Theories of the Right

Abstract

Before examining the particulars of this case-study we must first ask ourselves whether it is possible to produce an acceptable definition of the right. Are we alluding to a single, static ideology, or to a series of disparate, dynamic philosophical doctrines? Can we examine the right only in terms of tangible political movements, or should we simply define it as a loose amalgam of diverse and sometimes incompatible interest groups? The right must surely be understood in terms of all three: as ideology, movement and coalition of interests. The inadequacy of existing definitions lies in the fact that, on the whole,they ignore or misunderstand the complex and evolving nature of the right. Political scientists have tended to concentrate on a specific property, be it the right as political movement or ideology. Very rarely have they approached the question with an adequate holistic understanding of the issues involved. Walter Theimer, for example,in the Encyclopedia of World Politics, limits his definition to a purely physical and somewhat tautological interpretation of right-wing political parties. In his view, conservative parties are those whose representatives in parliament sit on the right-hand side when viewed from the president’s chair.¹ Of course, this spatial representation of left and right stems from the seating arrangement in the post-1789 French National Assembly in which the nobility and clergy sat on the right and the third estate on the left. The ideological components revolved around three set of issues. Politically, the right was associated with defending the concept of absolute monarchism, the left with universal suffrage.