🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his political party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable historic moment. However this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the United States and South America, hard-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are also ahead in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just brought down yet another France's leader, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In the German nation, the right-wing AfD party 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 Dutch PVV and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge exposes a new and unavoidable truth that democrats ignore at our peril: 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”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “group priority” and often “exclusive group focus” regimes. It is this nationalist sentiment that helps explain why the world is now composed of 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and this ideology 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.

Root Causes Explained

Crucial to understand the root causes, 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 accessible yet exclusionary has been a free for all that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, political figures have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people 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 multi-power landscape of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a might-makes-right approach. The ethnic nationalism that this has incited means open commerce is being replaced by trade barriers. Where market forces used to drive politics, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies characterized by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, investment and knowledge sharing, sinking global collaboration to its lowest ebb since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can see optimism 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 embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who govern them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a limited number of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the world's people (even if a quarter in the United States currently) who either feel coexistence between ethnic and religious groups 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.

However there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see international collaboration through free commerce as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people 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 “our side” and the “others”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates prefer a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they prepared to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A first group, about a fifth, will support humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of altruism, 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 practical cooperators who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are used effectively. 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 ensuring them food on the table or safety and stability.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

Thus a clear majority can be built not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for global action to deal with worldwide issues, like environmental emergency and disease control, as long as this case is presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits 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.

And this openness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that vilifies immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a positive, outward-looking and inclusive national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must promptly 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 own local communities. Recently, a prominent leader gave an emotional speech about how what’s good about Britain can overcome what’s negative, 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 society.

However, as the leader also pointed out, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. Nigel Farage praised a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since the 1980s. But he would also enact a similar plan – what was intended – the largest reductions in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by £275bn would not fix downtrodden communities but ravage them, create social division and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, needy or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which school and which public service will be the first to be cut or closed.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” 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 west is that they want their governments to rebuild our economies and our civic societies. “Reform” and its global allies should be revealed repeatedly for policies that would harm 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 appeals not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.