🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage portrays his political party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable historic moment. However this week, in every one of Europe’s major countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the United States and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are also leading in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the conservative, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure overthrew prime minister 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 presidential race and parliament. In the German nation, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Italian political group are already in power, 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, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, weaken fundamental freedoms and destroy international collaboration.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

This nationalist wave reveals a new and unavoidable truth that democrats overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the Berlin Wall – has replaced economic liberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “my tribe first” and often “exclusive group focus” 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 driver behind the breaches of global human rights standards not just by Russia in Ukraine but in almost every one of the world’s 59 cross-border conflicts and civil wars.

Root Causes Explained

It is important to grasp the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalization that was open but not inclusive has been a unregulated system that has not been fair to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel left out and left behind, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, transitioning from a US-dominated era once led by the United States 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 incited means open commerce is giving way to trade barriers. Where economics used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running protectionist strategies characterized by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by bans on cross-border trade, investment and technology transfer, sinking international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it solidifies we can see optimism in the common sense of the global public. In a recent survey for a prominent organization, of thousands of individuals in dozens of nations we find a clear majority are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to support global teamwork than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing a minority of the global population (even if 25% in today’s US) who either feel coexistence between ethnic and religious groups is unattainable 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.

But there are another 21% at the other end, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the world's citizens are moderate in views: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “US priority” ideology would suggest, or fully global citizens. They are patriotic but don’t see the world as in a permanent conflict between the “our side” and the “others”, adversaries always divided from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates prefer a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A first group, 22%, will back aid efforts to relieve suffering and are prepared to act out of altruism, backing emergency help for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” multilateralists empathize of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

A second group 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 safety and stability.

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 global problems, like environmental emergency and disease control, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits 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 necessity for collaboration, the response 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 forceful and controlling nationalism that demonises newcomers, outsiders and “different groups” as long as we champion a optimistic, outward-looking and inclusive patriotism that responds to people’s desire to belong and connects to their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

And while in-depth polls tell us that across the west, illegal immigration is currently the top concern – and it's clear that it must promptly be managed effectively – the public sentiment data also tell us that the people are even more concerned about what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their own local communities. Recently, a prominent leader spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, 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 economy and community.

But as the prime minister also pointed out, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. A Reform leader praised 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 fix struggling areas but ravage 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, needy or at-risk. 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 reduced or shut down.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is economic theory at its most cruel, more destructive even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are indicating all over the west is that they want their governments to restore our financial systems and our civic societies. “The party” and its international partners should be revealed day after day for policies 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 better Britain that resonates not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the nation's citizens.