🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader portrays his Reform UK party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent'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 public surveys.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist Andrej Babiš toppled prime minister Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In the German nation, the right-wing AfD party is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of opponents of global cooperation, motivated by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, aiming to dethrone the global legal order, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy international collaboration.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge reveals a recent undeniable reality that democrats overlook at our peril: an nationalist ideology – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has replaced neoliberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “India first”, “China first”, “Russia first”, “my tribe first” and often “exclusive group focus” 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 driver behind the violations of international human rights law 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 grasp the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a free for all that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, political figures have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and marginalized, but also to the shifting dynamics of world economic influence, moving us from a unipolar world once dominated by the US to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has provoked means open commerce is being replaced by protectionism. Where economics used to drive politics, the nationalist agendas is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies characterized by reshoring and friend-shoring and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and technology transfer, lowering global collaboration to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the pragmatism of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a clear majority are more resistant to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who govern them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the global population (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel peaceful living between diverse communities is impossible or have a win-lose perspective 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 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”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the global public are moderate in views: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “US priority” ideology would suggest, or all-in cosmopolitans. They are patriotic 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.

Are most moderates favor a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or city wall? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A first group, about a fifth, will back aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of selflessness, supporting emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and believe in something bigger than themselves.

A second group comprising a similar percentage are practical cooperators who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, 21%, personally motivated collaborators, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it advantages them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a definite majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid 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 case is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we stress the reciprocal benefits 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 necessity for collaboration, the response is each.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, isolated and often forceful and controlling nationalism that demonises immigrants, outsiders and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a optimistic, outward-looking and inclusive patriotism that addresses people’s need for community and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Addressing Public Concerns

Although detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must promptly be brought under control – 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 gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s negative, 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 financial system and community.

But as the prime minister also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. Nigel Farage hailed a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the largest reductions in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by £275bn would not fix struggling areas but damage them, turn citizen against citizen 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. Continually from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which medical facility, which educational institution and which public service will be the first to be reduced or closed.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most inhumane, more destructive even than monetary policy, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are indicating all over the west is that they want their governments to rebuild our economies and our civic societies. “The party” and its global allies should be exposed repeatedly 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 Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a case for a improved nation that resonates not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the nation's citizens.