Which Conflicts Does the Populist Radical Right Represent? A Western Europe Comparison

From a cleavage theory perspective, the rise of populist radical right parties (PRRPs) is often attributed to their ability to politicize specific social conflicts. However, the nature of these conflicts remains a subject of debate. Some scholars emphasize PRRPs’ appeal to the cultural losers of globalization, framing them as one pole of a globalization-related cultural cleavage. Others highlight their support base among economically insecure individuals or the working class. PRRPs have also been associated with peripheral-rural interests due to their strength outside urban centers. This paper revitalizes the literature at the intersection of cleavage politics and the populist right with original 2024 survey data from seven Western European countries: France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the UK. We examine which conflicts PRRPs represent and whether this varies by context. Drawing on ‘traditional’ and ‘neo’ cleavage theory, we analyze eight societal conflicts. In addition to the traditional cleavages described by Lipset and Rokkan, we examine conflicts between skilled and unskilled workers, ethnonationalism and cosmopolitanism, traditionalism and LGBTQ+ rights, and economic growth and environmental sustainability. With specific items, we assess how individuals’ positions on these conflicts, the salience they assign to them, and their self-identification with others on the same conflict side predict voting for PRRPs. Our findings show that PRRPs most strongly represent conflicts rooted in ethnonationalism, traditionalism, and environmental issues. Conversely, their alignment with rural interests and economic or labor-related conflicts is weaker. Finally, country-level variations underscore the role of national contexts in shaping PRRPs’ resonance with specific conflicts.