Talk:Centre-right politics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Centre-right)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Politics (Rated Stub-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Conservatism (Rated Stub-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled, Early thread[edit]

This page contradicts the New Democrats page because the centre-right article claims that Republicans in America best align with this idea, while the New Democrats page claims that modern day American Democrats align with it. Ashwinr 08:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

This page seems to be part of a set of pages created by a Briton. It probably should be incorporated into a page that is more representative of the worldwide center-right (or centre-right, in Commonwealth English). I don't even know where to start. Great fodder for you political types out there. Research away. Fuzzform 06:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I will continue to add to the list of parties later. Anyone else is of course welcome to beat me to it. Just one note: I was intending the list to be in alphabetical order by country. Tamino 18:40, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I just expanded the list to include a whole load of centre-right parties. Hope it proves useful. --CTerry 15:26, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


I've noticed the addition, removal and re-addition of Kadima to the list. Although I don't think that it is vandalism (though the person who removed it thought so), could someone explain whether it is centre-right or not? I've always heard it refered to as "centrist". Tamino 15:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Kadima is centrist. I know that because I'm a part of the party and many people like Peres, Itzik, Hermesh and Ramon came from the labour party (cetre-left).

Kadima sees itself as centrist and you can check it on Kadima's website. thanks.

likud is centre-right. you can check on the israeli wikipedia also (tal)

Isnt Eastern and centol europe dominated by centre right forces?

Republican party is not a centre-right[edit]

The Republican Party of the United States is not and will never be a centre-right party. Centre-rights believe in government involvement in the economy and thats something the Republican party is totally against The Democrat party of the United States should be listed here instead.

I would agree their support for "a welfare state of some form" is pretty lagging, admittedly there are certain members whose views could be described as centre-right (ie. Arnold Schwarzenneger) but the Bush administration itself has followed a pretty rightwing agenda since 2000 I think. I said this before on the discussion page for centre-left I am not crazy about the idea of having articles to describe differant political positions of parties in the Centre, especially not if they are going to be listed because these definitions are usually superificial and subject to constant change depending on the party's leadership. My suggestion would be to at least remove the lists of political parties from both the centre-right and centre-left articles, use examples of various governments and political parties under certain leaders, but do not list political parties as being ideologically centre-right or centre-left because it is pretty misleading! I won't do it myself instead I will leave it to other editors but I would highly suggest it. (Canadianpunk77 19:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC))

The Republicans are most certainty center-right, if not further left. The statement that they do not believe in government involvement in the economy is laughable, considering their policies during their most recent term in power.

I would go one further in arguing that there is no longer an American Center-Right party, due to the shifts of both major parties to the left.(Dockimble (talk) 11:43, 9 June 2009 (UTC))

The current political system known to the average, and yes, I am assuming you are average, is limited to a small slice of the political spectrum--on the left. Far right is facism. Far left is socialism. Communism is to the right of socialism. Nationalism is to the left of facism. (talk) 09:22, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Never heard anywhere before that Communism is to the right of Socialism! Maybe to the right of Trotskyism, but not mainstream socialism!

Additonally, I would be interested in what the editor meant who added the section differentiating Reaganism and Thatcherism. (Other than the fact that Reagan never advocated a poll tax, at least publically, because in the US that would necessitate a constitutional amendment.) (talk) 04:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Communism is the farthest left of far left economics. Communism (stateless socialism with no private property) Socialism (state socialism with no private property) Fascism (state socialism with private property) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

@origiinal poster, you must get your information from NPR or MSNBC... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Republican Party may be seen as just center in a lot of peoples eyes. it is left of the center-right paleocons, old right, libertarians, and very conservative people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

That's like saying Socialists are in the center because they're to the right of Anarcho-communists and Anarcho-Marxists. It doesn't get more right wing than Libertarians! The opposite of a libertarianism is an anarcho-communism. ::The opposite of autarky is autonomism.
The Republican Party right now is firmly occupying the space of "classical liberal" which is simply 'right wing'. They tried to voucherize Medicare. They tried to privatize Social Security. They want to gut welfare. They've been trying to block infrastructure spending. They're definitely not 'modern/social liberals". In my humble opinion, "modern liberalism" is the true center. Ancaps are obviously far right. Minarchists, I believe are, too. The only way to get out of being in the far right is to acknowledge that government should play a role in infrastructure, defense, police, courts, and firefighting. This makes someone simply "right wing". To advance further and say that government should play a role in education, healthcare, and civil rights makes a person a 'centrist' and a 'social liberal'. Everything past there is degrees of left.

"Want To Do" vs. "Did"[edit]

Let's be clear about the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the United States of America. Pointless rhetoric about what people or factions within the parties "want to do," versus historical fact about what the parties "did." Democrats wanted to keep slavery if it would prevent or end a war between the North and South. Republicans ended slavery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessemckay (talkcontribs) 06:45, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

More arguments in favour of change[edit]

The articles for right-wing politics and left-wing politics do not contain a reference list of political parties either as such lists can never be fully accurate, so again why should the centre-right and centre-left articles? And why is the BNP listed as a centre-right party in Spain??? You definately could not be reffering to the BNP in Britain! If there is another BNP in Spain it is not listed in wikipedia, maybe somebody should create an article for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadianpunk77 (talkcontribs) 19:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


I removed the french Union for a Popular Movement. It is not a centre-right party.

What is it then? It is generally agreed as being a centre-right party, indeed wikipedia's own article on the UMP starts with "The UMP is the main centre-right party in France."--CTerry 20:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I have French friends and it is center-right without a doubt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:44, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


I'm sure this definition is inaccurate. The term centre-right is frequently used to describe individuals.Nwe 11:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments next to party names[edit]

Right-wing does not mean far right it includes center-right as well. These additional comments next to the parties that say things like "mixture of center-right and right-wing" must go especially since they are highly debateable and not cited. Center-right is called center-right because of the party's position on the political spectrum; it can't be both center-right and far right or "a mixture" of center-right and far right. It can only be one, center-right or far right and many of these political parties are simply not far right.--Lucky Mitch (talk) 15:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it can be a mixture of centre-right and right-wing. As you note, it is a spectrum. Some parties are going go be farther to fall between centre-right and far-right.--RLent (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Great Britain[edit]

The Centre-Left page has the United Kingdom down as Great Britain, since Northern Ireland was split from it. Using the same logic, the same should be true here. -- (talk) 23:12, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Inaccurate Info[edit]

I totally disagree with this part.

"Parties of the centre-right generally support liberal democracy, capitalism, the market economy, private property rights and the existence of the welfare state in some form."

I am a center-right type of a guy, I do not support Liberal Democracy or a welfare state. That seems to be a bit of a biased assessment. I'm removing the weasel words.

K8cpa (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

If the definition of center-right doesn't describe you, then maybe you are not a member of the center right. There's nothing wrong with the definition.--RLent (talk) 17:16, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you are confusing 'liberal' with 'modern liberal', 'democracy' with 'mob rule', and 'welfare state' with 'socialism'. If not than you are not center right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


No other eurosceptic parties are included on this list, why is UKIP an execption? As well as their Europe Policy, they call for a freeze on immigration that is much more synnonymous with the far right, let alone "centre-right". Guesty1 (talk) 20:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Agree. See also below. BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


This should probably be broken-up into two pages, one for center-right and one for the list of parties. Lycurgus (talk) 08:28, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Agree. And the list is a little bit contentious isn't it? BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Contentious inclusions in list[edit]

I have removed UKIP from the list, as suggested and not opposed by a previous editor above. I have removed the Danish People's Party too, as the article itself says that so defining them is contentious. I believe that Italy's PdL should be removed too, as they are a coalition of far right, right and centre-right parties (the PdL page currently describes them as centre right, but in the discussion some editors have disagreed). Shouldn't only parties that are uncontroversially, widely accepted as centre right be included in such a list? BobFromBrockley (talk) 13:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

With no-one weighing in, I have removed PdL as well as Dutch Party for Freedom, which I think are widely agreed to be riht-wing not centre-right. I have put dubious tags by other parties, such as Indian BJP and Israeli Likud. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

This is simply ridicoulus. The People of Freedom is a centre-right party with any discussion. I want to remember you that the People of Freedom is a member of the European People s' Party, like the Spanish PP and the French UMP.-- (talk) 14:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

At least three editors have challenged the use of the word "centre-right" in relation to the PdL. This surely makes it contentious. BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The user BobFromBrockley is not credible on the politics questions because he is proud to be Marxist so he hates the global system and the centre-right parties. This is Wikipedia, we need serious users, not people like this guy.-- (talk) 18:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Says the anonymous editor with no other contributions to Wikipedia...
This is the comment I just left at the PdL talk page: Maybe [centre-right] means something radically different in Italy than it does in the rest of the world. Perhaps in Italy the term includes fascists. Giuseppe Ciarrapico of the PdL in 2009: "Fascism has given me suffering and joy but I never disowned it... I am a fascist, but in a cultural, not a political way."[1] Alessandra Mussolini in 2009, asked if she considered herself a fascist: "I am Alessandra Mussolini, proud of everything."[2] In 2007, when she made xenophobic remarks about Romanian immigrants, causing the collapse of the ITS bloc in the EU, The Guardian described ITS as "EU's ultra-rightwing MEP group" and "an extremist grouping", and her as "the Italian neo-fascist".[3] Bloomberg, writing in October 2008: "Berlusconi has refused to name an heir, creating a contest between the country's most popular and ambitious rightists. They also include Rome Mayor Gianni Alemanno, who on Sept. 7 said fascism as a philosophy was not an 'absolute evil,' and Defense Minister Ignazio La Russa, who a day later praised Italian soldiers who fought alongside Nazi Germany between 1943 and 1945. Both are in Fini's party."[4] Around the same time, when Jorg Haider died, Sky News noted reports that "leading European far-right politicians, including Alessandra Mussolini and Jean-Marie Le Pen, will attend [his funeral]".[5] In April this year, Mark Seddon writing for Al-Jazeera said: "In Italy, the far right now forms part of a coalition government with Silvio Berlusconi's administration, with the xenophobic Northern League and the post-fascist National Alliance being given senior positions in government. The National Alliance is led by Gianfranco Fini, and his party has advocated authorising coastguards to shoot human traffickers as well as arguing that the EU is run by paedophiles. Berlusconi defied international criticism by enlisting the support not only of Fini but also Alessandra Mussolini (the granddaughter of the former Italian dictator), a leading far-right figure in her own right. A year ago this month, Fascist salutes greeted the election of Gianni Alemanno as the far right Mayor of Rome, and anti-immigrant sentiment is running high across the country ahead of the European elections."[6] All of this, to me, seems like clear evidence that, although dominated by the centre-right, PdL contains significant far right elements and therefore should be considered a broad right-wing coalition rather than just a centre-right coalition.BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
The PdL is definitely a centre-right party and does not include fascists. No doubt. It is true that there are some post-fascists, but they are a minority and they are quite moderate. Take Alessandra Mussolini: with her socially liberal positions over immigration, abortion, gays and stem cell research she is definitely on the left of the party! What is strange about the PdL is not the fact there there are one or two nostaligics of fascism (which was anyway something very different from German nazism) in party ranks, but that there are several former Socialists, some of whom continue to identify as social democrats, including key ministers as Giulio Tremonti, Franco Frattini and Renato Brunetta. The PdL is a combination of right-wing, centrist, liberal and social-democratic grops: a quintessentially centre-right party, member of the mainstream European People's Party! Bob comes from Brockley and I'm sorry he does not know much of Italian politics. --Checco (talk) 13:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, I'll stop on this PdL issue (although on its talk page, of the 5 editors who have contributed to this discussion, 3 (albeit one anonymous) are against the "centre-right" appellation and 2 are in favour, so hardly a consensus) as I am not at all an expert in Italian politics, which Checco is. However, I remain concerned about a definition of centre-right that is so vague as to be able to include Fini, Gianni Alemanno and Ignazio La Russa. And I remain concerned about a wikipedia page that should be an authoritative list of centre-right parties listing ones that are only contentiously so. BobFromBrockley (talk) 10:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Another contentious inclusion that needs discussing:the BJP. BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Original research[edit]

Centre-right is not a specific concept found in political literature. It merely means standing between whatever is considered right and center. Unless someone can provide any evidence that this is anything more than a dictionary definition there article should be deleted. The Four Deuces (talk) 07:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. It is true the term is problematic, but it is widely used. A large number of other articles link here, describing particular parties as centre-right. It would be mad for that to become a red link. We need to improve the article instead.BobFromBrockley (talk) 23:45, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Center-right predominately means moderate classic liberalism and traditionalism. "A free and moral society." — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:05, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

List of center-right parties[edit]

I propose to delete the list of parties:

-it is unsourced and therefore original research
-there is no clear definition of center-right
-the article should be about the meaning of the term
-the list is by nature excessively long
-similar articles do not contain party lists

The Four Deuces (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree. BobFromBrockley (talk) 23:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I also agree. As there has been no action for the past few months, I have deleted it. TN05 21:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I cannot believe the political bias. The Conservative Party have confirmed they are not on the centre ground. Cameron is not a social liberal. There are no feminists in the Tories and he has a voting record that dissaproves of gay rights. The Tories political stance is still a subject of debate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)


(Under the heading "Fiscal Centrists and Social Conservatives of the Centre-Right"): "They are thus opposed to both militant communism and reactionary free-market Thatcherism"

This is a non-NPOV statement, as it implies that Communism is "militant" and that "Thatcherism" is "reactionary." I changed it to "They are thus opposed to both what they see as militant communism and also reactionary free-market Thatcherism" for now. I also changed the value judgment "occupying somewhat of a middle ground in economic policy." to the statement of fact "occupying a middle ground between those two ideologies in economic policy." Wormyguy (talk) 01:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps a neutral way of saying it is just opposed to socialism and very limited regulated capitalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


A list of prominent stances should be listed like how the center-left article has. Equality before the law, free trade, pro-growth, systemized immigration, right to work, classical liberal freedoms (speech, press, guns, religion, etc.) limited welfare, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi guys. Does it really enrich the article to quote the same source 13 times over every few lines of text? I don't see any value in this. Value lies in citing different points of view, different interpretations of our world, diversity of world views. Regards

^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 57. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 59. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 57. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 57. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 57. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 59. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 59. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 59. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 59. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 59. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 206. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 207. ^ Ian Adams. Political Ideology Today. Manchester, England, UK; New York, New York, USA: Manchester University Press, 2001. Pp. 58. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 20:34, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


There are various sources on this and other websites as well as in mainstream media and society that refer to the term "right-of-centre/center". Would it not be a good idea to include a new section in the main article to define the concept? It seems necessary to me because the terms "centre-right", "right-of-centre" and "right-wing", while sounding similar, describe materially different political positions. For example, in the European Parliament, there is the centre-right European People's Party (EPP) group, the right-of-centre group of European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and the right-wing European Alliance for Freedom (EAF). Each of these groups ideologies diverge significantly from on another, as such I believe it would be wise if terms used to describe said ideologies left little room for ambiguity. The term "right-of-centre" could also possibly include some of the less radical Eurosceptic political parties in the Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD) group as well as parties from elsewhere in the world that subscribe to certain schools of conservatism. What I would like to see is the political spectrum content on Wikipedia include stand-alone articles for "Right-of-centre politics" as well as "Left-of-centre politics" alongside the established main poltical positions. Though, an alternative, and potentially better solution, seeing as they are both fairly short, could be for the articles Centre-right politics and Centre-left to be expanded and respectively renamed "Centre-right/Right-of-centre politics" and "Centre-left/Left-of-centre politics". If you agree with me, I would appreciate any assistance in this endeavour.

MBFCPresident (talk) 11:04, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

There is no consistency on usage of these terms. It is really more relevant to a dictionary than an encyclopedia article. TFD (talk) 10:41, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Centre-right politics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:29, 18 November 2016 (UTC)