🔗 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 remarkable epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from India and Thailand to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the conservative, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš overthrew the head of government Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just brought down yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In the German nation, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Dutch PVV and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, inspired by right-wing influencers such as a well-known figure, seeking to overthrow the global legal order, weaken fundamental freedoms and undermine multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

This nationalist wave exposes a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has supplanted neoliberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “US priority”, “India first”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “group priority” and often “exclusive group focus” regimes. It is this ethnic nationalism that helps explain why the world is now composed of 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and this ideology is the force behind the breaches of global human rights standards not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every one of the world’s 59 cross-border conflicts and civil wars.

Root Causes Explained

It is important to understand the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalization 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 slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, transitioning from a unipolar world once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of competing superpowers, and from a system of international law to a might-makes-right approach. The ethnic nationalism that this has provoked means free trade is being replaced by trade barriers. Where economics used to drive government policies, the nationalist agendas is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running protectionist strategies marked out by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and knowledge sharing, sinking global collaboration to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

However, there is hope. The situation is not fixed, and even as it solidifies we can see optimism in the common sense of the global public. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, 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 support global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Globally there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of hardened anti-internationalists representing a minority of the global population (even if 25% in today’s US) who either feel coexistence between ethnic and religious groups is unattainable or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their nation do well, it has to be at the expense of others doing badly.

However there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through free commerce as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the global public are somewhere in between: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “US priority” 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 “others”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates prefer a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A first group, 22%, will support humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of altruism, backing disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any public funds for international development are used effectively. And there is a third group, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a definite majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid if money is well spent but also for global action to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and disease control, as long as this case is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits that benefit them and their own country. And thus for those who have long wondered whether we work together from necessity or if we have a necessity for collaboration, the response is each.

And this openness to work internationally shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, 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 inclusive national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and connects to their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, illegal immigration is currently the top concern – and it's clear that it must promptly be managed effectively – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the people are even more concerned about what is happening in their own lives and within their immediate neighborhoods. Last month, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can overcome what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “broken” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our economy and community.

However, as the prime minister also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. Nigel Farage hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since the 1980s. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by a huge sum would not fix struggling areas but ravage them, create social division and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be ill, disabled, poor or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which hospital, which school and which government service will be the first to be reduced or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are indicating all over the west is that they want their governments to rebuild our financial systems and our communities. “Reform” and its global allies should be revealed day after day for policies that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our greatest achievements could be in the future, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by setting out a argument for a improved nation that resonates not just to idealists, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.