🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his political party as a unique occurrence that has burst on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional epochal event. However this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the United States and Argentina, hard-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation parties similar to his are also leading in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist Andrej Babiš overthrew the head of government 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 parliament. 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 power, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, motivated by right-wing influencers such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, weaken human rights and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge reveals a new and unavoidable truth that supporters of democracy ignore at great risk: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has supplanted neoliberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “India first”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russia first”, “my tribe first” 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 violations of international human rights law not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

It is important to grasp the root causes, widespread globally, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was open but not inclusive has been a free for all that has not been fair to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, moving us from a US-dominated era once dominated by the US to a multi-power landscape of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has incited means free trade is being replaced by trade barriers. Where economics used to drive government policies, the nationalist agendas is now driving financial choices, and already over a hundred nations are running protectionist strategies marked out by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by bans on cross-border trade, investment and technology transfer, lowering international cooperation to its weakest point since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The situation is not fixed, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the common sense of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, of thousands of individuals in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more willing to support international cooperation than many of the officials who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of hardened anti-internationalists representing a minority 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 nation do well, it has to be at the expense 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 mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

Worldwide Public Position

The vast majority of the world's citizens are somewhere in between: not isolated patriots, as “US priority” ideology would suggest, or all-in cosmopolitans. They are devoted to their country but don’t see the world as in a permanent conflict between the “us” and the “them”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle prefer 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 first group, about a fifth, will back humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are ready to act out of altruism, backing emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates empathize of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising a similar percentage are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for international development are used effectively. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a clear majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid if money is well spent but also for global action to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits that benefit 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 response is each.

And this openness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can defeat current pessimistic, inward-looking and often forceful and controlling nationalism that vilifies immigrants, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a positive, globally engaged and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the top concern – and it's clear that it must quickly be brought under control – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more concerned about what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their own local communities. Last month, 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 “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our economy and society.

But as the prime minister also pointed out, the far right is more interested in using complaints than ending them. Nigel Farage hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also enact a similar plan – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by £275bn would not repair 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 ill, disabled, needy or vulnerable. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which medical facility, which school and which government service will be the first to be cut or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is economic theory at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their governments to rebuild our financial systems and our communities. “Reform” and its global allies should be exposed day after day for plans that would harm both. And for those of us who believe our greatest achievements could be ahead of us, 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 realists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.