🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the world stage, its meteoric rise an remarkable epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the United States and South America, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation parties similar to his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the conservative, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. 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 Italian political group are already in power, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Dutch PVV and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of anti-internationalists, inspired by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, seeking to overthrow the international rule of law, weaken human rights and undermine multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge exposes a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy ignore at our peril: an nationalist ideology – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has replaced economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “group priority” and often “exclusive group focus” 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 driver behind the breaches of global human rights standards not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

It is important to understand 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, political figures have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel left out and marginalized, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, moving us from a unipolar world once led by the US to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a might-makes-right approach. The ethnic nationalism that this has provoked means open commerce is being replaced by protectionism. Where market forces used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies marked out by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by bans on cross-border trade, foreign funding and technology transfer, lowering global collaboration to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

However, there is hope. The situation is not fixed, and even as it solidifies 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 34 countries we find a clear majority are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to support international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the global population (even if 25% in today’s US) who either feel peaceful living between ethnic and religious groups is unattainable or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

But there are another 21% at the other end, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through free commerce as a mutually beneficial arrangement, 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 narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “US priority” ideology would suggest, or fully global citizens. They are patriotic but don’t see the world as in a never-ending struggle between the “us” and the “others”, adversaries permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Do the majority in the middle favor a duty-free or a responsible global community? Are they prepared to accept obligations beyond their local area or city wall? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of altruism, supporting emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists empathize of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising 22% are practical cooperators who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will endorse teamwork if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a definite majority can be constructed 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 mutual advantages 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 necessity for collaboration, the response is each.

And this openness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can defeat today’s negative, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies immigrants, foreigners and “others” as long as we advocate for a positive, outward-looking and inclusive patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, illegal immigration is currently the biggest national issue – 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. Last month, a prominent leader gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “dysfunctional” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our economy and community.

But as the prime minister also pointed out, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. A Reform leader hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. The party's proposal to reduce public spending by £275bn would not repair downtrodden communities but damage them, create social division and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, poor or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which hospital, which school and which government service will be the first to be reduced or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is economic theory at its most cruel, more destructive even than monetary policy, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are telling us all over the Western world is that they want their leaders to rebuild our financial systems and our communities. “Reform” and its global allies should be exposed 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 highlighting Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a case for a better Britain that appeals not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the nation's citizens.