Populism emerged as a contemporary challenge to liberal democracy and can act as a threat or a potential corrective to democracy. This work will elaborate on the types of right-wing populism in Europe, where there is an assumption of the existing differences between right-wing populist parties in old and new democracies in Europe. It starts off with the explanation of right-wing populism, thus characterizing its main elements: populism, authoritarianism and nativism. The right-wing populist politics includes a negative attitude towards minority groups, antiimmigration politics and euroskepticism. The goal of this paper is to notice key aspects that are equal to these parties and also, to discover the potential differences among them. In the comparative analysis of this paper, there are four parties covered: the Polish party Law and Justice (PiS), the French party National Rally (RN), Czech party Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) and finally, the Norwegian party Progress Party (FrP). Scientific literature mentioned in this paper will emphasize the role of the parties and the comparison of the different party programs, especially with the aid of the Manifesto Project Database (MPD). The program contains qualitative information on the different subjects, policy and political position the parties draw attention to in their party manifestos. The right-wing populist parties show their differences in the grounds of socioeconomic views, their opinion towards the European Union, Russia and other international organizations and who they consider as “dangerous others”, i.e. their relationship towards ethnic and sexual minorities. There are differences on the economic dimension, where some parties are for free market economy and privatization, while others are for state interventionism and increase in social security and welfare. They have a similar radical right position on the cultural dimension, but they differ in the who they consider as “dangerous others”. Right-wing populists show a positive side when they combat technocratic governance, i.e. democratic elitism and when they are inclusionary towards sexual minorities. On the other hand, they show a negative side when they include minorities various minorities as “dangerous others” and when they violate the liberal principle of liberal democracy.