🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a unique occurrence that has burst on to the world stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional historic moment. But this week, in every one of Europe’s major countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the US and Argentina, hard-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation parties like his are also leading in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader 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 the German nation, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. A Hungarian political force, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Italian political group are already in power, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an global alliance of anti-internationalists, inspired by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, seeking to dethrone the global legal order, diminish human rights and undermine international collaboration.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge reveals a recent undeniable reality that democrats overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has replaced economic liberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “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 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and ethnic nationalism is the driver behind the breaches of global human rights standards not just by Russia in Ukraine but in almost every instance of global strife.

Root Causes Explained

It is important to understand the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this new age of nationalism. It starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalization that was open but not inclusive has been a unregulated system that has not been fair to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, moving us from a US-dominated era once led by the US to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a might-makes-right approach. The nationalist ideology that this has provoked means free trade is being replaced by trade barriers. Where market forces used to drive politics, the nationalist agendas 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, investment and knowledge sharing, sinking international cooperation to its lowest ebb 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 see optimism in the pragmatism of the global public. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, of 36,000 people in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more willing to support international cooperation than many of the officials who rule over them.

Globally there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the world's people (even if a quarter 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 country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

But there are an additional group at the other end, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the global public are moderate in views: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “America first” ideology would suggest, or all-in cosmopolitans. They are patriotic but don’t see the world as in a never-ending struggle between the “our side” and the “them”, opponents always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Are most moderates favor a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they prepared to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Affirmative, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of altruism, supporting emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” cooperation advocates empathize of others and believe in something bigger than themselves.

A second group comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for international development are used effectively. And there is a final category, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve teamwork if they can see that it advantages them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a clear majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with worldwide issues, like climate crisis and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we stress the mutual advantages that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long wondered whether we cooperate out of need or if we have a need to cooperate, the answer is both.

This willingness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, isolated and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that demonises newcomers, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a optimistic, globally engaged and inclusive patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and connects to their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, illegal immigration is currently the biggest national issue – and no one should doubt that it must promptly be brought under control – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the public 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 commonly cited when asked about both our economy and community.

However, as the leader also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. A Reform leader praised a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since the 1980s. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by a huge sum would not repair struggling areas but damage them, create social division and destroy any spirit of solidarity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, needy or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which educational institution and which public service will be the first to be reduced or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most inhumane, more destructive even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are telling us all over the Western world is that they want their governments to rebuild our economies and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be exposed day after day for policies that would harm both. And for those of us who believe our greatest achievements could be in the future, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by presenting a case for a better Britain that appeals not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.