🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader portrays his political party as a unique phenomenon that has burst on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, hard-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalisation parties like his are also leading in the public surveys.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the conservative, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure 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, Slovakia's governing alliance 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 staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of opponents of global cooperation, motivated by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, seeking to dethrone the global legal order, diminish fundamental freedoms and undermine international collaboration.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge reveals a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy ignore at our peril: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has replaced economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “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 many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and ethnic nationalism 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.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

Crucial to grasp the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was open but not inclusive has been a unregulated system that has not been fair 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 changing balance of world economic influence, transitioning from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of competing superpowers, and from a system of international law to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has incited means open commerce is being replaced by protectionism. Where economics used to drive politics, the nationalist agendas is now driving economic decisions, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies marked out by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by restrictions on cross-border trade, investment and technology transfer, lowering international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the common sense of the global public. In a recent survey for a major foundation, of thousands of individuals in 34 countries we find a significant portion are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more willing to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the global population (even if a quarter in today’s US) who either feel coexistence between ethnic and religious groups is unattainable 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 other end, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the world's citizens are somewhere in between: not isolated patriots, 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 “us” and the “others”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle favor a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or city wall? Yes, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, backing emergency help for affected areas. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists feel the pain of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

A second group 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, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a definite majority can be constructed not just for humanitarian aid if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with global problems, like climate crisis and pandemic prevention, as long as this case is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, 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 need to cooperate, the response is both.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can reverse the xenophobic tide: we can overcome current pessimistic, isolated and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that vilifies newcomers, outsiders and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a positive, globally engaged and inclusive national pride that addresses people’s need for community and connects to their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

Although 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, a prominent leader spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can overcome what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our financial system and community.

However, as the leader also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. Nigel Farage praised a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also implement a similar plan – what was planned – the largest reductions in government programs. The party's proposal to reduce public spending by a huge sum would not fix struggling areas but ravage them, create social division and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, impaired, needy or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which school and which government service will be the first to be cut or closed.

Risks and Solutions

“Faragism” is neoliberalism at its most cruel, more destructive even than monetarism, and vindictive far beyond austerity. What the public are telling us all over the west is that they want their governments to restore our financial systems and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be revealed repeatedly for plans that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be in the future, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by presenting a case for a better Britain that resonates not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the nation's citizens.