🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader portrays his political party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional historic moment. However this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the US and South America, hard-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are also leading in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure toppled prime minister Petr Fiala. A French political group, 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 far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the leading party. A Hungarian political force, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Brothers of Italy are already in power, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of opponents of global cooperation, inspired by right-wing influencers such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy international collaboration.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave exposes a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy ignore at our peril: an nationalist ideology – once thought toppled with the Berlin Wall – has supplanted economic liberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “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 ethnic nationalism is the driver behind the violations 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.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

It is important to grasp the root causes, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was open but not inclusive has been a free for all that has not been fair 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 world economic influence, moving us from a US-dominated era once dominated by the US to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a power-based one. The nationalist ideology that this has provoked means open commerce is giving way to protectionism. Where economics used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already over a hundred nations are running protectionist strategies characterized by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by bans on cross-border trade, investment and knowledge sharing, lowering global collaboration to its lowest ebb 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 global public. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of thousands of individuals in 34 countries we find a significant portion are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism 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 small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the world's people (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel peaceful living between ethnic and religious groups is impossible or have a zero-sum mindset that if they or their nation do well, it has to be at the cost 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 open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the global public are moderate in views: not isolated patriots, 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”, opponents always divided from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Do the majority in the middle favor a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or city wall? Yes, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support aid efforts to relieve suffering and are prepared to act out of selflessness, backing emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

Another segment comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are used effectively. And there is a third group, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will approve teamwork if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them food on the table or safety and stability.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

Thus a clear majority can be constructed not just for humanitarian aid if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this case is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the mutual advantages that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we cooperate out of need or if we have a necessity for collaboration, the answer is each.

This willingness to cooperate across borders shows how we can turn back the xenophobic tide: we can defeat current pessimistic, isolated and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a optimistic, globally engaged and inclusive patriotism that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

Although detailed surveys tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must quickly be brought under control – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the people are even more concerned about what is happening in their own lives and within their own local communities. Last month, a prominent leader spoke movingly 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 commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and community.

However, as the leader also reminded us, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. Nigel Farage hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by a huge sum would not fix struggling areas but damage them, create social division and destroy any spirit of solidarity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, poor or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which medical facility, which educational institution and which government service will be the first to be cut or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most inhumane, more destructive even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the public are telling us all over the west is that they want their leaders to restore our economies and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be revealed day after day for plans that would harm both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be ahead of us, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by setting out a argument for a improved nation that appeals not just to visionaries, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.