🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his Reform UK party as a unique occurrence that has burst on to the world stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional historic moment. However this week, in every one of Europe’s major countries and from India and Thailand to the United States and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also leading in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the conservative, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just forced the resignation of yet another France's leader, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In the German nation, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of opponents of global cooperation, inspired by right-wing influencers like Steve Bannon, seeking to overthrow the global legal order, diminish fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave reveals a new and unavoidable truth that democrats ignore at great risk: an nationalist ideology – once thought toppled with the Berlin Wall – has replaced neoliberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “group priority” and often “my tribe first and only” regimes. It is this ethnic nationalism that helps explain why the world is now composed of many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and ethnic nationalism is the force behind the violations of global human rights standards not just by Russia in Ukraine 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, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system that has been unjust to all.

Over the past ten years, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the millions who feel left out and marginalized, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, transitioning from a US-dominated era once dominated by the US to a multipolar world of competing superpowers, and from a system of international law to a power-based one. The ethnic nationalism that this has incited means free trade is giving way to protectionism. Where economics used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies marked out by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by restrictions on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, lowering international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the common sense of the world's population. In a recent survey for a major foundation, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a clear majority are less receptive to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to embrace global teamwork than many of the leaders who govern them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the world's people (even if 25% in today’s US) who either feel peaceful living between diverse communities is unattainable or have a zero-sum mindset that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

However there are another 21% 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 “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

The vast majority of the world's citizens 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 “our side” and the “them”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates favor a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or city wall? Yes, under certain conditions. A initial segment, 22%, will back aid efforts to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, supporting disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” cooperation advocates empathize of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

Another segment comprising a similar percentage are practical cooperators who want to know that any public funds for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will endorse cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them basic necessities 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 global action to deal with global problems, like climate crisis and disease control, as long as this case is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we emphasize 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 response is both.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can defeat current pessimistic, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies newcomers, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a positive, outward-looking and inclusive national pride that addresses people’s need for community and connects to their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the west, illegal immigration is currently the top concern – and no one should doubt that it must quickly be brought under control – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the public are even more worried by what is happening in their own lives and within their immediate neighborhoods. Recently, the UK Prime Minister gave an emotional speech about how what’s good about Britain can overcome what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “broken” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and society.

However, as the prime minister also pointed out, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. Nigel Farage praised a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. 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, turn citizen against citizen and destroy any sense of unity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, impaired, poor or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every electoral district, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which educational institution and which public service will be the first to be reduced or shut down.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is neoliberalism at its most inhumane, more harmful even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond austerity. What the public are indicating all over the west is that they want their governments to restore our economies and our civic societies. “The party” and its global allies should be revealed 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 pointing out Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a argument for a better Britain that resonates not just to visionaries, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.