🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional epochal event. However this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the conservative, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš overthrew prime minister Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another France's leader, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In the German nation, 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 Italian political group are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Dutch PVV and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of opponents of global cooperation, motivated by right-wing influencers like Steve Bannon, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, diminish fundamental freedoms and undermine international collaboration.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave exposes a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy overlook at our peril: an nationalist ideology – once thought toppled with the Berlin Wall – has supplanted economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “my tribe first” and often “exclusive group focus” regimes. It is this nationalist sentiment that helps explain why the world is now composed of 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and this ideology is the driver behind the breaches of international human rights law not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Root Causes Explained

Crucial to grasp the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It begins 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 slow to respond to the many people who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, transitioning from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of competing superpowers, and from a rules-based order to a power-based one. The ethnic nationalism that this has incited means free trade is being replaced by trade barriers. Where market forces used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies characterized by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, sinking international cooperation to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the pragmatism of the global public. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, of thousands of individuals in 34 countries we find a significant portion are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more willing to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Globally there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group 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 diverse communities 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.

However there are another 21% at the other end, 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 “locally engaged global citizens”.

The Global Majority's Stance

The vast majority of the global public are somewhere in between: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “America first” ideology would suggest, or fully global citizens. They are patriotic but don’t see the world as in a permanent conflict between the “us” and the “them”, adversaries always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Are most moderates favor a obligation-light or a responsible global community? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Affirmative, under specific circumstances. A first group, about a fifth, will back aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are ready to act out of selflessness, backing emergency help for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” multilateralists 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 taxes paid for global progress are used effectively. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve teamwork if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or safety and stability.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

Thus a clear majority can be built not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with worldwide issues, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we stress the mutual advantages 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 each.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the xenophobic tide: we can defeat today’s negative, isolated and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a positive, globally engaged and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and connects to their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

Although 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 public sentiment data also tell us that the people are even more concerned about 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 overcome what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “broken” and “deteriorating” 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. A Reform leader hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. The party's proposal to cut government expenditure by £275bn would not repair struggling areas but damage them, create social division and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, poor 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 reduced or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is economic theory at its most cruel, more destructive even than monetary policy, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their leaders to rebuild our economies and our communities. “Reform” and its international partners should be exposed repeatedly for plans that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our greatest achievements could be in the future, we can go beyond highlighting the party's contradictions by setting out a argument for a better Britain that resonates not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.