🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional epochal event. But this week, in every one of Europe’s major countries and from India and Thailand to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also ahead in the public surveys.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the conservative, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš toppled prime minister Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just forced the resignation of yet another France's leader, is leading the polls for both the presidential race and parliament. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. A Hungarian political force, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of opponents of global cooperation, motivated by right-wing influencers like Steve Bannon, seeking to dethrone the international rule of law, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave reveals a new and unavoidable truth that supporters of democracy ignore at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has supplanted neoliberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “America first”, “India first”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “my tribe first” and often “exclusive group focus” regimes. It is this ethnic nationalism that helps explain why the world is now composed of many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and this ideology is the force behind the violations of global human rights standards not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Root Causes Explained

It is important to grasp the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have fuelled this new age of nationalism. It begins with a widely felt sense that a globalisation that was open but not inclusive has been a unregulated system that has not been fair to all.

For more than a decade, political figures have not only been delayed in addressing to the millions who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the shifting dynamics of global economic power, transitioning from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has provoked means open commerce is giving way to trade barriers. Where market forces used to drive government policies, the nationalist agendas is now driving financial choices, and already over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies characterized by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, lowering global collaboration to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can see optimism in the pragmatism of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of thousands of individuals in dozens of nations we find a clear majority are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to embrace global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Across the world there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a limited number of hardened anti-internationalists representing a minority of the world's people (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel coexistence between diverse communities is unattainable or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

But there are an additional group at the opposite extreme, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through free commerce as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

The vast majority of the world's citizens are somewhere in between: not isolated patriots, as “America first” ideology would suggest, or all-in cosmopolitans. They are devoted to their country but don’t see the world as in a never-ending struggle between the “our side” and the “them”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Are most moderates prefer a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they prepared to accept responsibilities beyond their local area or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A first group, about a fifth, will support humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, supporting disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates empathize of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising 22% are practical cooperators who want to know that any public funds for global progress are used effectively. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, self-interested multilateralists, who will endorse cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them food on the table or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a definite majority can be constructed not just for humanitarian aid if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and disease control, as long as this case is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits that benefit them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we work together from necessity or if we have a need to cooperate, the answer is both.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome today’s negative, inward-looking and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that vilifies newcomers, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a optimistic, outward-looking and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must promptly be brought under control – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more worried by what is happening in their own lives and within their immediate neighborhoods. Last month, a prominent leader gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “broken” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our economy and community.

However, as the prime minister also reminded us, the far right is more interested in using complaints than ending them. Nigel Farage hailed a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. The party's proposal to reduce public spending by £275bn would not fix downtrodden communities but damage them, create social division and destroy any sense of unity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, needy or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which medical facility, which school and which government service will be the first to be cut or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is neoliberalism at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their governments to rebuild our economies and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be exposed repeatedly for plans that would harm both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be ahead of us, we can go beyond highlighting the party's contradictions by setting out a case for a improved nation that resonates not just to idealists, but to realists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the nation's citizens.