🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his political party as a unique phenomenon that has exploded on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable historic moment. But this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Southeast Asia to the US and South America, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalisation parties like his are also ahead in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist Andrej Babiš overthrew prime minister Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just brought down 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. A Hungarian political force, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Dutch PVV and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an international coalition of opponents of global cooperation, inspired by far-right propagandists like Steve Bannon, seeking to dethrone the global legal order, diminish fundamental freedoms and undermine multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

This nationalist wave reveals a new and unavoidable truth that democrats ignore at our peril: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated 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 “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 force behind the breaches of global human rights standards not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every one of the world’s 59 cross-border conflicts and civil wars.

Root Causes Explained

Crucial to understand the root causes, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalization that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system 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 excluded and marginalized, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, transitioning from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a power-based one. The ethnic nationalism that this has provoked means free trade is giving way to trade barriers. Where economics 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 reshoring and friend-shoring and by bans on cross-border trade, investment and knowledge sharing, lowering international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. The situation is not fixed, and even as it hardens we can see optimism in the common sense of the world's population. In a recent survey for a major foundation, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a clear majority are more resistant to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to embrace global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a limited number 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 country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

But there are an additional group at the opposite extreme, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

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 never-ending struggle between the “our side” and the “others”, adversaries always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle prefer a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A first group, about a fifth, will back humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, backing emergency help for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” multilateralists feel the pain of others and have faith in something bigger than themselves.

A second group comprising a similar percentage are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any public funds for global progress are used effectively. And there is a final category, 21%, personally motivated collaborators, who will endorse cooperation if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a clear majority can be constructed not just for humanitarian aid if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and disease control, as long as this case is argued on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we emphasize the mutual advantages that benefit them and their own country. And thus for those who have long wondered whether we cooperate out of need or if we have a need to cooperate, the response is both.

This willingness to cooperate across borders shows how we can turn back the xenophobic tide: we can overcome today’s negative, isolated and often forceful and controlling nationalism that demonises immigrants, outsiders 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

And while in-depth polls tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the top concern – and it's clear that it must quickly be managed effectively – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the public are even more worried by 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, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and community.

But as the leader also reminded us, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. A Reform leader praised a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by a huge sum would not repair struggling areas but damage 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 sick, impaired, poor or vulnerable. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which hospital, which educational institution and which public 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 monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond austerity. What the public are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their governments to restore 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 greatest achievements could be ahead of us, we can go beyond highlighting the party's contradictions by presenting a case for a improved nation that resonates not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.