The answer to this question is therefore beginning to take shape: what can (or should) the traditional right do to deal with the far right?<\/p>\n
The split between the two right-wing factions is not new: it occurred at the end of the Old Regime and the dawn of modernity. One embraced the new era and followed the winds of the Enlightenment: it sought to limit arbitrary power, separate political and religious power, promote individual liberties, and eventually embrace the market economy. The other fought to maintain hierarchies and traditions, old privileges, and the union of throne and altar in a world that was beginning to change at breakneck speed\u2014a change that was soon perceived as decadence. The far right, fueled by the contemporary polycrisis, thrives at the expense of more centrist parties, elevating autocratic leaders, denying science, egalitarianism, and democracy, dominating the conversation on social media<\/a>, and captivating a growing number of young men.<\/p>\n \u201cThe division on the right has always existed; now it\u2019s turned on each other,\u201d explains Armando Zerolo, a professor of political philosophy and law at San Pablo CEU University in Madrid. \u201cIt\u2019s curious that the idea of \u200b\u200bboth right-wing factions uniting is being considered, because they are conceptually incompatible,\u201d he adds. He believes that nationalism has no place within the liberal right, which has encompassed a broad spectrum of sensibilities. And he is surprised that there isn\u2019t a stronger reaction against the phenomenon of self-proclaimed patriots and leaders like Donald Trump or the now-disgraced Orb\u00e1n.<\/p>\n While the center-right has traditionally sought to project an image of moderation and competence, often detached from ideology, the current far right makes no secret of its strong ideological content, which it displays in the culture wars<\/a>, even while frequently attempting to disguise it as common sense. If the center-right has at times sought to resemble an aseptic technocracy, with calls for modernization and flexibility (hence the accusations of a \u201ccowardly\u201d or \u201cinsecure\u201d right wing), the far right has a more revolutionary component.<\/p>\n This revolutionary and anti-establishment character, according to some analysts, is linked to the populist element. \u201cThus emerges a right wing that challenges the fundamental principles of the existing order, whereas classical conservatism tended to respect tradition and institutions,\u201d explains Diego Garrocho, a professor of moral philosophy at the Autonomous University of Madrid. \u201cPopulism is a sign of our times.\u201d<\/p>\n A common narrative about the split portrays it as a result of tensions within the liberal-conservative camp, when conservatives began to believe that liberalism had gone too far. From this perspective, the key to understanding the current situation is not the left-right divide, but rather the distinction between populists and those who defend the institutions. Some, like Zerolo, argue that the far right doesn\u2019t even deserve the name \u201cright,\u201d which is something else entirely, differing not only quantitatively but also qualitatively. Even so, sectors of the traditional right have gotten lost down the rabbit hole of hard-right movements.<\/p>\n Antonella Marty\u2019s personal journey illustrates this shift. This Argentine political scientist was a prominent participant in liberal think tanks until she detected the growing presence of authoritarian and ultra-religious movements, which she considered contrary to her principles. \u201cIn some areas, the traditional right has tended to move toward more extreme positions, partly due to electoral calculations and partly due to pressure from these new forces that set the agenda with violence and polarization, even pushing the center aside,\u201d she explains. She cites as an example several key figures in Together for Change, Mauricio Macri\u2019s former center-right party in Argentina. \u201cA large portion of its leaders and voters shifted towards positions aligned with Javier Milei<\/a>, to the point that key figures like Patricia Bullrich ended up joining his government, and numerous elected congressmembers switched to his party.\u201d While initially the two political groups competed, ultimately one absorbed the other.<\/p>\n Another notable case is that of the Republican Party, in the U.S., a traditional representative of the American center-right, now in the hands of Trumpism. \u201cThe MAGA movement, which is not conservative but radical, has almost completely eliminated the center-right. The center-right Republicans, the followers of Reagan, who still exist, often fear expressing their opinions, or have changed their minds, or have withdrawn from politics,\u201d explains the American analyst Anne Applebaum, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of essays such as Autocracy Inc.: The Dictators Who Want to Run the World, via email. For this thinker, the differences are both ideological and methodological: while Republicans have historically believed in free trade, the rule of law, and the idea that the United States should be the leader of the world\u2019s democracies, \u201cin contrast, the MAGA movement has supported tariffs, unprecedented state interference in markets and businesses, and corruption on an unprecedented scale. It challenges and undermines the Constitution and the rule of law; it does not believe that the United States should lead the democratic world and, instead, sees the country as a transactional and predatory state with no permanent allies<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n How to respond to the far right?<\/p>\n What can the traditional right do in the face of this far-right surge? The Hungarian case is an example: try to attract a broad electorate, not necessarily along the left-right axis. Something similar happened in Poland in 2023 when the moderate Donald Tusk<\/a> managed to unseat the radical Law and Justice Party. Previously in Hungary, coalitions of parties of all stripes were formed against Orb\u00e1n, but without success. In the case of Hungary, the campaign has focused on denouncing systemic corruption: \u201cHungarians have learned that the most important political divide is between authoritarians and kleptocrats, on the one hand, and those who believe in democracy, transparency, and the rule of law, on the other. Faced with an authoritarian threat, it is essential to create broad and ideologically diverse coalitions,\u201d says Applebaum. The moderate right can also strive to offer less inflammatory responses to the issues on the far-right agenda. The formula would be a mix of clear boundaries, political effectiveness, and leadership.<\/p>\n In Germany, traditional parties still maintain the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) in isolation, though not without criticism from the traditional right, which believes this isolation benefits the far right by presenting them as the only alternative to the system. The same is happening in France, even though Marine Le Pen<\/a> has managed to \u201cun-demonize\u201d the National Front she inherited from her father, and has succeeded in attracting voters from the traditional right.<\/p>\n Another approach could be to denounce their rhetoric. \u201cContinuing to call them extremists no longer serves as an alarm bell,\u201d says Diego Garrocho, \u201cit\u2019s necessary to point out their contradictions, to show the specific inconsistencies in their platform, not to fight them solely through fear.\u201d In the United States, the MAGA movement\u2019s support and the silence of the traditional right seem to be fracturing due to Trump\u2019s erratic policies, the consequences of the Iran war, and his messianic and apocalyptic rhetoric: \u201cA whole civilization will die tonight,\u201d the president wrote on social media. Not everyone wants to join him in these diatribes.<\/p>\n The traditional right can also engage in democratic activism, in the sense described by Anne Applebaum: for democracy to thrive, the mere existence of institutions is not enough; it cannot be taken for granted. We must get to work. We must combat apathy, defend the rules, denounce abuses and authoritarianism, and protect those institutions. Democracy does not defend itself.<\/p>\n \u201cThe liberal right must exist, remember its history, and shape it,\u201d says the scholar Armando Zerolo. And in his genealogy of the new right, the researcher Franco Delle Donne, author of the book (and podcast) Ultra Epidemic, traces its origin to the idea of \u200b\u200bthe decline of Western civilization, which stems from the work of the German philosopher Oswald Spengler and contributed to the rise of fascism in the 1930s. Defeated in World War II, the thread is picked up again in the French New Right of Alain de Benoist, who unexpectedly takes the Italian communist theorist Antonio Gramsci as a point of reference: the battle for hegemony had to be fought in the cultural arena. That inspiration has become hypertrophied in this apocalyptic and digital age. \u201cWhen the right learns Gramscian methods from the left, that\u2019s when the right\u2019s defeat occurs,\u201d Zerolo believes.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/people\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/WQJDQ3AOQZHW3N65E2AQDOVHH4.jpg\")
The president of Spain’s PP, Alberto N\u00fa\u00f1ez Feij\u00f3o (right), and the president of Vox, Santiago Abascal, in Congress, on February 11.Eduardo Parra ( Europa Press \/ Getty Images)<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/people\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/K2CTXCHSPFBRRLSBPQVYAMLMCY.JPG\")
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen during a press conference in Brussels on April 13.Yves Herman ( REUTERS )<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/people\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/6ZY6SVZZZJA3DG3KWTIMUAT6LI.jpg\")
Peter Magyar, leader of the conservative Tisza party, greets his voters after his victory in the Hungarian elections on April 12.Janos Kummer ( Getty Images)<\/p>\n