🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader portrays his Reform UK party as a unique phenomenon that has exploded on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable historic moment. But this week, in every one of Europe’s major countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the US and Argentina, hard-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties like his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist Andrej Babiš toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just brought down yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the presidential race and the legislature. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Italian political group are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Dutch PVV and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – 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 undermine multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge exposes a recent undeniable reality that democrats overlook at great risk: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the Berlin Wall – has replaced economic liberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “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 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and this ideology is the driver behind the breaches of international human rights law not just by Russia in Ukraine 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 starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel left out and left behind, but also to the shifting dynamics of global economic power, moving us from a US-dominated era once dominated by the US to a multipolar world of competing superpowers, and from a system of international law to a might-makes-right approach. The nationalist ideology that this has incited means open commerce is being replaced by protectionism. 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 reshoring and friend-shoring and by restrictions on cross-border trade, foreign funding and knowledge sharing, sinking international cooperation to its weakest point since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the pragmatism of the world's population. In a poll conducted 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 willing to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Across the world 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 today’s US) who either feel peaceful living between diverse communities is impossible or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the expense of others doing badly.

But there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the global public are moderate in views: not isolated patriots, as “America first” ideology would suggest, or fully global citizens. 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”, opponents always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Are most moderates favor a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or city wall? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of selflessness, backing emergency help for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates empathize of others and believe in something bigger than themselves.

A second group comprising a similar percentage are practical cooperators who want to know that any taxes paid for international development are spent well. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, self-interested multilateralists, who will endorse cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their communities, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or peace and security.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

Thus a definite majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with worldwide issues, like climate crisis and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is argued on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we stress the reciprocal benefits that benefit 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 answer is each.

This willingness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, isolated and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that vilifies immigrants, foreigners and “others” as long as we champion a optimistic, globally engaged and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the top concern – and no one should doubt that it must quickly be managed effectively – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more concerned about what is happening in their own lives and within their own local communities. Recently, the UK Prime Minister gave an emotional speech about how what’s good about Britain can overcome what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “dysfunctional” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and community.

However, as the prime minister also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. Nigel Farage praised a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also implement a similar plan – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by a huge sum would not fix struggling areas but ravage them, turn citizen against citizen and wreck 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 constituency, the party should be asked which medical facility, which school and which government service will be the first to be reduced or shut down.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is economic theory 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. “Reform” and its global allies should be exposed day after day for plans that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be ahead of us, we can go beyond highlighting Reform’s hypocrisy by presenting a argument for a better Britain that appeals not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.