There continues to be disagreement over which label is most appropriate for designating the group of parties that includes, among others, the French Front National, the Austrian Freiheitliche Partei, the Vlamms Belang, the Danish Folkeparti, and the British National Party. While some scholars prefer the term ‘(populist) radical right’, others continue to favour the label ‘right-wing extremist’. Others have jettisoned these terms altogether, and have made the case that these parties are best labelled ‘anti-immigration’ parties.
There are a number of reasons for this terminological dispute. Some of these parties, it is argued, have never espoused truly anti-democratic beliefs. Others might have in the past, but more recently they have moderated their ideologies and have undergone a degree of ‘mainstreaming’. Either way then, these contemporary parties are quite distinct from the extremist parties of the inter-war years, and from the parties of the so-called first and second ‘wave’ of right-wing extremism.
So if our referents (i.e. parties) have changed, or if we are now dealing with a new set of referents, how has the meaning of the concept of right-wing extremism/radicalism changed? And crucially, how should we now term this concept? Is (right-wing) extremism now a redundant term? And are the alternative labels now more appropriate?
This paper examines these questions in a bid to give proper consideration to the issues that surround our choice of terminology. In so doing it explores the relationship between our objects (parties), the meaning of our concept, and our choice of words.
