🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage portrays his Reform UK party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an remarkable historic moment. However this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia to the US and Argentina, hard-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation 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. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the most popular party. A Hungarian political force, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Italian political group are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, seeking to overthrow the international rule of law, diminish 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 nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the Berlin Wall – has replaced economic liberalism 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 “my tribe first and only” 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 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 root causes, widespread globally, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It starts with a widely felt sense that a globalization that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a free for all that has been unjust to all.

Over the past ten years, political figures have not only been delayed in addressing to the millions who feel excluded and marginalized, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, transitioning from a US-dominated era once dominated by the US to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has incited means free trade is being replaced by protectionism. Where market forces used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already over a hundred nations are running protectionist strategies marked out by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, sinking global collaboration to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The situation is not fixed, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the pragmatism of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a significant portion are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more willing to embrace global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the global population (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel peaceful living 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 cooperation across borders through open trade as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

The vast majority of the global public are moderate in views: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “America first” ideology would suggest, or fully global citizens. They are devoted to their country but don’t see the world as in a permanent conflict between the “us” and the “them”, adversaries permanently set apart from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle prefer a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or city wall? Affirmative, under specific circumstances. A first group, 22%, will back humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of selflessness, supporting disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates empathize of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

Another segment comprising a similar percentage are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any public funds for international development are spent well. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, self-interested multilateralists, who will endorse teamwork if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through guaranteeing them food on the table or peace and security.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a definite majority can be constructed not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for global action to deal with worldwide issues, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we stress the mutual advantages that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we cooperate out of need or if we have a need to cooperate, the answer is each.

And this openness to cooperate across borders shows how we can turn back the xenophobic tide: we can overcome today’s negative, isolated and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that demonises newcomers, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a positive, globally engaged and inclusive national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and connects to their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the west, illegal immigration is currently the top concern – and no one should doubt that it must quickly be managed effectively – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more worried by what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their immediate neighborhoods. Recently, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and society.

But as the prime minister also pointed out, the extreme right is more interested in using complaints than ending them. Nigel Farage praised a disastrous mini-budget as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also implement a similar plan – what was planned – the largest reductions in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by £275bn would not repair downtrodden communities but damage them, create social division and destroy any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, needy or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which hospital, which school and which public service will be the first to be cut or closed.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most inhumane, more harmful even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond austerity. What the people are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their governments to restore our economies and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be exposed day after day for plans that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be in the future, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by setting out a case for a improved nation that appeals not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.