🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his Reform UK party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the world stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional historic moment. However this week, in every one of Europe’s major countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalisation parties like his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure overthrew prime minister Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just forced the resignation of yet another France's leader, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In the German nation, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Dutch PVV and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an global alliance of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, seeking to overthrow the international rule of law, weaken fundamental freedoms and undermine international collaboration.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave exposes a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy ignore at great risk: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has supplanted economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “my tribe first” 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 one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Root Causes Explained

It is important to grasp the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have fuelled this new age of nationalism. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalisation that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a free for all that has not been fair to all.

Over the past ten years, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, moving us from a unipolar world once dominated by the United States 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 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 over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies characterized by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by restrictions on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, sinking international cooperation to its weakest point since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. The situation is not fixed, 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 clear majority are less receptive to an exclusionary nationalism and more willing to support global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a limited number of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the global population (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel coexistence between diverse communities 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 other end, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through free commerce as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the world's citizens 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 “our side” and the “them”, opponents always divided from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates prefer a duty-free or a responsible global community? Are they prepared to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or city wall? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A first group, 22%, will support humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are prepared to act out of altruism, backing emergency help for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” multilateralists feel the pain of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

Another segment comprising a similar percentage are practical cooperators who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are spent well. And there is a third group, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or peace and security.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a clear majority can be built not just for humanitarian aid if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with worldwide issues, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this case is argued on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we emphasize the mutual advantages that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long wondered whether we cooperate out of need or if we have a necessity for collaboration, the answer is both.

This willingness 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 patriotic extremism that demonises newcomers, outsiders 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

Although detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry 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 worried by what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their immediate neighborhoods. Last month, a prominent leader spoke movingly about how what’s good about Britain can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “broken” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our financial system and community.

But as the prime minister also reminded us, the far right is more interested in using complaints than resolving issues. Nigel Farage praised a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also enact a similar plan – what was intended – the largest reductions in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by a huge sum would not fix struggling areas but damage them, turn citizen against citizen and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, disabled, needy or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which hospital, which educational institution 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 spiteful far beyond austerity. What the people are telling us all over the west is that they want their leaders to rebuild our economies and our communities. “The party” and its international partners should be revealed 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 the party's contradictions by presenting a argument for a improved nation that appeals not just to visionaries, but to realists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.