🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a unique occurrence that has exploded on to the world stage, its meteoric rise an remarkable epochal event. However this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation parties like his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader 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 the legislature. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Italian political group are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, aiming to overthrow the international rule of law, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

This nationalist wave reveals a new and unavoidable truth that democrats ignore at great risk: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the Berlin Wall – has replaced economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “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 many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and ethnic nationalism is the driver behind the violations of global human rights standards not just by Russia in Ukraine but in almost every instance of global strife.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

It is important to grasp 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 been unjust to all.

Over the past ten years, leaders have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and marginalized, but also to the shifting dynamics of global economic power, transitioning from a unipolar world once led by the US to a multipolar world of competing superpowers, and from a rules-based order to a might-makes-right approach. The nationalist ideology that this has incited means free trade is being replaced by protectionism. Where economics used to drive government policies, the nationalist agendas is now driving economic decisions, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies marked out by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and technology transfer, lowering global collaboration to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. 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 major foundation, of 36,000 people in dozens of nations we find a clear majority are more resistant to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to support global teamwork than many of the officials who govern them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the global population (even if a quarter in the United States currently) who either feel coexistence between diverse communities is impossible or have a zero-sum mindset that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the expense of others doing badly.

However there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what an influential thinker calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the global public are somewhere in between: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, 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 never-ending struggle between the “our side” and the “them”, adversaries permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates favor a duty-free or a responsible global community? Are they prepared to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A first group, 22%, will back humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, backing disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists feel the pain of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising a similar percentage are pragmatic multilateralists 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 teamwork if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or peace and security.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a clear majority can be built not just for emergency assistance if funds are used wisely but also for international measures to deal with worldwide issues, like climate crisis and pandemic prevention, as long as this case is argued 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 questioned whether we work together from necessity or if we have a necessity for collaboration, the answer is both.

This willingness to cooperate across borders shows how we can turn back the xenophobic tide: we can overcome today’s negative, inward-looking and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that demonises newcomers, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a positive, globally engaged and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the top concern – and no one should doubt that it must promptly be brought under control – the public sentiment data also tell us that the people are even more concerned about what is happening in their own lives 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 developed nations, “broken” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and society.

However, as the leader also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. A Reform leader praised a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the largest reductions in government programs. The party's proposal to reduce public spending by £275bn would not repair struggling areas but ravage them, create social division and destroy any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, needy or at-risk. Every day 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 cut or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most inhumane, more harmful even than monetarism, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their leaders to rebuild our economies and our communities. “The party” and its international partners should be exposed day after day 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 highlighting the party's contradictions by setting out a case for a better Britain that appeals not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to self-interest, and to the daily kindness of the British people.