🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional epochal event. However this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are also leading in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure overthrew the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just brought down yet another France's leader, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the most popular 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 Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgium’s 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, aiming to overthrow the international rule of law, diminish fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

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 supplanted economic liberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “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 force behind the breaches 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.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

Crucial to grasp the root causes, widespread globally, that have fuelled this new age of nationalism. It starts with a widely felt sense that a globalization that was open but not inclusive has been a free for all that has been unjust to all.

Over the past ten years, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel left out and marginalized, but also to the shifting dynamics of global economic power, moving us from a US-dominated era once dominated by the United States to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a might-makes-right approach. The ethnic nationalism that this has provoked 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 characterized by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by restrictions on cross-border trade, foreign funding 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 find hope in the pragmatism of the global public. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of 36,000 people in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to support international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the world's people (even if a quarter in today’s US) who either feel peaceful living between diverse communities is unattainable or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

However there are an additional group at the opposite extreme, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through free commerce 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 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 permanent conflict between the “us” and the “them”, opponents 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 prepared to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Yes, under certain conditions. A initial segment, 22%, will back humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of altruism, backing disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists empathize of others and have faith in something bigger than themselves.

Another segment comprising a similar percentage are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for international development are spent well. And there is a final category, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will approve teamwork if they can see that it benefits them and their communities, whether it be through ensuring them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a clear majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and disease control, as long as this case is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize 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 necessity for collaboration, the answer is each.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the xenophobic tide: we can overcome current pessimistic, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies newcomers, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a positive, outward-looking and inclusive national pride that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Addressing Public Concerns

And while in-depth polls tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry 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 people are even more concerned about what is happening in their own lives and within their own local communities. Recently, the UK Prime Minister gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “broken” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our economy and community.

But as the prime minister also pointed out, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. Nigel Farage hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also enact a similar plan – 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 ravage them, create social division and destroy any sense of unity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, poor or vulnerable. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which hospital, which school and which public service will be the first to be cut or shut down.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“This ideology” is neoliberalism at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond austerity. 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 international partners should be exposed day after day 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 highlighting the party's contradictions by setting out a argument for a improved nation that appeals not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the nation's citizens.