The persistent use of right and left as ways of analysing politics much favoured by the BBC and other commentators is way out of date. I heard yesterday morning the BBC describe Bolsonaro as extreme right and Lula as left in Brazil. Both are different kinds of populists who worry the global elites, though they currently think Lula will conform more with their wishes if he gets another period in office than he did the first time so they do not call him extreme.
The populist against the internationalist is the best shorthand or generalisation to capture modern politics. In Europe we see globalist parties like the old Social Democrats and Christian Democrats can no longer win majorities and need to form difficult coalitions with other parties willing to trim to the establishment line to get Ministerial office. We see waves of challenger parties seek to assemble a popular army against the elite. In Greece Syria’s mounted a strong but ultimately unsuccessful challenge. In Italy first Lega, now Fratelli, try to moderate EU internationalist policies. In Spain Vox has dented traditional parties. In the UK the Conservatives could only win a convincing majority by embracing populist Brexit.
In the USA the Republicans could only win the Presidency by embracing populist Trump who railed against the internationalist establishment Democrats.
I myself find myself in agreement with the populists in some of their challenges to damaging elite theories and policies, but not in agreement with their more extreme views and actions. The internationalists are not always wrong and do include many talented people with good ideas and the capacity to improve the lot of the people. I do not like the arrogance and thuggish dismissal of any alternative view that the elite at their worst display. Nor do I like rioting Trump supporters loose in the Capitol.