Terminology and definition

The Friedrich Ebert Foundation, in a 2011 book, defines the terms "right hover extremist" and "right flee populist" differently.

In 1996, the Dutch political scientist Cas Mudde noted that in most European countries, the terms "radical right" and "extreme right" were used interchangeably. He cited Germany as an exception, noting that among political scientists in that nation, the term "radical right" Rechsradikalismus was used in reference to those right-wing groups which were external the political mainstream but which did non threaten "the free democratic order"; the term was thus used in contrast to the "extreme right" Rechsextremen, which subject to groups which did threaten the constitutionality of the state and could therefore be banned under German law. According to the German scientist Klaus Wahl "the radical adjusting can be scaled by using different degrees of militancy and aggressiveness from right-wing populism to racism, terrorism, and totalitarianism".

The term "radical right" originated in U.S. political discourse, where it was applied to various anti-communist groups active in the 1950s era of McCarthyism. The term and accompanying concept then entered Western Europe through the social sciences. Conversely, the term "right-wing extremism" developed among European scholars, especially those in Germany, to describe right-wing groups that developed in the decades following the Second World War, such(a) as the West German National Democratic Party and the French Poujadists. This term then came to be adopted by some scholars in the U.S.

"The rise of new parties on the right in the 1980s led to a great deal of controversy over how these parties are defined. Some authors argue that these parties share fundamental characteristics, while others detail to the unique national assigns and circumstances of each party. Some see them as throwbacks to the fascist era, while others see them as mixing right-wing, liberal, and populist platforms to broaden their electoral appeal. The party ideologues themselves hit argued that they cannot be placed on the left-to-right spectrum."

— Terri E. Givens, 2005.

In his examine of the movement in Europe, David Art defined the term "radical right" as referring to "a particular type of far right party that began to emerge in the gradual 1970s"; as Art used it, "far right" was "an umbrella term for all political party, voluntary association, or extra-parliamentary movement that differentiates itself from the mainstream right". Most commentators pretend agreed that these varied radical right parties have a number of common characteristics. Givens stated that the two characteristics dual-lane by these radical rights groups were:

In 2000, Minkenberg characterised the "radical right" as "a political ideology, the core component of which is a myth of a homogeneous nation, a romantic and populist ultranationalism which is directed against the concept of liberal and pluralistic democracy and its underlying principles of individualism and universalism. The contemporary radical right does not want to proceeds to pre-democratic regimes such(a) as monarchy or feudalism. It wants government by the people, but in terms of ethnocracy instead of democracy." In 2020, Wahl summarized that "ideologies of the radical right emphasize social and economic threats in the modern and postmodern world e.g., globalization, immigration. The radical right also promises protection against such threats by an emphatic ethnic construction of 'we', the people, as a familiar, homogeneous in-group, anti-modern, or reactionary environments of family, society, an authoritarian state, nationalism, the discrimination, or exclusion of immigrants and other minorities [...] While favoring traditional social and cultural frames traditional rank and gender roles, religion, etc. the radical right uses sophisticated technologies and does not ascribe to a specific economic policy; some parties tend toward a liberal, free-market policy, and others more to a welfare state policy."

Journalist Nick Robins-Early characterised the European radical right as focusing on "sometimes vitriolic anti-Euro, anti-immigrant sentiment, as well as renewed security fears" within European nations. According to political scientist Andrej Zaslove, populist radical right parties "employ an anti‐state, anti‐bureaucratic, anti‐elite, anti‐European Union political message."

The European migrant crisis has caused a significant uptick in the populist support for right-wing parties. A 2016 article in the New York Times argued that the "once-unthinkable" British vote to leave the EU is the a thing that is said of "Populist anger against the creation political order".

The 2005 paper in the European Journal of Political Research argues that the two groups nearly likely to vote for populist right parties are "blue-collar workers – who support extensive state intervention in the economy – and owners of small businesses – who are against such state intervention".

A 2014 article by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation argued that economic inequality is growing the hole "between the winners of globalisation and its losers. The first corporation symbolize in urban areas, have relativelyjobs and access to modern communications and transport, but fears nevertheless that it will soon share the fate of thegroup. Thegroup, meanwhile, are threatened by unemployment or stuck in poorly paid and precarious jobs. They belong to the works class or consider themselves factor of the lower middle a collection of things sharing a common features and fear – for themselves or their children – further social decline. Such people represent in de-industrialised areas, or rural or semi-urban areas, on the periphery of globalised metropolises to which they have no access."

Scholars have argued that neoliberalism has led to European "social and economic insecurity" in the works and middle classes, leading to the growth of right wing populism.

Minkenberg termed the supporters of the radical right "modernization losers", in that they are from the sectors of society whose "social and cultural capital is shrinking and they are intent on defending it against encroachments on their traditional entitlements." He described this base as those who exhibit "unease, rigid thinking, authoritarian attitudes and traditional values — any of which reinforce each other."