander Smith, Raymond Tatalovich.Cultures at war: moral conflicts in western democracies. Toronto, Canada: Broadview Press, Ltd, 2003. p. 30. "That viewpoint is held by contemporary sociologists, for whom 'right-wing movements' are conceptualized as 'social movements whose stated goals are to maintain structures of order, status, honor, or traditional social differences or values' as compared to left-wing movements which seek 'greater equality or political participation.' In other words, the sociological perspective sees preservationist politics as a right-wing attempt to defend privilege within thesocial hierarchy."
^abLeft and right: the significance of a political distinction, Norberto Bobbio and Allan Cameron, p. 37,University of Chicago Press, 1997.
^abSeymour Martin Lipset, cited in Fuchs, D., and Klingemann, H. 1990. The left-right schema. pp. 203–34 in Continuities in Political Action: A Longitudinal Study of Political Orientations in Three Western Democracies, ed.M.Jennings et al. Berlin:de Gruyter
^Smith, T. Alexander and Raymond Tatalovich.Cultures at War: Moral Conflicts in Western Democracies (Toronto, Canada: Broadview Press, Ltd., 2003) p. 30. "That viewpoint is held by contemporary sociologists, for whom 'right-wing movements' are conceptualized as 'social movements whose stated goals are to maintain structures of order, status, honor, or traditional social differences or values' as compared to left-wing movements which seek 'greater equality or political participation.'
^Gidron, N; Ziblatt, D. (2019)."Center-right political parties in advanced democracies 2019"(PDF).Annual Review of Political Science.22: 23.doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-090717-092750.Defining the right by its adherence to the status quo is closely associated with a definition of the right as a defense of inequality (Bobbio 1996, Jost 2009, Luna & Kaltwasser 2014). As noted by Jost (2009), within the context of Western political development, opposition to change is often synonymous with support for inequality. Notwithstanding its prominence in the literature, we are hesitant to adopt this definition of the right since it requires the researcher to interpret ideological claims according to an abstract understanding of equality. For instance, Noel & Therien (2008) argue that right-wing opposition to affirmative action speaks in the name of equality and rejects positive discrimination based on demographic factors. From this perspective, the right is not inegalitarian but is "differently egalitarian" (Noel & Therien 2008, p. 18).
^Scruton, Roger "A Dictionary of Political Thought" "Defined by contrast to (or perhaps more accurately conflict with) the left the termright does not even have the respectability of a history. As now used it denotes several connected and also conflicting ideas (including) 1)conservative, and perhaps authoritarian, doctrines concerning the nature of civil society, with emphasis on custom, tradition, and allegiance as social bonds ... 8) belief in free enterprise free markets and a capitalist economy as the only mode of production compatible with human freedom and suited to the temporary nature of human aspirations ..." pp. 281–2, Macmillan, 1996
^Goldthorpe, J.E. (1985).An Introduction to Sociology (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 156.ISBN978-0-521-24545-6.There are ... those who accept inequality as natural, normal, and even desirable. Two main lines of thought converge on the Right or conservative side...the truly Conservative view is that there is a natural hierarchy of skills and talents in which some people are born leaders, whether by heredity or family tradition. ... now ... the more usual right-wing view, which may be called 'liberal-conservative', is that unequal rewards are right and desirable so long as the competition for wealth and power is a fair one.
^abGoodsell, Charles T., "The Architecture of Parliaments: Legislative Houses and Political Culture", British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 18, No. 3 (July 1988), pp. 287–302.
^Linski, Gerhard,Current Issues and Research In Macrosociology (Brill Archive, 1984) p. 59
^Clark, BarryPolitical Economy: A Comparative Approach (Praeger Paperback, 1998), pp. 33–34.
^Adler, Franklin Hugh.Italian Industrialists from Liberalism to Fascism: The Political Development of the Industrial Bourgeoisie, 1906–34. p. 349.
^abcWiarda, Howard J. (1997).Corporatism and comparative politics: the other great "ism". Comparative politics series. Armonk, NY: Sharpe.ISBN978-1-56324-716-3.
^Clarke, Paul A. B; Foweraker, Joe.Encyclopedia of democratic thought.London, UK;New York:Routledge, 2001. Pp. 113
^Marty, Martin E.; Appleby, R. Scott (1994).Fundamentalisms Observed (2nd ed.). Chicago:University of Chicago Press. p. 91.ISBN978-0-226-50878-8.Reactionary right-wing themes emphasizing authority, social hierarchy, and obedience, as well as condemnations of liberalism, the democratic ethos, the "rights of man" associated with the legacy of the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, and the political and cultural ethos of modern liberal democracy are especially prominent in the writings and public statements of Archbishop Lefebvre.
^Holland, J.,Modern Catholic Social Teaching: The Popes Confront the Industrial Age, 1740–1958. Paulist Press, 2003, p. 132.
^Payne, Stanley G. (1983).Fascism: Comparison and Definition. Madison, Wisc.:University of Wisconsin Press. p. 19.ISBN978-0-299-08064-8.Right radicals and conservative authoritarians almost without exception became corporatists in formal doctrines of political economy, but the fascists were less explicit and in general less schematic.
^Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of economic analysis, Oxford University Press 1996,ISBN978-0195105599.
^Menger, Carl (2007) [1871].Principles of Economics(PDF). Translated by Dingwall, James; Hoselitz, Bert F. Auburn, Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
^Heath, Joseph (1 May 2018). Zalta, Edward N. (ed.).The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved1 May 2018 – via Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
^Ludwig von Mises.Human Action, p. 11, "Purposeful Action and Animal Reaction". Referenced 2011-11-23.
^Doyle, William (2002).The Oxford History of the French Revolution (2nd ed.). Oxford [u.a.]:Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-925298-5.An exuberant, uncompromising nationalism lay behind France's revolutionary expansion in the 1790s...", "The message of the French Revolution was that the people are sovereign; and in the two centuries since it was first proclaimed it has conquered the world.
^Winock, Michel (dir.),Histoire de l'extrême droite en France (1993).
^Adams, IanPolitical Ideology Today (2nd edition), Manchester University Press, 2002, p. 68.
^abLeft and right: the significance of a political distinction, Norberto Bobbio and Allan Cameron, pg. 68,University of Chicago Press, 1997.
^Bruce Frohnen, Jeremy Beer and Jeffrey O. Nelson, ed. (2006)American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, p. 870.
^Mudde, Cas and Rovira Kaltwasser, Cristóbal (2017)Populism: a Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp.14-15, 72-73.ISBN978-0-19-023487-4
^Hayward, Jack (2004).Elitism, Populism, and European Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0198280354.
^Daniel Stockemer, "Structural data on immigration or immigration perceptions? What accounts for the electoral success of the radical right in Europe?."JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 54.4 (2016): 999-1016.
^"About Us". Tea Party. 2 September 2004. Archived fromthe original on 18 April 2015. Retrieved15 November 2016.
^Rozsa, Matthew (5 July 2019)."How did the Republican Party become so conservative?".Salon. Retrieved7 March 2022.To understand how the Republican Party became associated with right-wing politics — and, for that matter, how the Democratic Party became associated with a left-wing, progressive philosophy — it is essential to understand the history of the Grand Old Party.
^Thomas Blom Hansen,The Saffron Wave: Democracy and Hindu Nationalism in Modern India, Princeton University Press, 2001,ISBN1-4008-0342-X, 9781400803422.
^"Israel's Ayatollahs: Meir Kahane and the Far Right in Israel". Archived fromthe original on 19 February 2009.Any non-Jew, including the Arabs, can have the status of a foreign resident in Israel if he accepts the law of the Halacha. I don't differentiate between Arabs and non-Arabs. The only difference I make is between Jews and non-Jews. If a non-Jew wants to live here, he must agree to be a foreign resident, be he Arab or not. He does not have and cannot have national rights in Israel. He can have civil rights, social rights, but he cannot be a citizen; he won't have the right to vote. Again, whether he's Arab or not.
^Ball, T. and R. Bellamy, eds.,The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought, pp. 610–12.
^Alan S. Kahan.Mind Vs. Money: The War Between Intellectuals and Capitalism. New Brunswick, New Jersey:Transaction Publishers, 2010. p. 88.
^Ian Adams.Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, US:Manchester University Press, 2001. p. 57.
^The English Ideology: Studies in the Language of Victorian Politics, George Watson Allen Lane, London, 1973, p. 94.
^Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan,The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics,Right (-wing)...and for extreme right parties racism and fascism., p. 465, Oxford, 2009,ISBN978-0-19-920780-0.
^Rao, Jaithirth (25 October 2019).The Indian Conservative : A History of Indian Right-Wing Thought (First ed.). New Delhi: Juggernaut Press. p. 280.ISBN978-9353450625.
^Webb, Paul; Bale, Tim (2014)."Why Do Tories Defect to UKIP? Conservative Party Members and the Temptations of the Populist Radical Right".Political Studies.62 (4):961–970.doi:10.1111/1467-9248.12130.ISSN0032-3217.For one thing, as we have already suggested, the problems posed by UKIP for the Conservatives are akin to those posed to other European centre-right parties by populist radical right challengers: there is no prima facie reason to think that if large numbers of the Tory rank-and-file are considering switching their vote to UKIP that the same does not apply to, say, members of the ÖVP in Austria (who might switch to the FPÖ), or of the Dutch VVD and CDA (who might vote for the PVV), or of Denmark's Venstre (who might cast their ballot for the DF), or of KOK in Finland (who might be tempted by the Finns Party), or even of the French UMP (who might plump for Marine Le Pen's FN).
^Abou-Chadi, Tarik; Cohen, Denis; Wagner, Markus (2021). "The centre-right versus the radical right: the role of migration issues and economic grievances".Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.48 (2):366–384.doi:10.1080/1369183X.2020.1853903.Specifically, the centre-right contains Christian Democratic parties such as the German CDU, Conservative parties such as the British Tories or the French Gaullists, and classically Liberal parties such as Venstre in Denmark or the VVD in the Netherlands.
^Bale, Tim (March 2023).The Conservative Party After Brexit: Turmoil and Transformation. Cambridge:Polity. pp. 3–8, 291,et passim.ISBN9781509546015.Archived from the original on 14 September 2023. Retrieved12 September 2023.[...] rather than the installation of a supposedly more 'technocratic' cabinet halting and even reversing any transformation on the part of the Conservative Party from a mainstream centre-right formation into an ersatz radical right-wing populist outfit, it could just as easily accelerate and accentuate it. Of course, radical right-wing populist parties are about more than migration and, indeed, culture wars more generally. Typically, they also put a premium on charismatic leadership and, if in office, on the rights of the executive over other branches of government and any intermediate institutions. And this is exactly what we have seen from the Conservative Party since 2019
^de Geus, Roosmarijn A.; Shorrocks, Rosalind (2022). "Where Do Female Conservatives Stand? A Cross-National Analysis of the Issue Positions and Ideological Placement of Female Right-Wing Candidates". In Och, Malliga; Shames, Shauna; Cooperman, Rosalyn (eds.).Sell-Outs or Warriors for Change? A Comparative Look at Conservative Women in Politics in Democracies. Abingdon/New York:Routledge. pp. 1–29.ISBN9781032346571.[R]ight-wing parties are also increasing the presence of women within their ranks. Prominent female European leaders include Theresa May (until recently) and Angela Merkel, from the right-wing Conservative Party in the UK and the Christian Democratic Party in Germany respectively.
^Eatwell: 2004, p. 8, "Today four other traits feature most prominently in definitions: 1) anti-democracy; 2) nationalism; 3) racism; 4) the strong state".
^Vincent, Andrew (1995).Modern Political Ideologies (2nd ed.). Oxford [u.a.]: Blackwell.ISBN978-0-631-19507-8.Who to include under the rubric of the New Right remains puzzling. It is usually seen as an amalgam of traditional liberal conservatism, Austrian liberal economic theory ... extreme libertarianism (anarch-capitalism) and crude populism.
^Michael E. Brown, Owen R. Cote Jr.,Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict, "Anti-immigrant and anti-refugee feeling is being exploited by extreme right-wing parties throughout Europe...", p. 442, MIT Press, 2001,ISBN978-0-262-52315-8.
Bacchetta, Paola, and Margaret Power, eds. 2002.Right-Wing Women: From Conservatives to Extremists around the World. New York: Routledge.
Berlet, Chip. 2006. "When Alienation turns Right". InThe Evolution of Alienation: Trauma, Promise, and the Millennium, edited by Langman, Lauren, and Kalekin-Fishman. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.ISBN0-7425-1835-3,ISBN978-0-7425-1835-3.
Davies, Peter. 2002.The Extreme Right in France, 1789 to the Present: From De Maistre to Le Pen. New York, NY: Routledge.ISBN0-415-23982-6,ISBN978-0-415-23982-0.
Eatwell, Roger. 1999. "Conclusion: The 'End of Ideology'". InContemporary Political Ideologies, edited by R. Eatwell and A. Wright. Continuum International Publishing Group.ISBN0-8264-5173-X,ISBN9780826451736.
Fielitz, Maik, and Laura Lotte Laloire, eds. 2016.Trouble on the Far Right. Contemporary Right-Wing Strategies and Practices in Europe. Bielefeld: transcript.ISBN978-3-8376-3720-5.
Gottlieb, Julie, and Clarisse Berethezéne, eds. 2017.Rethinking right-wing women: Gender and the Conservative Party, 1880s to the present.
Miles, Michael W. (1980).The Odyssey of the American Right. New York: Oxford University Press.ISBN9780195027747.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
-(c).jpg)
![[icon]](/mt/?noimg=&dark=on&url=http%3a%2f%2fen.wikipedia.org%2fwiki%2fFile%3aWiki_letter_w_cropped.svg)
.jpg)
