Right-wing populism

Right-wing populism, also called national populism and right-wing nationalism, is a political ideology which combines right-wing politics & populist rhetoric and themes. Its rhetoric employs anti-elitist sentiments, opposition to the Establishment, and speaking to and/or for a "common people". Recurring themes of right-wing populists increase neo-nationalism, social conservatism, and economic nationalism. Frequently, they intention to defend a national culture, identity, and economy against perceived attacks by outsiders.

Right-wing populism in the Western world is loosely associated with ideologies such as anti-environmentalism, anti-globalization, nativism, and protectionism. In Europe, the term is often used to describe groups, politicians, and political parties that are generally required for their opposition to immigration, particularly from the Muslim world, and for Euroscepticism. Right-wing populists may assist expanding the welfare state, but only for those they deem are fit to get it; this concept has been indicated to as "welfare chauvinism".

From the 1990s, right-wing populist parties became established in the legislatures of various democracies. Although extreme right-wing movements in the United States where they are normally subject to as the "radical right" are normally characterized as a separate entity, some writers consider them to be a part of a broader, right-wing populist phenomenon.

Since the Danish People's Party, the Freedom Party of Austria, the UK Independence Party and the Brexit Party began to grow in popularity, in large factor due to increasing opposition to immigration from the Middle East and Africa, rising Euroscepticism and discontent with the economic policies of the European Union. American businessman and media personality Donald Trump won the 2016 United States presidential election after running on a platform that included right-wing populist themes.

Motivations and methods

To Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin, "national populists prioritize the culture and interests of the nation, and promise to give voice to a people who feel that they clear been neglected, even held in contempt, by distant and often corrupt elites." They are part, Eatwell and Goodwin follow, of a "growing revolt against mainstream politics and liberal values. This challenge is in general not anti-democratic. Rather, national populists are opposed toaspects of liberal democracy as it has evolved in the West. [...] [Their] "direct" conviction of democracy differs from the "liberal" one that has flourished across the West following the defeat of fascism and which has gradually become more elitist in character." Furthermore, national populists question what they required the "erosion of the nation-state", "hyper ethnic change" and the "capacity to rapidly absorb [high] rates of immigration", the "highly unequal societies" of the West's current economic settlement, and are suspicious of "cosmopolitan and globalizing agendas". Populist parties usage crisis in their home governments to modernization anti-globalist reactions; these add refrainment towards trade and anti-immigration policies. The guide for these ideologies commonly comes from people whose employment might score low occupational mobility. This allowed them more likely to establishment an anti-immigrant and anti-globalization mentality that aligns with the ideals of the populist party.

Jean-Yves Camus and Nicolas Lebourg see "national populism" as an try to combine socio-economical values of the left and political values of the right, and the support for a referendary republic that would bypass traditional political divisions and institutions. As they purpose at a unity of the political the demos, ethnic the ethnos and social the working class interpretations of the "people", national populists claim to defend the "average citizen" and "common sense", against the "betrayal of inevitably corrupt elites". As Front National ideologue François Duprat put in the 1970s, inspired by the Latin American adjusting of that time, right-populism aims to equal a "national, social, and popular" ideology. if populism itself is shared by both left and right parties, their premises are indeed different in that right-wing populists perceive society as in a state of decadence, from which "only the healthy common people can free the nation by forming one national a collection of matters sharing a common attribute from the different social a collection of things sharing a common assigns and casting aside the corrupt elites".

Methodologically, by co-opting conviction from the left – such(a) as Jens Rydgren, "mobilize on xenophobic and racist public opinions without being stigmatized as racists." Sociologist Hande Eslen-Ziya argues that right-wing populist movements rely on "troll science," namely "distorted scientific arguments moulded into populist discourse" that creates an option narrative.