Is the modern far-right a form of bourgeoisie liberalism?

Having observed debates around the web, it seems to me like a lot of far-righters disagree with traditionalist policies implemented by far-right leaders.

Going to the far-left, the Pope visited Cuba recently. And in the book "Castro, my life", Castro claims to be an "ethical christian", even though he also (if I understood him correctly) does not believe in the supernatural elements of christianity.

I wonder, what is the far-right without traditionalism? Specially among neo-nazis, it seems that they often just want to "shock the audience", much the same way postmodern artists wants. (This vague project of deconstruction, that is supposed to end with something positive, according to the liberalists) I find the more traditionalist view of art, were art is seen as a tool of spiritual refinement and education, much better.

I think it was Slavoj Zizek who claimed that the islamic fundamentalists and the liberalists are two sides of the same coin. Could the same be said about the modern far-right? The tendency towards creating individual bubbles of imagination is perhaps the most extreme form of liberal individualism ever, and the same can be said about the complete disrespect towards tradition, and the attempt at shocking people just for the shock-value itself. Beneath the surface of their various forms of "socialism" lurks a deep disrespect for workers, which is also a very liberal attitude.

Moving over to modern far-right rethorics, it was interesting to see how Anders Breivik (the Norwegian terrorist) claim that he did it because Norway is not a democracy. He claims that his democratic rights are being suppressed, using the extremely liberal technique of victimizing himself. Such rhetoric is very normal within the less extreme forms of rightwing populism, but it is interesting that also the far right use it.

It seems to me, like the modern far-right lends a lot of attitudes from middle-class liberalism and the middle-class center of politics. Are far-righters just angry middle-class liberals? Who drag all those liberal attitudes with them into the darkest corners of the web? Even if they claim to hate middle-class values? The phenomena of self-hatred among the middle-class, is also, a trait of middle-class liberalism - Fascism just drags it a bit further than normal liberalism.

Deconstructing the far-right is so much more fun than being a far-rightist one self. Og crap! Deconstruction is a liberalist middle-class hobbie! Oh no!!!

In the Castro-book, Castro even says some positive things about Franco. He is not a fan off course, but at least Franco is not called a "traitor". The guy he really hates, is a elected right-wing president that came after Franco, I think his name was "Aznar", I have never heard about him. (Castro talking about spanish politics is very interesting)

Doesn't the liberal soft-left do exactly the same thing? They claim to be left-wingers, but at the same time they mock every leader of socialist and communist countries that have ever been.

(If you feel like it, I have no problem with you people mocking Franco and Mussolini and Salazar and all other right-wing authoritarians all you want. I just don't want to hear it from self-proclaimed fascists)

Aha, here we have him. This is the man the Fidel Castro hates the most, or at least the one he describes most negatively in the book ("Castro, my life")

"As a young man José María Aznar described him self as a Phalangist. He studied law in Madrid and worked for the Spanish tax authorities. Aznar was a member of the conservative People's Alliance (Alianza Popular) and was elected to the Parliament of La Rioja. He later became president of the autonomous region Kastilien and Leon. His close relationship with Manuel Fraga meant that he succeeded him as party chairman for the Conservatives. Aznar then reorganized the Spanish conservatives in a new party, the Partido Popular, as he moved towards the political center, and distanced itself from the legacy of activism phalanx."

(First time I have used the google-translator, only had to re-arrange a few word in order to make it what I think is proper English, good tool)

Aznar is the spanish version from the portuguese Durão Barroso. Their politically history is remarkably similar, culminating in their role in the Iraq invasion.

I did read somewhere, that Barroso was a maoist in his youth, so at least his background is different. Oh, I remember. I found it in Breiviks manifesto. According to Breivik, he is one of the evil cultural marxists that go around infiltrating and corrupting.

Wikipedia seems to agree on maoism:
Barroso's political activity began in his late teens, during the Estado Novo regime in Portugal, before the Carnation Revolution of 25 April 1974. In his college days, he was one of the leaders of the underground Maoist MRPP (Reorganising Movement of the Proletariat Party, later PCTP/MRPP, Communist Party of the Portuguese Workers/Revolutionary Movement of the Portuguese Proletariat).

I know little about his politics though, is he the guy that liberalized drugs in Portugal? The liberalization that has occurred in Portugal, and whatever effects it has, should perhaps be taken under closer scrutiny in the legalization-thread that grew out of my introduction-thread. - A little sidetrack.