🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader portrays his political party as a distinct occurrence that has burst on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional historic moment. However this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the United States and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties like his are also leading in the public surveys.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure overthrew 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 presidential race and parliament. In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in power, 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 far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, seeking to dethrone the global legal order, weaken human rights and destroy multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

This nationalist wave reveals a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy ignore at our peril: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has replaced economic liberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “India first”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russia first”, “group priority” and often “my tribe first and only” regimes. It is this nationalist sentiment 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 breaches of international human rights law 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 root causes, widespread globally, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been slow to respond to the many people who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, transitioning from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has incited means free trade is being replaced by trade barriers. Where economics used to drive politics, the nationalist agendas is now driving economic decisions, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies marked out by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by bans on cross-border trade, investment and technology transfer, lowering international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can see optimism in the pragmatism of the global public. In a recent survey 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 support global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a limited number of hardened anti-internationalists representing a minority of the global population (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel peaceful living between ethnic and religious groups is unattainable or have a zero-sum mindset that if they or their nation do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

But there are another 21% at the other end, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through open trade as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

The vast majority of the world's citizens are somewhere in between: not isolated patriots, 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 “us” and the “them”, adversaries always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle favor a duty-free or a responsible global community? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of altruism, backing disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists empathize of others and have faith in something bigger than themselves.

A second group comprising 22% are practical cooperators who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress 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 ensuring them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a definite majority can be built not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with global problems, like climate crisis and disease control, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we stress 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 answer is both.

This willingness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the xenophobic tide: we can overcome current pessimistic, isolated and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that demonises immigrants, foreigners and “others” as long as we champion a positive, outward-looking and welcoming national pride that addresses people’s need for community and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Addressing Public Concerns

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 quickly be brought under control – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the people are even more concerned about what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their own local communities. Recently, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “dysfunctional” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our financial system and community.

But as the leader also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. A Reform leader hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also implement a similar plan – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by a huge sum would not repair downtrodden communities but damage them, turn citizen against citizen and destroy any sense of unity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be ill, disabled, poor or vulnerable. Continually from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which hospital, which educational institution and which public service will be the first to be cut or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“This ideology” is neoliberalism at its most cruel, more destructive even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are telling us all over the west is that they want their governments to rebuild our financial systems and our civic societies. “The party” and its global allies should be revealed day after day for plans that would harm both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be in the future, we can go beyond highlighting Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a case for a better Britain that appeals not just to visionaries, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the nation's citizens.