🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his political party as a distinct occurrence that has burst on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional historic moment. However this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also ahead in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure overthrew the head of government Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just brought down yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the presidential race and the legislature. In the German nation, the right-wing AfD party is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, 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 staunch nationalist groups – are part of an global alliance of opponents of global cooperation, motivated by right-wing influencers like Steve Bannon, seeking to overthrow the global legal order, weaken fundamental freedoms and undermine multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge reveals a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the Berlin Wall – has replaced economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russia first”, “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 many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, 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 one of the world’s 59 cross-border conflicts and civil wars.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

Crucial 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 accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, political figures have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel left out and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, moving us from a unipolar world once led by the US to a multipolar world of competing superpowers, and from a rules-based order to a power-based one. The ethnic nationalism that this has incited means open commerce is being replaced by protectionism. Where market forces used to drive politics, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies marked out by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, investment and technology transfer, lowering international cooperation to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

But all is not lost. The situation is not fixed, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the common sense of the global public. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, of thousands of individuals in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are more resistant to an divisive nationalist agenda and more willing to embrace global teamwork than many of the officials who govern them.

Globally there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of hardened anti-internationalists representing 16.5% of the global population (even if 25% in today’s US) 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 expense of others doing badly.

However there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see international collaboration through free commerce as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what an influential thinker calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people of the global public are somewhere in between: 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”, adversaries permanently set apart from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle prefer a duty-free or a responsible global community? Are they prepared to accept responsibilities beyond their local area or community boundaries? Yes, under certain conditions. A initial segment, 22%, will back humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are ready to act out of altruism, backing disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists feel the pain of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any public funds for global progress are spent well. 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 local areas, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a definite majority can be constructed 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 presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, 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 necessity for collaboration, the answer is each.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can defeat today’s negative, isolated and often forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that demonises newcomers, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a positive, globally engaged and welcoming national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

And while in-depth polls tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the top concern – and no one should doubt that it must promptly 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. Recently, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our financial system and society.

But as the leader also pointed out, the extreme right is more interested in using complaints than resolving issues. A Reform leader praised a disastrous mini-budget as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also enact 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, create social division and destroy any sense of unity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, poor or vulnerable. Continually from now on, and in every electoral district, Reform should be asked which hospital, which educational institution and which public service will be the first to be cut or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“Faragism” is economic theory at its most inhumane, more harmful even than monetary policy, and spiteful far beyond austerity. What the public are indicating all over the west is that they want their leaders to rebuild our financial systems and our communities. “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 greatest achievements could be ahead of us, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by presenting a argument for a better Britain that resonates not just to idealists, but to realists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the nation's citizens.