🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage portrays his Reform UK party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable epochal event. But this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also ahead in the public surveys.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the conservative, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another France's leader, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the most popular party. A Hungarian political force, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, aiming to dethrone the global legal order, weaken fundamental freedoms and undermine multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave exposes a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy overlook at great risk: 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 firsts: “America first”, “India first”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “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 this ideology 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.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

Crucial to understand the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have fuelled 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 not been fair to all.

For more than a decade, political figures have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and marginalized, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, transitioning from a US-dominated era once dominated by the US to a multi-power landscape of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a might-makes-right approach. The ethnic nationalism that this has incited means free trade is being replaced by trade barriers. Where market forces used to drive government policies, the nationalist agendas is now driving financial choices, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies marked out by reshoring and friend-shoring and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and technology transfer, sinking global collaboration to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the common sense of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a significant portion are less receptive to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a small group of hardened anti-internationalists 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 win-lose perspective that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the expense of others doing badly.

However there are an additional group at the opposite extreme, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through free commerce as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

The vast majority of the world's citizens are moderate in views: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “America first” 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 “them”, adversaries always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

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 community boundaries? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A initial segment, 22%, will support humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, supporting disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

Another segment comprising 22% are practical cooperators who want to know that any public funds for international development are spent well. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will endorse 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.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

Thus a clear majority can be constructed not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits that benefit them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we work together from necessity or if we have a need to cooperate, the response is both.

And this openness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the xenophobic tide: we can overcome today’s negative, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that demonises immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a optimistic, outward-looking and inclusive national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and no one should doubt that it must quickly be brought under control – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the public are even more concerned about what is happening in their own lives and within their immediate neighborhoods. Last month, 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 western countries, “broken” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our economy and society.

However, as the leader also reminded us, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. A Reform leader hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by a huge sum would not repair downtrodden communities but ravage them, turn citizen against citizen and destroy any sense of unity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, disabled, poor or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every electoral district, 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 inhumane, more destructive even than monetarism, and vindictive far beyond austerity. What the people are telling us all over the Western world is that they want their leaders to restore our financial systems and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be exposed day after day 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 Reform’s hypocrisy by presenting a case for a better Britain that resonates not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to self-interest, and to the daily kindness of the British people.