The extremeright party family
Studies of political parties have been based on a multiplicity of both scholarly
and political theories, and have focused on a variety of internal and external
aspects. As is common within the scientific community, complaints have been
voiced about the lack of knowledge in particular areas of the field, such as
party (as) organisations (Mair 1994), party ideology (Von Beyme 1985), and
minor or small parties (Fischer 1980; Müller-Rommel 1991). However, even
though a lot of work certainly remains to
This book provides a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the five main parties of the extreme right in the Netherlands (Centrumdemocraten, Centrumpartij), Belgium (Vlaams Blok), and Germany (Die Republikaner, Deutsche Volksunion). Using primary research — including internal party documents — it concludes that rather than right-wing and extremist, the core ideology of these parties is xenophobic nationalist, including also a mix of law and order and welfare chauvinism. The author's research and conclusions have broader implications for the study of the extreme-right phenomenon and party ideology in general.
Parties of the extreme Right have experienced a dramatic rise in electoral support in many countries in Western Europe over the last two and a half decades. This phenomenon has been far from uniform, however, and the considerable attention that the more successful right-wing extremist parties have received has sometimes obscured the fact that these parties have not recorded high electoral results in all West European democracies. Furthermore, their electoral scores have also varied over time, with the same party recording low electoral scores in one election but securing high electoral scores in another. This book examines the reasons behind the variation in the electoral fortunes of the West European parties of the extreme right in the period since the late 1970s. It proposes a number of different explanations as to why certain parties of the extreme right have performed better than others at the polls and it investigates each of these different explanations systematically and in depth.
This book reveals the Conservative Party's relationship with the extreme right between 1945 and 1975. It shows how the Party, realising that its well-documented pre-Second World War connections with the extreme right were now embarrassing, used its bureaucracy to implement a policy of investigating extreme-right groups and taking action to minimise their chances of success. The book focuses on the Conservative Party's investigation of right-wing groups, and shows how its perception of their nature determined the party bureaucracy's response. It draws on extensive information from the Conservative Party Archive, supported by other sources, including interviews with leading players in the events of the 1970s. The book draws a comparison between the Conservative Party machine's negative attitude towards the extreme right and its support for progressive groups. It concludes that the Conservative Party acted as a persistent block to the external extreme right in a number of ways, and that the Party bureaucracy persistently denied the extreme right party assistance, access to funds and representation within party organisations. The book reaches a climax with the formulation of a ‘plan’ threatening its own candidate if he failed to remove the extreme right from the Conservative Monday Club.
, and cultural strengths and weaknesses in an overall
post-war era of steadily improving conditions for many of its inhabitants. People
who grew up in the decade do not necessarily recognise the picture of negativity either. Many fondly remember the popular culture that anaesthetised the
gloom. The continued success of television programmes from the 1970s such as
Fawlty Towers, Dad’s Army and The Two Ronnies is evidence of this nostalgia,
The Conservative Party and the extremeright 1945–75
as is the popularity of the more recent Life on Mars, in which a twenty
Consensus Conservatism and
extremeright revival, 1951–57
Defeat at the 1950 General Election went some way to exorcise the Conservative
Party’s shock at the 1945 defeat, and held the promise that success was near.
Labour’s 145-seat majority was now a mere five. A number of high-calibre individuals among the 1950 intake of new MPs reinvigorated the Conservative
parliamentary party. Some quickly formed the One Nation Group, which was a
modernising organisation that played a pivotal role in reshaping Conservatism.
Not that the Conservative leadership lacked
The varying electoral fortunes of
the West European parties of
Right-wing extremist parties have experienced a dramatic rise in electoral
support in many West European democracies since the late 1970s. One of the
most prominent such parties, the French Front National (FN), won nearly
10 percent of the vote in both the 1986 and 1988 national legislative
contests, and in 1993 and 1997 its share of the ballots grew even further,
ﬁrst to 12.7 percent and then to 14.9 percent. Similarly, in Austria, the
Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ
Pride in Prejudice offers a concise introduction to the varied extreme right groups active in Britain. It looks to the past, in order to explore the roots of this complex movement, while focusing on the numerous groups and activists that make up Britain’s contemporary extreme right. This timely analysis examines the extreme right movement in terms of ideology and appeal, organisational styles, online and offline activism, approaches to leadership, types of supporters and gendered dynamics. Jackson also evaluates successes and failures in policy responses to the extreme right, and identifies the on-going risks posed by lone-actor terrorism. Showcasing the latest research, Pride in Prejudice argues that Britain has never been immune from the extreme right, and demonstrates the movement has a long history in the country. It is made up of a wide variety of organisations, helping give this marginalised culture a diverse appeal and many are attracted for emotive as well as more rational reasons. While risks posed by the extreme right are manageable, Jackson concludes that this is only possible if we make ourselves aware of the ways the movement operates, and that by doing so we can also make multicultural liberal democracy more robust.
In the first months of the
coronavirus crisis, extremeright groups and figures in Britain were
quick to seize on the emerging sense of panic to make a case for their
confrontational brand of politics. Some called for the rekindling of the
‘Best of British’, in characteristically divisive ways. In
March 2020, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon uploaded a
video of himself remonstrating
fierce opposition to change
frequently became muted acceptance and party policy, in the course of which
the Conservative Party co-opted, and then absorbed, Peelites, Liberal Unionists,
Coalition Liberals, and National Liberals. The result is a broad-based electoral
monolith. Therefore, it is easy to attribute the extremeright’s conspicuous and
longstanding electoral failure to the Conservative Party’s ability to attract many
Yet the extremeright was a persistent feature of twentieth-century Britain.
Prior to the First World War, the Tariff Reform League