Right-wing parties and political groups Information
Describing political parties and groups that are perceived by experts and the general public to be to the right of traditional ideologies such as liberalism and conservatism has long resulted in debate among scholars and journalists. This guideline is intended to assist editors in adding descriptions and should be used with common sense and good faith.
Summary of problem
Most political parties identify with and are identified with distinct ideologies. For example, historically in the UK, the Conservatives were seen as a conservative party, while the Liberals were seen as a liberal party. But since the Second World War, a number of parties have been created that either do not claim and ideology or whose claimed ideology has little acceptance.
Naming
Many right-wing parties that emerged following the Second Word War had ties to historical Fascism and therefore terms such as neo-Fascist were used. But in the 1980s new parties arose that had no ties to historical fascism, leading to terms that defined them by their perceived positions in the political spectrum. However, scholars have come to no agreement about which descriptions to use.
Policy and guidelines
The description of political parties and groups that are perceived to be to the right of long established parties is contentious. Generally these groups either do not self-describe their ideologies or claim to hold mainstream political views.
When describing these groups, editors should identify and use the best sources available. Descriptions should only be used if they are widely used and undisputed in reliable sources. While some of these terms may appear value-laden, Contentious labels does not apply. Do not use groups' self-descriptions if they are misleading or self-serving, unless they are widely used in reliable secondary sources.
Notes= Information
Right-wing parties and political groups Information
Describing political parties and groups that are perceived by experts and the general public to be to the right of traditional ideologies such as liberalism and conservatism has long resulted in debate among scholars and journalists. This guideline is intended to assist editors in adding descriptions and should be used with common sense and good faith.
Summary of problem
Most political parties identify with and are identified with distinct ideologies. For example, historically in the UK, the Conservatives were seen as a conservative party, while the Liberals were seen as a liberal party. But since the Second World War, a number of parties have been created that either do not claim and ideology or whose claimed ideology has little acceptance.
Naming
Many right-wing parties that emerged following the Second Word War had ties to historical Fascism and therefore terms such as neo-Fascist were used. But in the 1980s new parties arose that had no ties to historical fascism, leading to terms that defined them by their perceived positions in the political spectrum. However, scholars have come to no agreement about which descriptions to use.
Policy and guidelines
The description of political parties and groups that are perceived to be to the right of long established parties is contentious. Generally these groups either do not self-describe their ideologies or claim to hold mainstream political views.
When describing these groups, editors should identify and use the best sources available. Descriptions should only be used if they are widely used and undisputed in reliable sources. While some of these terms may appear value-laden, Contentious labels does not apply. Do not use groups' self-descriptions if they are misleading or self-serving, unless they are widely used in reliable secondary sources.