The Plural Radical Right: foundations for a hermeneutic category of analysis

Abstract

This article analyzes the literature on the rise and expansion of groups that challenge liberal democracy, focusing on Brazilian and European academic production. The objective is to identify the specificities and convergences in the studies produced in each region on this phenomenon and, based on this analysis, to propose the hermeneutic category of a Plural Radical Right to describe actors, movements, and parties that attack the constitutional rights of minorities and question the actions of the state in regulating inequalities. A diagram is presented, developed from research conducted between 2019 and 2023 on the discourses and identities of the radical right, illustrating the plurality within the Brazilian context and pointing to potential research agendas that take into account particularities and transnational aspects, as well as the processes of radicalization within different clusters.

Keywords:
Plural Radical Right; radicalization; clusters; liberal democracy; illiberalism

Resumo

O presente artigo analisa a literatura sobre a ascensão e expansão de grupos que desafiam a democracia liberal, com foco na produção acadêmica brasileira e europeia. O objetivo é identificar as especificidades e convergências nos estudos produzidos em cada região sobre esse fenômeno e, a partir de tal análise, propor a categoria hermenêutica de Direitas Radicais para descrever atores, movimentos e partidos que atacam os direitos constitucionais das minorias e questionam as ações do Estado na regulação das desigualdades. Apresenta-se um diagrama formulado a partir da pesquisa feita entre 2019 e 2023 sobre os discursos e identidades nas Direitas Radicais, ilustrando a pluralidade no contexto brasileiro e sinalizando potenciais agendas de pesquisa que levem em consideração aspectos particulares e transnacionais, assim como os processos de radicalização em diferentes clusters.

Palavras-chave:
Direitas Radicais; radicalização; clusters; democracia liberal; iliberalismo

Resumen

Este artículo analiza la literatura sobre el auge y la expansión de grupos que desafían la democracia liberal, centrándose en la producción académica brasileña y europea. El objetivo es identificar las especificidades y convergencias en los estudios producidos en cada región sobre este fenómeno y, a partir de este análisis, proponer la categoría hermenéutica de Derechas Radicales para describir actores, movimientos y partidos que atacan los derechos constitucionales de las minorías y cuestionan las acciones del Estado en la regulación de las desigualdades. Se presenta un diagrama, desarrollado a partir de investigaciones realizadas entre 2019 y 2023 sobre los discursos e identidades de la derecha radical, que ilustra la pluralidad en el contexto brasileño y señala posibles agendas de investigación que tengan en cuenta las particularidades y los aspectos transnacionales, así como los procesos de radicalización dentro de diferentes clusters.

Palabras clave:
Derechas Radicales; radicalización; clústeres; democracia liberal; iliberalismo

Introduction²

In Western societies, the expansion of actors, movements and parties that put pressure on liberal democracies has been a cause for attention and concern. Under different labels, including, the Far Right (Fernandes; Machado, 2022; Hoeveler, 2020), the New Right (Cepêda, 2018; Gentile, 2018; Rocha, 2019) and Radical Right-Wing Populism (Betz, 2018; Mudde, 2014)), such groups largely have been analyzed in the traditions of political and social sciences (Mayer, 2020).

In the case of Brazil, some of these initiatives were brought together in the book O ódio como política: a reinvenção das direitas no Brasil (Gallego, 2018). This book is part of a collection that includes a series of works that sought to analyze the June Journeys and the pro-impeachment demonstrations against former President Dilma Rousseff as triggers of a political crisis in Brazil. The title of the collection is Tinta Vermelha (Red Ink, in English), and, the publisher’s note explains that the title refers to a speech given by Slavoj Žižek to the Occupy Wall Street protestors, where he said: “we have all the freedom we desire - the only thing that is missing is the ‘red ink’: we ‘feel free’ because we are deprived of the language to articulate our non-freedom” (Žižek apudGallego, 2018, p. 12, author’s translation).

This sentence emphasizes the constituting power of language in shaping realities, this language that is also (re)invented and discussed frequently in the academic field. In the case of the emergence of the New Right(s), producing a theoretical consensus within academic and activist fields is profoundly challenging. However, the scope and expansion of the New Right have led a high number of researchers to turn their eyes and attention to it, drawing upon a diverse and rich conceptual - and, fundamentally, linguistic - apparatus in an attempt to understand the phenomenon. This exercise reflects the richness of the scientific and academic world, which, in its committed and well-founded pursuit of knowledge, must acknowledge those who have previously walked the same paths.

The critique of European studies - particularly those grounded in populism as an analytical lens (Jarrín et al., 2022, p. 21) - has led to a greater isolation of Brazilian studies on the phenomenon. It is understood that the country’s colonial and dictatorial past signal a certain exceptionalism. However, Cas Mudde’s studies on the Radical Right in the European context, are also based on research carried out since the end of the 1960s.

Mudde has also combined forces with the Chilean Cristóbal Kaltwasser ( Mudde; Kaltwasser, 2017) to develop analyses that integrate specific realities. Considering the potential for dialogue, the present article seeks to rebuild the trajectory and discussion carried out in the context of a comparative study of youth activism in the Plural Radical Right in Brazil and Germany (Besen, 2023). An outline of the main dimensions of analysis in each country is built through a review of both European and Brazilian literatures.

The analysis begins by presenting the trajectory of European investigations, which have been distributed across the analytical lenses of populism, radicalization, and illiberalism. Next, we approach Brazilian studies exploring their advance through the interpretative paths of authoritarianism, ultraliberalism and neopentecostalism. Finally - and with both traditions in view - the article seeks to present and justify the construction of the hermeneutic category of the Plural Radical Right³ to describe actors, movements, and parties that attack the constitutional protection of minorities, as well as question state actions in the regulation of social inequalities. The article concludes by presenting a diagram developed from research conducted between 2019 and 2023 and from the literature review discussed herein. This diagram seeks to illustrate the plurality of the Brazilian context and identify future research agendas that take into account particular and transnational aspects of the plural radical right, while also reflecting on radicalization processes in different clusters.

Populist, radical and illiberal: investigating the Radical Right in Europe

European studies on the European far-right date back to the early twentieth century, with particular attention on many scholars who sought to interpret the conditions for the development of Nazism and its impacts on societies, especially through studies on authoritarianism and totalitarianism (Adorno, 1950/2019; Arendt, 1951/1989). Political scientist Nonna Mayer (2020) points out that, over the years, the main shifts that occurred with regards to the studies on this theme occurred with a shift from studies centered on extremism and fascism to those focused on radicalism and populism; from an interpretation focused on demand to one focused on supply; and from a predominant application of quantitative methods and electoral analysis to a gradual - though still relatively limited - use of qualitative methodologies.

In the European context, particularly within political science, it is common to distinguish between the studies of the far-right which focus on elements of demand and others that focus on supply. On the one hand, demand-side analysis focuses on factors that lead to a “predisposition” toward far-right ideas and movements; supply-side analysis, in turn, refers to the actors and strategies that promote and disseminate these ideas and opportunities. On the demand side, research often explores social, economic, political, and cultural factors that drive individuals to align with or identify with extremist agendas, actors, and movements. On the supply side, analyses include interpretations of activist groups, political leaders, mainstream and alternative media, and social networks, seeking to understand their strategies and how they construct their narratives to mobilize supporters and expand their reach.

Despite the differences, the boundaries become more blurred when we take a closer look at this literature. Most studies on the far right in Europe tend to focus on (1) socioeconomic explanations related to job insecurity (Hernández; Kriesi, 2016; Stockemer; Lentz; Mayer, 2018). There are also (2) sociopolitical explanations associated with the alienation of political elites, who are perceived as more distant, disconnected, or indifferent to popular needs (Zhirkov, 2014); (3) sociocultural explanations related to cultural changes in late modern societies, particularly the clash between post-modern and fundamentalist values, with a special focus on the issue of the reactions to multiculturalism (Ignazi, 1992; Mrozowicki et al., 2019). In addition, (4) some analyses point to a decline of neoliberal democracy and the intensification of repressive practices within the political regimes that came into being through democratic procedures (Castells, 2018; Runciman, 2018). Finally, there are (5) interpretations that revisit theories that were used to analyze Nazism and Fascism (Griffin, 2010, 2021; Traverso, 2019), incorporating psychological and psychoanalytic perspectives, where the idea of right extremism prevails as a “common pathological condition”, which could repeat itself in moments of crisis and social anomie (Scheuch; Klingemann, 1967).

The Dutch political scientist Cas Mudde (2007) revisits the European development of this field of study and notes that, between 1980 and 1995, there was a “war of words” in Western Europe. During this period, scholars proposed 28 different definitions of the far right, based on 58 distinct ideological traits, though a few gained greater prominence. Initially, one of the most used definitions was that offered by Ignazi (1992), that dealt with the existence of a “silent counter revolution” in a reaction against the spread of values he termed post-materialist. The author devised a scale differentiating spectral dimensions (positions along the left-right continuum), an ideological criterion (including, for instance, references to fascism), and finally an attitudinal measure (pro- or anti-system, meaning pro- or anti-democracy). This scale was used to differentiate between the new right and the old traditional right-wing parties across Europe.

In France, in 1984, Pierre-André Taguieff introduced the concept of populism to analyze some emerging European parties. Up to that point, the term had been used primarily to study political processes in Latin America, where it was believed that there was an “ample and lasting variety of left-wing and right-wing populism” (Wahl, 2020, p. 336). Taguieff was the first to interpret and label the ideology of the Frente Nacional (FN) as national populist, highlighting its combination of nationalism, xenophobia and demagogy in the name of “the people”.

In the English-language literature, however, Betz (1994) observed that the main distinction between the new parties and the traditional far right lay in the former’s acceptance of democratic rules and rejection of political violence. However, compared to the political center, these parties diverged insofar as they endorsed a radical transformation of the postwar democratic consensus, and, consequently, of the Welfare State and of the acceptance of a multicultural society. Finally, Betz also argued that these parties were populist both in their discourse-professing faith in common sense and in the moral superiority of the ordinary citizen, while offering simple solutions to complex problems - and in their political strategy, which centered on articulating a “politics of resentment” aimed at mobilizing people against the political class and the elites (Mayer, 2020).

Parallel to studies on populism are those that interpret the phenomenon as a revival of elements of historical fascism, albeit reconfigured in a contemporary guise. Roger Griffin (2010, 2021), a leading figure in these analyses, argues that one of the central elements of fascism, Palingenesis (national rebirth) remains present in the discourse of the new radical right, fostering conditions for the persistence of fascist ideologies within liberal democracies. Although explicit elements and symbols characteristic of past totalitarian regimes have been abandoned, Griffin proposes, in his more recent work (2021), that fascism may emerge through radical right-wing populism. Traverso (2019), however, through his concept of post-fascism, shares Griffin’s view of contemporary adaptations. Both scholars emphasize that the movements emerging in Europe since the 1960s - known as the “New Right”- were already developing a project aimed at challenging cultural hegemony.

With regards to the studies of populism,Mudde and Kaltwasser (2017) stand out as two of the main scholars. Radical Right Populism was defined by Mudde (2007) as the core ideology of groups and parties that combine three main elements: nativism (understood as a blend of nationalism and xenophobia), authoritarianism (the belief in a strictly ordered society), and populism (the framing of a pure people in opposition to corrupt elites). The term radical right - derived from the use of “radicalism” to explore the phenomenon - began to circulate in European studies in the mid-1990s, replacing the term extremism. The concept quickly gained ground because it carried less stigma and appeared more analytically distinct from fascism and Nazism.⁴

One of the demand theories that had the greatest impact in the European context was that of Betz (1994), who analyzed the political consequences of the social transformations. The author argues that urbanization, social mobility and the erosion of class structures and religion-based solidarity resulted in a more fluid and atomized society, weakening traditional party loyalties and fostering the so-called “politics of resentment” or “anti-politics”. Betz’s (1994) theory approaches the concept of the losers of modernization, reflecting on how globalization has generated groups that see themselves as adversely affected by socioeconomic changes. These individuals often attribute job losses and social instability to migratory flows, perceiving multiculturalism, cosmopolitanism, and universal norms as threats to their identities.

Within socioeconomic explanations, a number of studies link neoliberalism, understood as an economic policy that would lead to job insecurity and the flexibilization of labor relations, to the prioritization of the market as a mediator in social relations. Within this line of thought, one also finds interpretative theories that address the dualization of the labor market in capitalist societies. In general, these works are inspired by Standing (2014), who introduced the term precariat to designate a common and dangerous class that could politically oscillate between the far right and the far left, as well as being more susceptible to populist demagogy.

More recently, populism has been interpreted as a thin-ideology contrasting with those that would be understood as complete ideologies, such as liberalism, socialism and conservatism. Whereas these offer a system of thought with specific and practical political solutions, populism, on the other hand, would provide a simplified approach to the political world, one that can easily attach itself to a variety of different ideologies (Stanley, 2008; Wahl, 2020). Mudde (2019) argues that the populist far right should be regarded as a radical interpretation of mainstream values or even as a form of “pathological normality”. This argument is supported by an empirical analysis of party ideologies and voter attitudes.

This proposed paradigm shift has profound implications for understanding both the relationship between the far right and Western democracy, as well as the broader study of the phenomenon itself. Mudde (2016), for instance, suggests that the demand for populist far-right policies should be approached more as an assumption than as a mystery. The concept of “normal pathology” challenges the idea that the populist far right is entirely external or alien to the political and social system, defending instead that it reflects distorted or amplified aspects of the existent social and political norms.

Such an approach has also transformed how scholars regard voters, who for a long time were seen as emotive, irrational and motivated by resentment, instead of ideological convictions. Recent studies show how the votes for the Radical Right can be seen as “protest votes” (Mayer, 2020), demonstrating a rejection of other parties. Building on this idea, a growing body of research has emerged that interprets the rise of these groups, movements, and parties as part of a broader phenomenon of illiberalism (Laruelle, 2022). Illiberalism is a concept still under development in the social sciences, regarded by some as an ideology, yet its main feature lies in its intrinsic dependence on liberalism.

What is interesting in this new use of the concept is that it encourages a more profound analysis of liberalism itself and its scripts,⁵ challenging researchers to question the assumption that liberal values and policies are “intrinsically correct”. Apart from this, it also challenges the tendency to view groups classified as “illiberal” as extreme and threatening to the liberal democratic framework. By conceptualizing illiberalism as a response to, or critique of, liberal norms, one avoids creating a dichotomy between liberalism and illiberalism. Instead, it acknowledges that the relationship between the two is context-dependent and evolves over time and space. Illiberalism emerges from within liberalism, not as its existential opposite, but as a conjuncture linked to liberalism’s failure to fulfill its democratic objectives. This post-liberal approach to illiberalism competes with liberalism by employing its own conceptual language.

Laruelle (2022, p. 309) describes illiberalism as a new ideological universe that, “even if doctrinally fluid and context-dependent, is to some extent coherent”. Such a universe represents a reaction against liberalism in its “political, economic, cultural, geopolitical and civilizational [dimensions], positioning itself in the name of democratic principles and thanks to them (winning though popular vote). Their solutions are grounded in the nation or in sovereignty, favoring traditional hierarchies and a cultural homogeneity”. Ultimately, illiberalism would operate through a “shift from politics to culture, presenting itself as post-postmodern in its claims to rootedness in an age of globalization”.

Despite not being widely used in Brazilian and Latin American academic contexts, the concept of illiberalism presented here deserves attention for the way it challenges the notion of “inside” ad “outside” liberal democracy, emphasizing the idea of tension and calling for a deeper analysis of the contexts in which liberal democratic frameworks were formed in different countries. It also highlights how actors of the Radical Right appropriate this conceptual language, contesting meanings and constructing new narratives from within the liberal democratic context.

Authoritarian, ultraliberal and neopentecostal: investigations about the New Right in Brazil

The New Right in Brazil attracted significant attention both within the academic sphere and among the general public following the election of Jair Bolsonaro as president in 2018. Within these discussions, a clear division arose amongst those that saw the phenomenon as genuinely new (Chaloub; Perlatto, 2016; Gentile, 2018; Rocha, 2019) and those who viewed it only as the reemergence of the traditional right in new guises (Miguel, 2018; Pereira, 2015; Salles, 2017).

Pinheiro-Machado and Freixo (2019) observe that the 2013 June protests brought about two main changes to the Brazilian political landscape. First, they removed the Workers Party and associated movements from their protagonism in street mobilizations. Second, and relatedly, they marked the “discovery” of the streets by right-wing groups, who began to occupy spaces that, since the dictatorship, had been identified as places of progressive forces and movements. In the streets, one encountered a mix of extremist nationalist organizations, young people with anti-political rhetoric and diffuse liberalism, skinhead groups, advocates of military intervention, conservative and fundamentalist religious groups, as well as citizens engaged in anti-communist discourse or a generalized struggle against corruption.

In terms of interpretation, the researchers (Pinheiro-Machado; Freixo, 2019) identify two main lines of analysis. The first (1) relates to the global context of growing disillusionment with liberal democracy and the failures of traditional models of political representation. The second (2) concerns the exhaustion of the petista or lulista model, which was based on redistributive policies and an expanded role for the state, but which failed to advance the structural reforms necessary to deepen and radicalize Brazilian democracy.

The second line of analysis revisits the period following Dilma Rousseff’s 2014 reelection, arguing that attempts to secure “governability” failed amid growing discontent within the party’s traditional base and the broader left, in response to austerity measures, coupled with the continuation and intensification of Operation Car Wash, which uncovered new allegations of bribery and irregularities. These developments culminated in the protest calling for the ex-president’s impeachment, organized in 2015 and 2016, that represented a “selective indignation” against the Workers’ Party, fueled by conservative narratives disseminated through mainstream media and by conspiracy theories circulating on social networks and WhatsApp groups. The politicization of the judiciary, the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office, and the Federal Police is also identified as a fundamental factor for understanding the process that the authors describe as a de-democratization in Brazil.

Miguel (2018, p. 17, author’s translation) interprets this phenomenon as the resurgence of the Brazilian right, highlighting the “growing visibility and relevance of groups that openly adopted conservative or reactionary discourses”. For the author, the New Right, though plural in composition, shares a pragmatic convergence rooted in the perception of a common enemy. These groups emerged during the period of Workers’ Party governments, reshaping public debate in Brazil through their use of new technologies and growing access to traditional media platforms.

According to Miguel (2018), the New Right challenged the consensuses established since the end of the military dictatorship and the promulgation of the 1988 Constitution - such as the defense of democracy, respect for human rights, and the fight against social inequality. In the researcher’s view, these groups combine libertarianism, derived from the Austrian School of economics and influential in academic and activist circles in the United States; religious fundamentalism, particularly represented by the expansion of neo-Pentecostalism; and the revival of the “red scare/menace”, which revived anti-communism in the form of Bolivarianism. Libertarianism is characterized by the elevation of the market as the ultimate regulator of social relations and by the reduction of all rights to property rights, paired with an aversion to any form of social solidarity. For the proponents of this ideology, the rallying cry is “freedom,” a term used to amplify the oppositions first articulated by eighteenth-century liberals. Miguel argues that equality is perceived as a threat to freedom, the state as an obstacle to the market, and politics as a constraint on the economy.

Rocha, Solano and Medeiros (2021) also highlight the differences between the plural New Right and the traditional Right, breaking away from the democratic pact established with the promulgation of the “Citizen Constitution” in 1988. This new democratic order, described by Abranches (2018) as “coalition presidentialism,” is said to have broken with the political model of the military dictatorship, contributing to the gradual construction of a post-bourgeois public sphere increasingly aimed at the inclusion of socially subordinate groups. At the same time, this new arrangement encouraged right-wing groups that had been active during the military regime to attempt to adapt to the emerging political constraints The author argues that, after redemocratization, to openly identify as being right-wing became somewhat uncomfortable, reproducing an Argentine phenomenon that the literature refers to as the “ashamed right” (Power, 2000). This shame extended beyond politicians, also reaching supporters and voters, who began to conform to the new alternative public sphere, particularly during the height of lulismo, between 2006 and 2010.

This analysis is also present in Camila Rocha’s (2019) doctoral dissertation Mais Mises menos Marx: uma gênese da Nova Direita no Brasil which portrays the new right as a blend of ultraliberal and conservative currents, where the origin is related to the organization of the “counterpublics” (alternative public spheres) during this period. Rocha shows that, over those years, online spaces such as Orkut - and later Facebook - became arenas for meetings and debates amongst those who felt marginalized and unrepresented within the dominant public sphere, contributing to the spread of ultraliberal ideas. Her analysis traces back to the 1980s and to the creation of neoliberal think tanks and institutes, as well as to the rise of neo-Pentecostal organizations that gained institutional influence during Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s administrations (2003-2011).

Camila Rocha (2018) also examined New Right activism in detail, questioning the common assumption that this activism was financed by private sources. The researcher demonstrates that the movement’s emergence is mainly associated with the period following the pro-impeachment protests against Dilma Rousseff. Originating in online groups and forums, this activism was predominantly voluntary among young people. Many of these groups soon began to organize in-person protests, meetings, and training sessions (Bringel; Pleyers, 2019; Klüppel; Cruz; Cerri, 2021; Sousa et al., 2022). Their mobilization combined the defense of Christian values and the “traditional” family with the rejection of feminist demands and LGBTQIA+ equality movements (Codato; Bolognesi; Roeder, 2015). Religious groups, mainly Catholic and Protestant evangelical groups, also played a significant role in this activism (Severo; Weller; Araújo, 2021).

The motto “God, Homeland, Family, and Freedom”, widely adopted by the former Brazilian president and used with slight variations by New Right movements, also compels us to look back to the past and at the Ação Integralista Brasileira (AIB), a movement that had a similar motto and that, lead by journalist Plínio Salgado, mobilized a substantial portion of the Brazilian population in the 1930s (Gonçalves; Caldeira Neto, 2020).

The AIB was inspired by European fascism⁶ and became known for its aggressive rhetoric and paramilitary tactics. Together with the Sociedade de Defesa da Tradição, Família e Propriedade, known as TFP, the AIB was present at the famous March for the Family with God for Freedom, a landmark and foundational event of the Brazilian military dictatorship. Both groups can be understood as exponents of Brazilian clerical fascism. The “two Plínios”, Plínio Salgado and Plínio Correa de Oliveira, remain influential figures, and the traditions inaugurated by their groups provide elements and symbols later taken up by the New Right. Both were deeply shaped by Catholicism, making it essential to consider the role of religious influences in this context. Beyond the religious aspect, however, it was also through the influence of Adolpho Lindbergh - current president of the Instituto Plínio Corrêa de Oliveira (IPCO) - that the first works of neoliberalism were brought to Brazil. As Rocha (2019) notes, the 1946 translation of Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom was intended to curb the advance of the Catholic left and its associated agendas, such as agrarian reform.

In this regard, Pleyers (2020) highlights the central role of the neo-Pentecostal Church, which came to occupy the spaces in Brazilian favelas once filled by liberation Christianity, a movement that was harshly persecuted before and during the Brazilian military dictatorship. He argues that Bolsonaro’s electoral victory in 2018 forms part of a broader process of profound transformation initiated in the early 1980s and carried forward with continuity and strategic foresight for more than four decades by conservative religious actors. Dantas (2013), in turn, analyzes the shifting boundaries between the public and private spheres, as well as between politics and religion. Politics, he argues, is encroaching on the private sphere, while religion is reaching the public sphere. Within the neopentecostal context, Dominion Theology and Spiritual Warfare Theology play a fundamental role in understanding the political engagement of these churches. Dantas (2013) observes that, within neo-Pentecostalism, the battle between good and evil unfolds in both social and political arenas - through voting, electronic media, and property ownership. This battle aims at seizing political control of society, by securing elected offices, expanding parliamentary representation, and consolidating political power.

In summary, within the Brazilian context, the phenomenon has primarily been analyzed through the traits of authoritarianism and authoritarian personality, emphasizing the enduring influence of the dictatorial past and the erosion of the democratic pact established after 1988 (González; Baquero; Grohmann, 2021): through theories of neofascism (Cruz, 2019; Vasconcelos, 2021); as a metamorphosis of neoliberalism (Dardot; Laval, 2016; Safatle, 2020) also described as an ultraliberal tendency (Miguel, 2018; Rocha, 2018); and through the expansion of neo-Pentecostalism (Dantas, 2013; Lopes; Dantas, 2017; Teixeira, 2019; Teixeira; Barbosa, 2022) representing a deepening intersection between religion and politics.

The Plural Radical Right: radicalization and democratic straining

As discussed in the previous sections, the European and Brazilian contexts share few convergences in their analytical frameworks. In Brazil, there is a strong emphasis on the country’s historical and cultural particularities, and although some researchers trace the formation of these groups and parties back to the 1980s, the term New Right has become more common recently due to its temporal proximity. In Europe, on the other hand, these parties began to reemerge on the political scene as early as the 1960s, earning the label “New Right” (Minkenberg, 1992). In the twenty-first century, a new transformation has taken place, with parties such as the Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland, AfD), the National Front (Front National, FN), and the Freedom Party of Austria (Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs, FPÖ) being classified within what is conventionally referred to as the “fourth wave” of the far right.

Arzheimer (2019) dedicated his work to discussing the conceptual issues surrounding this fourth wave in Western Europe, arguing that, despite the different nomenclatures, research on the phenomenon has expanded and progressed, with the term radical right⁷ being most frequently used. This label draws on the work of Mudde (2016, 2019), who establishes the broad existence of the far-right and proposes a distinction between the extreme-right and the radical right. While both reject liberal democracy, the radical right is differentiated by its partial acceptance of democratic principles, such as popular sovereignty and majority rule. However, it remains opposed to constitutional protections for minorities (ethnic, political, religious), the separation of powers, and the rule of law (Mudde, 2016).

Despite the importance of the distinction developed in the European context and its widespread use in the literature, the recent incursions - into the three branches of government in Brazil, into the U.S. Capitol, and the threat to the German Parliament - put into question the statement about the acceptance of popular sovereignty and government sovereignty by the majority. In this manner, one can state that Arzheimer (2019) offers an alternative when stating that such movements present an ambiguous relation with liberal democracy, where, on the one hand, there is participation in democratic instances and the search for legislative and executive positions and, on the other, there is a constant breach of democratic norms, be it though the denial of the principle of equality or through the legitimization of political violence and radicalization.

In the Latin American context, researchers (Chaloub; Perlatto, 2016; Díaz, 2021; Gentile, 2020; Stefanoni, 2021) have identified multiple constellations within the new right, emphasizing the coexistence of diverse political identities. Gentile (2020) argues that we are facing a new phenomenon in which authoritarian thought and the Brazilian dictatorial legacy intertwine with Hayek’s conservative-liberal theories and Milton Friedman’s neoliberal doctrine. This interpretation aligns with Chaloub and Perlatto (2016), who underscore the plurality within the new right, or contemporary Brazilian right-wing, in which groups organize around a “common ideological-political platform, ranging from anti-Workers’ Party sentiment to anti-Bolivarianism […] passing through anti-politics and moral conservatism […] and extending to the traditional arguments of neoliberalism” (Gentile, 2020, p. 236, author’s translation).

The use of the term New Right(s)⁸ is justified both on temporal grounds and as a means of differentiating these movements from the mainstream or traditional right, also emphasizing the idea of plurality present among reference intellectuals, who do not form a “homogeneous and monolithic” bloc (Chaloub; Perlatto, 2016, p. 39, author’s translation). This plurality is likewise reflected in their modes of action within the public sphere: on the one hand, there would be those groups concerned with exerting direct influence on the ideological construction and the shaping of narratives capable of influencing the public debate; on the other hand, there would be the militant groups that concentrate on the organization of protests and the occupation of institutional spaces. Despite their differences, these groups would present complementarity, as the rhetoric right would provide the justifications and frameworks, while the militant wing would ensure political implementation.

Journalist Pablo Stefanoni (2021), in his recent book, La rebeldía se volvió de derecha, highlights the porous configurations of the plural New Right and their capacity to channel social indignation, by presenting themselves as a group that “questions” the system. These derechas, which the author also refers to in the plural, have demonstrated the ability to mobilize outrage in response to social realities, putting forward proposals to transform it. Stefanoni’s use of derechas in the plural underscores the diversity and complexity within right-wing movements and ideologies. In his book, he argues that right-wing politics and movements encompass a wide range of perspectives, factions and actors; recognizing that the right-wing spectrum is not a monolithic entity, but a heterogeneous constellation of political orientations. As examples, he points to the coexistence of conservative, nationalist, populist, neoliberalist and authoritarian currents. Moreover, the author states that the right should not be viewed as a fixed or static entity, but rather as one subject to internal debates, contradictions and changes over time.

Díaz (2021) defends that liberal democracy should not be the main reference point of political analyses, showing that there is no substantial difference between what is understood and analyzed in Latin America as the “new right” and that which is being understood in Europe as “illiberal conservatism”. Based on her ethnographic work and on interviews in Brazil, she defends the notion of a plural right, that includes diverse ideological expressions and takes into account the procedural nature of the consolidation of political subjects. To capture this dynamic, she places the notion of radicalization at the center of her analysis in order to account for this procedural character, understanding radicalization and authoritarianism as “diachronic social processes comprising the confluence of top-down attempts of (coercive) interpellation and bottom-up practices ofsubjectivation ” (Díaz, 2021, p. 4).

The researcher highlights the interplay between processes of neoliberalization and coercive mechanisms, in which movements and organizations are mobilized to compete for discursive and political hegemony. She also emphasizes that contemporary right-wing actors and phenomena are far from coherent, combining elements that resist alignment with established theoretical categories. From this perspective, the “new right” should not be reduced to specific political figures or to a fixed set of attributes; rather, it should be understood as a heuristic category for analyzing both the enduring traits and signs of renovation within contemporary right-wing projects.

Given these contributions from Latin-American - above all - and European Literature on the subject, the category, “Plural Radical Right”, is proposed here. The intention is to emphasize the notion of plurality - affirmed in the Latin-American context - and to differentiate from the traditional right through the adjective radical - in line with the European tradition. The “Plural Radical Right” thus operates as a heuristic category encompassing actors, groups, movements, and parties generate tensions within liberal democracy by attacking the constitutional protection of minorities (ethnic, religious, and economic), and by questioning state interventions aimed at regulating inequalities.⁹

The use of the word, “plural” acknowledges that such actors, groups, movements and parties have distinct characteristics in different regions of the world, acquiring elements related to the social context, national politics, and historical trajectories. The concept of radicalization, particularly in European and North American contexts, on the other hand has been widely used to analyze the trajectories of individuals involved in Islamic religious extremism (Hofmann, 2020; McCauley; Moskalenko, 2011; Sedgwick, 2010). In Brazil, this approach was also used in some studies (Begeres Bisneto, 2019; Gonçalves, 2014), which focused on the category of “terrorism”. While these concerns are legitimate, they have also contributed to a stigmatizing and reductionist view of radicalization, often associating it exclusively with global jihadism or Islamic fundamentalism. In this article, we adopt a broader and multidimensional definition, understanding radicalization as a process involving social, psychological, and cultural factors that contribute to the legitimation of hate speech, conspiracy theories, and the justification or practice of political violence (Adorno, 2022; Krasteva, 2017; Miller-Idriss, 2018a, 2018b).

In Brazil, research on the Radical Right remains heavily concentrated on what has been defined as “Bolsonarism”.¹⁰ However, recent research (Besen, 2025) alongside broader Brazilian literature on the subject, has revealed that this label is insufficient to capture the expansion of these groups and movements. To systematize the identified plurality and contribute to future research agendas, we identified distinct clusters and profiles within the Brazilian Radical Right. Drawing on findings from a study conducted for the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE)¹¹; on observations of networks made through a professional Instagram account over the past few years; as well as the review of national and international literature, we delineated seven clusters. The term cluster originates in data analysis and technology; however, it has been adopted in social sciences to refer to the grouping of subjects or variables into sets sharing one or more common characteristics. It also highlights the influence of algorithms, a phenomenon widely studied by Letícia Cesarino (2020, 2022), a leading scholar in digital research and the study of political manifestations on social networks.

Figure 1.
Diagram of clusters of the Brazilian Radical Right

Despite the boundaries between these groups being more blurred in practice, the examination of some of their agendas and key traits allowed for the initial identification and classification of seven clusters:

1. Patriots and pro-civilian gun ownership: They combine a nostalgia for the military with the defense of civilian armament, promoting a project to militarize society. They defend the preservation of an idealized national identity and frequently support authoritarian measures in the name of “order”;

2. Antifeminists: Self-proclaimed defenders of the traditional family, they strongly oppose what they call “gender ideology”. They tend to attack feminist movements, mobilizing both biological essentialism and arguments grounded in moral conservatism;

3. Evangelicals:¹² Characterized by their defense of anti-secularism, they seek greater religious influence in politics. Some strands follow Prosperity Theology, combining moral conservatism with an entrepreneurial view of faith and social life;

4. Monarchists: As well as defending aristocratic values, they are particularly focused on the fight of what they call “school indoctrination”. They propose the re-establishment of the monarchy, in its parliamentary and constitutional model;

5. Libertarians and Paleolibertarians: Combine a radical defense of the free market with socially conservative values. They uphold meritocracy and frequently oppose social policies and affirmative action;

6. Masculinists: Associated with the so-called “manosphere”,¹³ they center their critiques on what they describe as “radical” feminism and “progressivism”;

7. Traditionalists: They emphasize moral conservatism and the defense of a “natural” hierarchy. Influenced by traditionalist thinkers,¹⁴ they call for a return to premodern values and social structures.

Far from exhausting the possible intersections and existing definitions, the proposed diagram seeks to stimulate the development of research agendas directed not only toward the theorization of parties and leaderships that have received greater media attention, but also to a more profound analysis of the internal dynamics of these clusters. This includes the study of their particularities, relations and the discourses that circulate amongst them, allowing for the development of a more robust and wide-ranging theory. Such in-depth analysis is crucial for understanding the modes of operation and consolidation of the radical right, as well as for grounding strategies of resistance. It is equally important to recognize that many of these groups operate within liberal democratic frameworks, requiring close attention to how they participate and adapt to the democratic system, often leading to tensions within their structures without necessarily breaking them.

Final considerations

The current article revisited part of the complex trajectories of (in)definition surrounding the expansion of groups, actors, movements, parties, and leaders that share common characteristics, such as their attacks on constitutional rights of minorities and their opposition to state interventions aimed at reducing social inequalities. Unlike their predecessors, these groups have sought to integrate themselves into democratic processes and to influence them from within, advancing agendas that most external observers do not recognize as democratic.

Their electoral victories, combined with their significant discursive influence in the public sphere, have sparked increasing academic interest. Given the diversity of existing analyses, this study brought together Brazilian and European research, grounding the theoretical choice of framing these groups under the category of the plural Radical Right. The use of this term does not seek to unify the field, but to identify points of connection between studies of different regions, respecting the local and historical specificities. In this sense, it is understood that the word plural combined with the notion of the Radical Right is not simply stylistic, but essential to capture the diversity in profiles, strategies and discourses observed globally.

This approach engages directly with the literature that identifies the activation of movements and organizations in search of discursive and political hegemony. It also recognizes that contemporary radical right groups are not homogeneous and present internal contradictions, challenging rigid theoretical categorizations. Another fundamental point raised is the need to expand the concept of radicalization, which, historically, was applied to religious extremisms and to what was classified as “terrorism”. This reductionist perspective has contributed to the stigmatization of specific groups, neglecting a broader understanding of the social, psychological, and cultural processes that lead to the legitimation of hate speech and political violence. In this way, by expanding this definition, this study seeks to contribute to a more refined and less pathologizing understanding of the Radical Right.

In the Brazilian context, research remains heavily centered on what has been termed “Bolsonarism”. However, the data collected indicate that this category does not fully capture the plurality of groups and identities that have emerged in recent years. The analysis carried out allowed for the mapping of different clusters within this political field, with the aim of developing systematic and replicable methodologies for comparative investigations. Despite the gradual progress of qualitative studies, a gap persists in comparative research across different regions of the world.

Situating this phenomenon within the political and social system makes evident the need to consider the specific conditions through which liberal democracy develops in each context. The diagram presented in Figure 1 seeks to illustrate this plurality, highlighting points of convergence that justify grouping these different clusters under a single hermeneutic category. Far from offering a definitive conclusion, this article seeks to inspire and stimulate new comparative research that examines the processes of engagement and radicalization within the plural Radical Right, exploring in greater depth both their particularities and their transnational connections.

References

• ABRANCHES, Sérgio Henrique. Presidencialismo de coalizão: raízes e evolução do modelo político brasileiro. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2018.
• ADORNO, Sérgio França. O fracasso do controle legal dos crimes e da violência na sociedade brasileira contemporânea: questões para discussão: como alcançar saídas viáveis e socialmente legítimas sem comprometer a vigência da democracia na sociedade? Ciência e Cultura, São Paulo, v. 74, n. 4, p. 1-9, 2022. Disponível em: DOI: 10.5935/2317-6660.20220063 Acesso em:10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.5935/2317-6660.20220063
• ADORNO, Theodor W. Estudos sobre a personalidade autoritária. Tradução de Virginia Helena Ferreira da Costa, Francisco López Toledo Corrêa e Carlos Henrique Pissardo. São Paulo: Unesp, 1950/2019.
• ARENDT, Hannah. Origens do totalitarismo. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1989/1951.
• ARZHEIMER, Kai. Conceptual confusion is not always a bad thing - the curious case of European radical right studies. In: MARKER, K.; SCHMITT, A.; SIRSCH, J. (orgs.). Demokratie und Entscheidung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, 2019. p. 23-40. Disponível em: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24529-0_3. Acesso em:10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-24529-0_3
• BEGERES BISNETO, Victor. Fronts islamistas no Brasil: prenúncios de uma radicalização incompleta face ao fundamentalismo existencial. 379f. Tese (Doutorado em Sociologia) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2019. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8138/tde-12122019-170616/pt-br.php Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/8/8138/tde-12122019-170616/pt-br.php
• BÉRTOA, Fernando Casal; BOURNE, Angela. Prescribing democracy? Party proscription and party system stability in Germany, Spain and Turkey. European Journal of Political Research, v. 56, n. 2, p. 440-465, 2017. Disponível em: DOI: doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12179 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12179
• BESEN, Beatriz. Nos limiares do(a) político(a): (des/re)construindo trajetórias e narrativas de jovens ativistas das direitas radicais no Brasil e na Alemanha. 2023. Tese (Doutorado em Mudança Social e Participação Política). Escola de Artes, Ciências e Humanidades, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 2023. Disponível em: DOI:10.11606/T.100.2023.tde-08012024-121833. Acesso em: 10 jan. 2026.
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/T.100.2023.tde-08012024-121833
• BESEN, Beatriz. Youth activism in the radical right of Brazil and Germany: on the thresholds of politics. Cham: Springer, 2025. Disponível em: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-87635-6. Acesso em: 10 jan. 2026.
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-87635-6
• BETZ, Hans-Georg. Radical right-wing populism in Western Europe. Londres: Macmillan, 1994.
• BETZ, Hans-Georg. The radical right and populism. In: RYDGREN, Jens (ed.). The Oxford handbook of the radical right. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. p. 86-104. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/43520/chapter-abstract/364489668 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/43520/chapter-abstract/364489668
• BIBLIOTECA DIGITAL BRASILEIRA DE TESES E DISSERTAÇÕES. [Site institucional]. 2002. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://bdtd.ibict.br/vufind/ Acesso em: 17 fev. 2025.
  » https://bdtd.ibict.br/vufind/
• BRINGEL, Breno; PLEYERS, Geoffrey. June 2013, five years later: polarization, reconfiguration of activism, and challenges for the Brazilian left. In: PUZONE, V.; MIGUEL, L. M. (eds.). The Brazilian left in the 21st century: conflict and conciliation in peripheral capitalism [Marx, Engels, and Marxisms]. Londres: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. p. 237-257. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-03288-3 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-03288-3
• CASTELLS, Manuel. Ruptura: a crise da democracia liberal. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 2018.
• CEPÊDA, Vera. A nova direita no Brasil: contexto e matrizes conceituais. Mediações - Revista de Ciências Sociais, Londrina, v. 23, n. 2, p. 40-74, 2018. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/mediacoes/article/view/34801 Acesso em 10. jan. 2025.
  » https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/mediacoes/article/view/34801
• CESARINO, Letícia. Como vencer uma eleição sem sair de casa: a ascensão do populismo digital no Brasil. Internet & Sociedade, São Paulo, v. 1, n. 1, p. 91-120, 2020. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revista.internetlab.org.br/serifcomo-vencer-uma-eleicao-sem-sair-de-casa-serif-a-ascensao-do-populismo-digital-no-brasil/ Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://revista.internetlab.org.br/serifcomo-vencer-uma-eleicao-sem-sair-de-casa-serif-a-ascensao-do-populismo-digital-no-brasil/
• CESARINO, Letícia. O mundo do avesso: verdade e política na era digital. São Paulo: Ubu Editora, 2022.
• CHALOUB, B. Jorge; PERLATTO, Fernando. A nova direita brasileira: ideias, retórica e prática política. Insight Inteligência, Rio de Janeiro, n. 72, jan.-mar. 2016. [online]. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://insightinteligencia.com.br/a-nova-direita-brasileira-ideias-retorica-e-pratica-politica/ Acesso em: 10 jan. 2026.
  » https://insightinteligencia.com.br/a-nova-direita-brasileira-ideias-retorica-e-pratica-politica/
• CODATO, Adriano; BOLOGNESI, Bruno; ROEDER, Karolina Mattos. A nova direita brasileira: uma análise da dinâmica partidária e eleitoral do campo conservador. In: VELASCO E CRUZ, Sebastião; KAYSEL, André; CODAS, Gustavo (orgs.). Direita, volver, o retorno da direita e o ciclo político brasileiro. São Paulo: Editora Fundação Perseu Abramo, 2015. p. 115-144. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://bibliotecadigital.fpabramo.org.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/270/Direita-volver-Final.pdf Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://bibliotecadigital.fpabramo.org.br/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/270/Direita-volver-Final.pdf
• CRUZ, Natalia dos Reis. Neofascismo e conspiracionismo brasileiro: o Mídia Sem Máscara e o “Eixo do Mal”. Revista de História Comparada, Rio de Janeiro, a. 13, v. 13, n. 2, p. 216-257, 2019. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/RevistaHistoriaComparada/article/view/31341 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://revistas.ufrj.br/index.php/RevistaHistoriaComparada/article/view/31341
• DANTAS, Bruna S. D. A. Psicologia política das religiões: uma análise dos símbolos e ideologias da Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus. Revista Psicologia Política, Florianópolis, v. 13, n. 28, p. 489-506, 2013. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-549X2013000300006 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1519-549X2013000300006
• DARDOT, Pierre; LAVAL, Christian. A nova razão de mundo: ensaio sobre a sociedade neoliberal. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2016.
• DÍAZ, Belen. “Make (Neo-)Liberalism Cool Again”. Rear-view mirrors, creative destruction and right-wing youth political culture in Brazil. In: ENCONTRO ANUAL DA ANPOCS, 45., Anais eletrônicos [...]. 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://biblioteca.sophia.com.br/terminal/9666/acervo/detalhe/1255?guid=1771385848693 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://biblioteca.sophia.com.br/terminal/9666/acervo/detalhe/1255?guid=1771385848693
• FERNANDES, Victor José Alves; MACHADO, Daniel Spotorno Moreira. Discurso popular-democrático e o sujeito de negação bolsonarista. Revista de Ciências Sociais: RCS, Fortaleza, v. 53, n. 1, p. 23-56, 2022. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://periodicos.ufc.br/revcienso/article/view/71950 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://periodicos.ufc.br/revcienso/article/view/71950
• GALLEGO, Esther Solano (org.). O ódio como política. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2018.
• GENTILE, Fábio. A direita brasileira em perspectiva histórica. Plural: Revista de Ciências Sociais, São Paulo, v. 25, n. 1, p. 92-110, 2018. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://revistas.usp.br/plural/pt_BR/article/view/149017 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://revistas.usp.br/plural/pt_BR/article/view/149017
• GENTILE, Fábio. Uma direita “plural”: configurações ideológicas e organizações políticas da direita brasileira contemporânea. In: FARIA, Fabiano Godinho; MARQUES, Mauro Luiz Barbosa (orgs.). Giros à direita: análises e perspectivas sobre o campo líbero-conservador. Sobral: Editora SertãoCult, 2020. p. 222-240.
• GING, Debbie. Alphas, betas, and incels: theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities, v. 22, n. 4, p. 638-657, 2017. Disponível em: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1097184X17706401 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X17706401
• GLOBAL PROJECT AGAINST HATE AND EXTREMISM (GPAHE). GPAHE Unveils Extensive Profile of Far-Right Extremism in Brazil. 12 mar. 2024. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://globalextremism.org/post/gpahe-unveils-extensive-profile-of-far-right-extremism-in-brazil/ Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://globalextremism.org/post/gpahe-unveils-extensive-profile-of-far-right-extremism-in-brazil/
• GONÇALVES, Francisco Jorge. O combate à radicalização no extremismo islâmico: a contrarradicalização e a des-radicalização. Nação e Defesa, Lisboa, n. 137, p. 217-237, 2014. Disponível em: https://revistas.rcaap.pt/nacao/article/view/38317 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
• GONÇALVES, Leandro Pereira; CALDEIRA NETO, Odilon. O fascismo em camisas verdes: do integralismo ao neointegralismo. São Paulo: Editora FGV, 2020.
• GONZÁLEZ, Rodrigo Stumpf; BAQUERO, Marcello; GROHMANN, Luiz Gustavo Mello. Nova direita ou vinho velho em odres novos? A trajetória conservadora no Brasil do último século. Revista Debates, Porto Alegre, v. 15, n. 2, p. 9-44, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/debates/article/view/110792 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/debates/article/view/110792
• GRIFFIN, Roger. Modernismo y fascismo: la sensación de comienzo bajo Mussolini y Hitler. v. 305. Madrid: Ediciones Akal, 2010.
• GRIFFIN, Roger. ¿Vox qualis populi?: La ubicación de la derecha radical populista dentro de la ultraderecha. Encrucijadas: Revista Crítica de Ciencias Sociales, v. 21, n. 2, p. 1-26, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/encrucijadas/article/view/92645/67457 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/encrucijadas/article/view/92645/67457
• HAWLEY, George. The alt-right’s goals and predecessors. In: HAWLEY, George. Making sense of the alt-right. New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2017. p. 11-50. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.7312/hawl18512-003. Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.7312/hawl18512-003
• HAYEK, Friedrich August von. O caminho da servidão. 5. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Instituto Liberal, 1990.
• HERNÁNDEZ, Enrique; KRIESI, Hanspeter. The electoral consequences of the financial and economic crisis in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, v. 55, n. 2, p. 203-224, 2016. Disponível em: doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12122 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12122
• HOEVELER, Rejane Carolina. A reorganização da extrema direita latino-americana no ascenso bolsonarista: fóruns e redes organizativas. In: FARIA, Fabiano Godinho; MARQUES, Mauro Luiz Barbosa (orgs.). Giros à direita: análises e perspectivas sobre o campo líbero-conservador. Sobral: Editora SertãoCult, 2020. p. 71-89.
• HOFMANN, David C. How “alone” are lone-actors? Exploring the ideological, signaling, and support networks of lone-actor terrorists. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, v. 43, n. 7, p. 657-678, 2020. Disponível em: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1057610X.2018.1493833 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610X.2018.1493833
• IGNAZI, Piero. The silent counter‐revolution: Hypotheses on the emergence of extreme right‐wing parties in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, v. 22, n. 1, p. 3-34, 1992. Disponível em: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00303.x Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1992.tb00303.x
• JARRÍN, Alvaro; JUNGE, Benjamin; MITCHELL, Sean; CANTERO, Lucía; BIONDI, Karina (orgs.). Democracia precária: etnografias de esperança, desespero e resistência no Brasil. Porto Alegre: Zouk, 2022.
• KLÜPPEL, Giuvane de Souza; CRUZ, Matheus Mendanha; CERRI, Luiz Fernando. Jovens, uma nova “nova direita” e suas esquerdas: um estudo sobre a posição política de jovens brasileiros. Revista de História da UEG, Goiânia, v. 10, n. 2, p. e022108, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.revista.ueg.br/index.php/revistahistoria/pt_BR/article/view/1160 3 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.revista.ueg.br/index.php/revistahistoria/pt_BR/article/view/1160
• KRASTEVA, Anna. Re/De/constructing far-right youth. In: LAZARIDIS, G.; CAMPANI, G. (eds.). Understanding the populist shift: othering in a Europe in crisis. Londres: Routledge, 2017. p. 150-178.
• LARUELLE, Marlène. Illiberalism: A conceptual introduction. East European Politics, v. 38, n. 2, p. 303-327, 2022. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.illiberalism.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Laruelle-Illiberalism-a-conceptual-introduction.pdf Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.illiberalism.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Laruelle-Illiberalism-a-conceptual-introduction.pdf
• LOPES, Ana Paula Hermoso; DANTAS, Bruna Suruagy do Amaral. Representações sociais da cura divina no contexto neopentecostal. Psicologia em Revista, Belo Horizonte, v. 23, n. 2, p. 771-789, 2017. Disponível em: https://dx.doi.org/10.5752/P.1678-9563.2017v23n2p771-789. Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.5752/P.1678-9563.2017v23n2p771-789
• LUCID SOFTWARE INC. Lucidchart. Software de diagramação online. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.lucidchart.com Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.lucidchart.com
• MARIANO, Ricardo. Neopentecostalismo: os pentecostais estão mudando. 1995. 251f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Sociologia) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, 1995.
• MAYER, Nonna. Political science approaches to the far right. In: ASHE, Stephen D.; BUSHER, Joel; MACKLIN, Graham; WINTER, Aaron (orgs.). Researching the far right: Theory, method and practice. Londres: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2020. p. 17-31.
• MCCAULEY, Clark; MOSKALENKO, Sophia. Friction: How radicalization happens to them and us. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
• MIGUEL, Luis Felipe. A reemergência da direita brasileira. In: GALLEGO, Esther Solano (org.). O ódio como política. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2018. p. 17-26.
• MILLER-IDRISS, Cynthia. The extreme gone mainstream: Commercialization and far right youth culture in Germany. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018a.
• MILLER-IDRISS, Cynthia. Youth and the radical right. In: RYDGREN, Jens (org.). The Oxford handbook of the radical right. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018b. p. 348-365.
• MINKENBERG, Michael. The new right in Germany: The transformation of conservatism and the extreme right. European Journal of Political Research, v. 22, n. 1, p. 55-81, 1992.
• MROZOWICKI, Adam; TRAPPMANN, Vera; SEEHAUS, Alexandra; KAJTA, Justyna. Who is a right-wing supporter? On the biographical experiences of young right-wing voters in Poland and Germany. Qualitative Sociology Review, v. 15, n. 4, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.15.4.10. Acesso em:10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.15.4.10
• MUDDE, Cas. Populist radical right parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
• MUDDE, Cas. Fighting the system? Populist radical right parties and party system change. Party Politics, v. 20, n. 2, p. 217-226, 2014. Disponível em: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1354068813519968 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068813519968
• MUDDE, Cas, ed. The populist radical right: a reader. Londres: Routledge, 2016. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9781315514574/populist-radical-right-cas-mudde Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9781315514574/populist-radical-right-cas-mudde
• MUDDE, Cas; KALTWASSER, Cristóbal Rovira. Populism: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
• MUDDE, Cas. The far right today. Nova Iorque: John Wiley & Sons, 2019.
• OLIVEIRA FILHO José Ivan de. Os primórdios do bolsonarismo: a utopia regressiva dos redpills. 2024. 261f. Tese (Doutorado em Sociologia) - Programa de Pós-Graduação em Sociologia, Centro de Humanidades, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, 2024. Disponível em: https://repositorio.ufc.br/bitstream/riufc/77687/3/2024_tese_jiofilho.pdf Acesso em: 10 jan. 2026.
  » https://repositorio.ufc.br/bitstream/riufc/77687/3/2024_tese_jiofilho.pdf
• PEREIRA, Mateus Henrique de Faria. Nova direita? Guerras de memória em tempos de Comissão da Verdade (2012-2014). Varia Historia, Belo Horizonte, v. 31, n. 57, p. 863-902, 2015. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/vh/a/NcJrcx93VSTVnnQnHVGXLYf/ Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/vh/a/NcJrcx93VSTVnnQnHVGXLYf/
• PINHEIRO-MACHADO, Rosana; FEIXO, Adriano (orgs.). Brasil em transe: Bolsonarismo, nova direita e desdemocratização. Tijuca: Oficina Raquel, 2019.
• PLEYERS, Geoffrey. A “guerra dos deuses” no Brasil: da teologia da libertação à eleição de Bolsonaro. Educação & Sociedade, Campinas, v. 41, e233566, 2020. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.233566 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/ES.233566
• POLLARD, John. “Clerical Fascism”: context, overview and conclusion. In: FELDMAN, Matthew; TURDA, Marius; GEORGESCU, Tudor (orgs.). Clerical fascism in interwar Europe. Londres: Routledge, 2013. p. 221-234.
• POWER, Timothy J. The political right in post-authoritarian Brazil: elites, institutions, and democratization. Filadélfia: Penn State Press, 2000.
• ROCHA, Camila. O boom das novas direitas brasileiras: financiamento ou militância? In: GALLEGO, Esther Solano (org.). O ódio como política. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2018. p. 47-52.
• ROCHA, Camila. “Menos Marx, mais Mises”: uma gênese da nova direita brasileira (2006-2018). 2019. 233f. Tese (Doutorado em Ciência Política) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, 2019.
• ROCHA, Camila; SOLANO, Esther; MEDEIROS, Jonas. The Bolsonaro paradox: The public sphere and right-wing counterpublicity in contemporary Brazil. Cham: Springer, 2021.
• RUNCIMAN, David. How democracy ends. Londres: Profile Books, 2018.
• SAFATLE, Vladimir. A economia é a continuação da psicologia por outros meios: sofrimento psíquico e o neoliberalismo como economia moral. In: SAFATLE, Vladimir; SILVA JUNIOR, Nelson da; DUNKER, Christian (orgs.). Neoliberalismo como gestão do sofrimento psíquico. São Paulo: Autêntica, 2020. p. 11-38.
• SALLES, Leonardo Gaspary. Nova direita ou velha direita com wi-fi?: uma interpretação das articulações da “direita” na internet brasileira. 2017. 169f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Sociologia Política) - Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 2017.
• SCHEUCH, Erwin; KLINGEMANN, Hans-Dieter. Theorie des Rechtsradikalismus in westlichen Industriegesellschaften. Hamburger Jahrbuch für Wirtschafts-und Gesellschaftspolitik, v. 12, p. 11-29, 1967.
• SEDGWICK, Mark. The concept of radicalization as a source of confusion. Terrorism and Political Violence, v. 22, n. 4, p. 479-494, 2010. Disponível em: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09546553.2010.491009 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09546553.2010.491009
• SEVERO, Ricardo Gonçalves; WELLER, Wivian; ARAUJO, Gabrielle Caseira. Jovens de direita e extrema-direita: posicionamentos políticos no ensino médio. Linhas Críticas, Brasília, v. 27, p. 1-24, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/linhascriticas/article/view/36319 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/linhascriticas/article/view/36319
• SOUSA, Renan Silva de; OLIVEIRA FILHO, Pedro de; ARAÚJO, Jônatas Barros; VIEIRA, Dandara Virgínia Machado. A identidade da direita em narrativas de seus militantes numa universidade brasileira. Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão, Brasília, v. 42, p. 1-16, 2022. https://www.scielo.br/j/pcp/a/4MqfjZ8tbRFM7jpxbkgDc4h/ Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/pcp/a/4MqfjZ8tbRFM7jpxbkgDc4h/
• STANDING, Guy. O precariado e a luta de classes. Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais, Coimbra, v. 103, p, 9-24, 2014. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://journals.openedition.org/rccs/5521 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://journals.openedition.org/rccs/5521
• STANLEY, Ben. The thin ideology of populism. Journal of Political Ideologies, v. 13, n. 1, p. 95-110, 2008. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1080/13569310701822289 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/13569310701822289
• STEFANONI, Pablo. ¿La rebeldía se volvió de derecha?: Cómo el antiprogresismo y la anticorrección política están construyendo un nuevo sentido común (y por qué la izquierda debería tomarlos en serio). Santa Fé: Siglo XXI Editores, 2021.
• STOCKEMER, Daniel; LENTZ, Tobias; MAYER, Danielle. Individual predictors of the radical right-wing vote in Europe: a meta-analysis of articles in peer-reviewed journals (1995-2016). Government and Opposition, v. 53, n. 3, p. 569-593, 2018. DOI: doi:10.1017/gov.2018.2 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2018.2
• TAGUIEFF, Pierre-André. La rhétorique du national-populisme. Mots. Les langages du politique, v. 9, n. 1, p. 113-139, 1984. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.persee.fr/doc/mots_0243-6450_1984_num_9_1_1167 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.persee.fr/doc/mots_0243-6450_1984_num_9_1_1167
• TAYLOR, Blair. Alt-right. In: CASEY, Zachary A. (ed.). Encyclopedia of critical whiteness studies in education. Leiden: Brill Sense, 2020. p. 15-22.
• TRAVERSO, Enzo. Do fascismo ao pós-fascismo. Revista de Estudos e Pesquisas sobre as Américas, Brasília, v. 13, n. 2, p. 12-44, 2019. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/repam/article/view/26801 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://periodicos.unb.br/index.php/repam/article/view/26801
• TEIXEIRA, Jacqueline M. A conduta universal: governo de si e políticas de gênero na Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus. 2019. Tese (Doutorado em Ciências) - Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas, Universidade de São Paulo, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2019.TDE-30052019-103135. Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2019.TDE-30052019-103135
• TEIXEIRA, Jacqueline M.; BARBOSA, Olívia A. A mulher e a família: agendas pentecostais na disputa pela gramática dos direitos humanos. (Syn)Thesis, Rio de Janeiro, v. 15, n. 1, p. 89-105, 2022. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/synthesis/article/view/69311 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/synthesis/article/view/69311
• VASCONCELOS, Francisco Thiago Rocha. A “guerra cultural” neofascista no Brasil: entre o neoliberalismo e o nacional-bolchevismo. REVHIST - Revista de História da UEG, Goiânia, v. 10, n. 2, p. e022101, 2021. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://www.revista.ueg.br/index.php/revistahistoria/pt_BR/article/view/11549 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://www.revista.ueg.br/index.php/revistahistoria/pt_BR/article/view/11549
• WAHL, Klaus. The radical right: biopsychosocial roots and international variations. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.
• ZHIRKOV, Kirill. Nativist but not alienated: A comparative perspective on the radical right vote in Western Europe. Party Politics, v. 20, n. 2, p. 286-296, 2014. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068813511379 Acesso em: 10 jan. 2025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068813511379

• ²
  I acknowledge the support of the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), Grant no. 2024/01520-2.
• ³
  The expression Plural Radical Right is adopted here as a translation of the Portuguese direitas radicais and Spanish derechas radicales. In English, the conventional form is the singular radical right, which does not lend itself naturally to the plural. The formulation “Plural Radical Right” is therefore a deliberate analytical choice, reflecting the emphasis on heterogeneity developed in the analysis carried out in this article.
• ⁴
  In post-war Germany, both left-wing and right-wing extremism were considered anti-democratic and anti-constitutional. The parties and groups labeled this way were subject to vigilance and, in some cases, were banned. However, the radicals, despite being in opposition to certain constitutional principles, were seen as less threatening and did not face the same procedures. Currently, the concept of “militant democracy” is used to examine the democratic answers to political extremism, including policies that ban parties and the vigilance of movements. Decisions with regards to these groups are taken by the Ministry of the Interior, without the need for legislative review. Recent studies have discussed the effectiveness of these mechanisms in controlling radicalization. For further information on the ban policy in Germany, see Bértoa and Bourne (2017).
• ⁵
  To understand the five scripts of liberalism and the threats related to it, see Liberalism(s), illiberalism(s), and their inner tensions, in Laruelle (2022).
• ⁶
  Pollard (2013) defines the term “clerical fascism” as a means of including individuals, movements and regimes, or simply moments where Christian religion and fascism meet, both in terms of its geographical dissemination and of the Christian denominations involved. This means that it is not limited to Catholicism, but also includes different forms of Protestantism and other extremist churches. Some Brazilian groups that combine religion and extremism, such as the integralist lineage, as well as the heirs of the Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property, are still present in the form of organizations such as IPCO (Instituto Plínio Corrêa de Oliveira), Associação Cívica Arcy Lopes Estrella, Ação Integralista Revolucionária, Frente Integralista Brasileira (FIB), and the Movimento Integralista Linearista Brasileiro. With different levels of radicalization, these groups are institutional organizations; however, Integralism has served and continues to serve as an inspiration for the emergence of neo-Nazi groups and cells, such as the Carecas do Subúrbio and Carecas do ABC, as well as groups associated with White Power. The work of Gonçalves and Caldeira Neto (2020) focuses primarily on the Integralists, their history, and later branches that gave rise to some contemporary movements.
• ⁷
  In the North-American context, there is also a wide universe of research on the theme that gained prominence after the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Due to the scope of the article, such studies were not examined, which does not annul the recognition of the great influence and exchange that exists between what is understood as Alt Right and the Brazilian plural New Right. There, the Conservative Right has been differentiated from the Alt-Right. More recently, within this framework, the concept of Alt-Lite has also been proposed, referring to a “lighter” version of the alternative right. Hawley (2017) explains that the definition is somewhat nebulous, but that the Alternative Right encompasses a range of individuals who identify as right-wing, while placing white racial supremacy at the center of their agendas. Taylor (2020) clarifies that the Alt-Right includes “white nationalists, ‘race realists,’ neo-Nazis, far-right academics, esoteric anti-modernists, and the misogynistic ‘manosphere.’” This diversity is reflected in the distinction between the Alt-Right, which openly embraces white nationalism, fascism, or Nazism, and the Alt-Lite, which advocates civic rather than racial nationalism and admits the participation of Jews, gay men, and people of color. What unites them is the belief that “all men are created unequal” (Taylor, 2020, p. 15).
• ⁸
  In both Portuguese and Spanish scholarship, authors use the terms novas direitas or nuevas derechas (plural) as well as nova direita or nueva derecha (singular).
• ⁹
  Here it is important to highlight that there is a call for the State to act fighting the inequalities attributed to affirmative policies and ones of redistribution. These groups position themselves as aggrieved, interpreting state actions in intersectional terms as coercive. In the author’s research (Besen, 2023), analyses are presented on how discourses promoting social justice are framed as forms of state coercion.
• ¹⁰
  On researching on the 17th February 2025 works that include in their title the word “bolsonarism” at the Biblioteca Digital Brasileira de Teses e Dissertações 233 results were found. On expanding to summaries this number grew to 912.
• ¹¹
  Part of these clusters were also identified in the investigation process carried out for the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) report, in relation to the Brazilian active groups within what they refer to as “extreme right” (Global Project..., 2024).
• ¹²
  Despite many studies concentrating and identifying “neopentecostalism” (Mariano, 1995) as the lineage related to the rise of the plural Radical Right, this has been questioned and expanded, considering that Baptist groups, as well as traditional pentecostal churches have also influenced and taken part in and disputed spaces within the public sphere, such as roles and positions within the State.
• ¹³
  “Masculinist” is proposed as a translation for “manosphere”, a concept coined in the United States to define groups that revolve around the “red pill philosophy”, involving a heterogeneous collection that is united around the “movement for the rights of men”. Oliveira Filho (2024) presented the red pill as “a way of seeing the world as decadent and pressing”, positioning men as “victims of “progressivism”, “modernism” and “feminism”. Reacting to what is perceived as violence, the redpill uses “troll” humor in the pursuit of provocation and in small cells of intellectual formation aimed at reclaiming the “lost high culture” (Oliveira Filho, 2024, p. 9). According to Ging (2017), the “manosphere” encompasses factions of nerd or beta masculinities, as well as conservative or alpha masculinities. Unlike groups that are essentially anti-feminist, masculinists prioritize male participation, advancing discourses of mutual support and the promotion of “techniques of personal development or self-improvement”.
• ¹⁴
  The original influences of Traditionalism are Julius Evola and René Guenón, however in the context of Brazilian groups, Aleksander Dugin stands out with the “Fourth Political Theory” and Olavo de Carvalho with his critique to “cultural marxism”. To understand more about the influence of Traditionalism in Brazilian groups see Vasconcelos (2021).
• Data Availability
  The entire dataset used in this study is available within the article
• Statement on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
  Assistance from the ChatGPT model (OpenAI, GPT-5 version) was used to convert part of the references from APA to ABNT format, in an interaction dated September 25, 2025. The verification, checking, and final correction of the references were conducted manually by the author and the editor.

• Editors
  Debora Rezende de Almeida
  Rebecca Neaera Abers

Data availability

The entire dataset used in this study is available within the article

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  18 May 2026
• Date of issue
  2026

History

• Received
  17 July 2024
• Accepted
  05 Aug 2025