Great question, @Kraken Some are wealthy or well placed in corporations and are serving their own interests by supporting a movement that constantly wants to reduce taxes for the rich and slash services for the poor so there will be less financial demands on the rich to support them. These are the corporatists. But they are nowhere near a large enough voting block to get accomplish their objectives alone. So right-wing political leaders must come up with talking points that appeal to middle class and poor voters, convincing them to vote against their own economic interests and in support of an oligarchy they have little or no hope of benefiting from. The wealthy corporatists and those who work for them to curry their favor tend to be the leaders of the right-wing movement. They are the genesis of the “I’ve got mine, screw you.” philosophy.They are the authoritarian leaders.
Many of the lower income right wingers are drawn from a personality type called right-wing authoritarian followers. This personality type has been studied in depth by Dr. Robert Altemeyer of the University of Manitoba. His book, The Authoritarians is available free as a PDF download.
Right wing authoritarian followers tend to be people who grew up in highly authoritarian homes. Their parents often stressed to them how unsafe the world outside is, and how threatening strangers who are “not like us” are likely to be.
They tend to be highly inbred in their social interactions, sticking to people who think just like them and gravitating to news and information sources that never challenge them. So long as they are supported by friends, they are highly aggressive when challenged and willing to strike out verbally and even physically if necessary at others who do not share their ideology. They are the perfect posse. If an authoritarian leader tells them to get a rope, they are far more likely that the general population to act on that urging. They also have highly compartmentalized minds. That means that they are nearly incapable of realizing that two separate beliefs they hold are mutually exclusive. Even if challenged, they will pull out one belief at a time, examine it against their ideology and prejudices, and if it passes that muster, deem it true and file it back in its ealed compartment before separately pulling out the next belief for the same treatment.
A good for instance is the common right-wing claim that Obama is a Communist and a Nazi. The Nazis were the mortal enemies of Communists. It is ridiculous to believe that one person would be both at one time. But when challenged, a right-wing extremist will look at only one belief at a time. “Is Obama a Commie? I hate commies, and I hate him, Did my leaders say he is? Yes, they did, so yes, he is a Commie.”
Next they check Nazi. “Is Obama a Nazi? I hate Nazis, and I hate him, Did my leaders say he is? Yes, they did, so yes, he is a Nazi.”
I realize this is going to sound offensive to many who share such right-wing behaviors, but the research behind it is solid enough it deserves the light of day. We have only to look at pre-war Germany, the Brownshirt movement and the far-right fascist behaviors to realize this psychology can grow and can be extremely dangerous.
By the way, we call it Right-wing Authoritarianism here because that is the way the movement here leans. But the same sort of behavior pertained to the ideological left-wing extremists that pushed the brutal side of Communism in the former Soviet Union.