🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his Reform UK party as a unique occurrence that has exploded on to the world stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional historic moment. But this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, hard-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the conservative, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure toppled prime minister Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the presidential race and parliament. In the German nation, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in power, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Dutch PVV and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, inspired by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the global legal order, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy international collaboration.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge exposes a new and unavoidable truth that supporters of democracy overlook at our peril: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has supplanted neoliberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russia first”, “group priority” and often “my tribe first and only” regimes. It is this ethnic nationalism that helps explain why the world is now composed of many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and ethnic nationalism is the force behind the violations of international human rights law not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Root Causes Explained

Crucial to understand the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have driven this new age of nationalism. It begins with a widely felt sense that a globalization that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system that has been unjust to all.

Over the past ten years, political figures have not only been delayed in addressing to the millions who feel excluded and marginalized, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, moving us from a unipolar world once dominated 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 provoked means open commerce is being replaced by trade barriers. Where economics 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 reshoring and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, sinking global collaboration to its lowest ebb since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

However, there is hope. The situation is not fixed, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the pragmatism of the global public. In a recent survey for a prominent organization, of thousands of individuals 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 govern them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the world's people (even if 25% in today’s US) 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 expense of others doing badly.

But 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”.

Worldwide Public Position

The vast majority 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 patriotic but don’t see the world as in a permanent conflict between the “us” and the “them”, adversaries always divided 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 local area or city wall? Yes, under certain conditions. A first group, about a fifth, will support aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of altruism, supporting disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists feel the pain 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 global progress are spent well. And there is a third group, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve teamwork if they can see that it advantages them and their local areas, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a clear majority can be built not just for emergency assistance if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with global problems, like climate crisis and disease control, as long as this case is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we stress the reciprocal benefits that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long wondered whether we work together from necessity or if we have a need to cooperate, the response is each.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, isolated and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that vilifies immigrants, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a positive, globally engaged and welcoming national pride that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while 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 people are even more worried by what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their immediate neighborhoods. Recently, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s good about Britain can drive out what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our economy and society.

But as the prime minister also reminded us, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. A Reform leader praised a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also enact a similar plan – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. The party's proposal to cut government expenditure by £275bn would not repair downtrodden communities but damage them, turn citizen against citizen and destroy any sense of unity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, needy or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which educational institution and which public service will be the first to be reduced or shut down.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is neoliberalism at its most inhumane, more harmful even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond austerity. What the people are indicating all over the west is that they want their leaders to restore our financial systems and our civic societies. “The party” and its global allies should be revealed repeatedly for policies that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be ahead of us, we can go beyond pointing out Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a argument for a better Britain that appeals not just to idealists, but to realists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the nation's citizens.