An old conservative era is slowly coming to an end. We're seeing it in Europe, where the past crony-rightism of Berlusconi types and the weak leadership of social liberals come under frequent fire. Most notably, in America, there's been serious talk of a "GOP crisis" for years since the end of the Bush Administration. Tea Party movements are opening fire against the Republican establishment and radical Right-wingers in Europe are transforming old conservatives who have sold out to social liberalism and social democracy.

This old era now belongs to the past. The new age is that of a New Right. An age without central movements, but central ideas and motivations. But what does it really mean to subscribe to something like this? The New Right, to be perfectly clear, attacks both the Left and the Right. It is highly self-critical and lacks central ideological authority. While it remains anti-Left, to better understand its framework, you have to look at where it parts from the traditional Republican Right. And these are the patterns we may discern:

• Environment: The old Right was often environmentalist in character, but refused to compromise with industrial and economic development. "Progress" was the name of the game, but as the world increasingly became a filthy place to live in, New Rightists began to promote capitalism and environmentalism at the same time, some even suggesting the government should restrain population numbers. The idea? We want to live well off, but because of our numbers, all of us cannot do it, so we need to rethink both technology and urban design.

  At the front: Michael E. Arth, politician and urban designer, attempts to unite fiscal conservatism with progressive environmentalism. Current with a new book: Democracy and the Common Wealth: Breaking the Stranglehold of the Special Interests.

• Foreign policy: After the Cold War, Reagan was a hero for standing up for Western values, but when the Bush Administration began to see its mission to spread those values to the rest of the world, New Rightists spoke out and said the empire couldn't afford it. Some even went as far as saying that America's status as super power may be over soon. This shifted the focus away from the strength of West, to how it relates to the rest of the world. This culminated in the death of neoconservatism in America, and the rise of anti-Islamic, pro-patriotic sentiment in Europe.

  At the Front: Ron Paul, libertarian and Austrian-schooled presidential candidate. Made great news during the previous presidential election when suggesting that America had created its own foreign enemies and that the Iraq War was not handled properly by government and military agencies.
  In Europe, Dutch politician Geert Wilders warned that the issue Europeans should be worried about is not whether we are superior to other people or not, but whether our values match those of non-Western values. His conclusion was no, and everyone was offended, especially the old Right.

• Economy: When the economic crisis hit America, and later Europe, political leaders began to question the authority of capitalism. New Rightists fathomed this criticism but suggested that while capitalism is superior to any other economic system we've ever designed, it's been overthrown by bureaucrats and governments who control the market to promote special interests. By doing so, New Rightists highlighted the fact that any economic system can be manipulated behind closed doors, unless there is a regulating force stopping it from doing so. The invisible hand, not so invisible after all?

  At the Front: Peter Schiff, libertarian and Austrian-schooled, predicted the economic downturn in America years before it took place. At that time he was publically ridiculed for his viewpoints. When proven right, the old Right began to listen to what he and others had to say about the impact of growing government on the free market system. The message was too radical for any American President, regardless of political color: let that which spells failure, fail, so we can move on to stabilize markets and create jobs. Economic purists took notes and became followers.

• Culture: After the Second World War, patriotism and nationalism transformed into ethnic and cultural masochism in Europe. The old Right wanted to remain enemies of the old Fascist and Nazi regimes, so it adopted the same policies. The New Right became fed up with the urban sprawl, social decay and cultural confusion caused by leftist-driven multiculture, and said no. Even more radically, it suggested a more compassionate form of cultural nationalism is possible, one based on mutual respect rather than racism. If suppressed, it argued, the West will lose belief in itself and self-destruct.

  At the Front: Mark Steyn, conservative agitator and columnist, flamed the leftist-liberal establishment in Canada for trying to promote religious and cultural diversity over constitutional rights. Later moving to America and becoming the European voice in American old-school conservatism, Steyn controversially suggested America was the last outpost of Western civilization not yet fully succumbed to alien values and liberal-government supremacy. His attack on ideological multiculturalism remains epic.

• HBD (Human Biological Diversity): When Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein wrote the Bell Curve, it immediately became highly controversial. Its main thesis was the cause; it claimed scientifically that biology matters far more than social environment for the development, character and ability of social and racial groups. This sparked a slow revolution among conservatives of the old Right, who increasingly began to believe that humans cannot and should not be socialized to become equal, but instead pursue interests based on ability. The New Right thus began calling itself believers of HBD, human biological diversity, and suggested liberal leftists denied science in favor of social utopia.

  At the Front: Steve Sailer, famous American columnist and author, trespassed into forbidden territory by covering news about the relation between social culture and genetics. He found that genetics is superior to any social model of how humans interact and work, and that we therefore haven't changed much the last thousand years or so. His influence remains large in America, where smaller movements of conservative-leaning people have begun to apply similar theories on gender roles, dating, race relations and even music.

So what does all of this add up to? The New Right is first and foremost against entitlement programs and extended government control of areas in society that used to be civic or cultural in nature. To beat back what it perceives as being socialist policies, it upholds the nuclear family model, free business enterprise and traditional culture as central to society. It also seeks to challenge the mainstream environmentalism with conservationism, or the belief that it's more important to conserve free land for functioning ecosystems and designing sustainable infrastructure, rather than buying the right ecoproducts in the stores.

Perhaps what most clearly distinguishes the New Right from the old Right is the tendency to believe more in evolutionary and biological answers than in social and environmental answers. The New Right refuses to worship race and class, but recognizes their reality in society and seeks to understand them on scientific terms. While scrutinizing the Western empire-building post WWII, the New Right embraces local decision making and decentralized power to bring authorities closer to the people they govern, while emphasizing strong and persistant leadership in the service of constitutional tradition.

In our book store we list some of the most fascinating, penetrating and forward-thinking literature circulating among the New Right. We add more as we continue our journey.