🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage portrays his political party as a unique occurrence that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional epochal event. However this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation parties similar to his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the conservative, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure overthrew the head of government Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the most popular party. A Hungarian political force, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Italian political group 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 overthrow the international rule of law, diminish fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge exposes a new and unavoidable truth that supporters of democracy overlook at our peril: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has replaced neoliberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “India first”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “my tribe first” and often “exclusive group focus” 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 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.

Root Causes Explained

Crucial to understand the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It begins with a widely felt sense that a globalization that was open but not inclusive has been a unregulated system that has been unjust to all.

Over the past ten years, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel left out and left behind, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, moving us from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of competing superpowers, and from a rules-based order to a power-based one. The ethnic nationalism that this has provoked means open commerce is being replaced by trade barriers. Where market forces used to drive politics, the politics of nationalism is now driving economic decisions, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies characterized by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and technology transfer, lowering global collaboration to its weakest point since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The situation is not fixed, and even as it solidifies we can see optimism in the common sense of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of thousands of individuals in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Globally there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of hardened anti-internationalists representing a minority of the world's people (even if a quarter in today’s US) who either feel coexistence between diverse communities is unattainable or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the cost of others doing badly.

However there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through free commerce as a positive sum win-win, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the world's citizens are somewhere in between: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “America first” ideology would suggest, or fully global citizens. They are devoted to their country but don’t see the world as in a never-ending struggle between the “us” and the “them”, opponents permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates prefer a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their local area or city wall? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A initial segment, 22%, will support aid efforts to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, backing disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates empathize of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

A second group comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will endorse cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them food on the table or peace and security.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a clear majority can be constructed not just for humanitarian aid if funds are used wisely but also for global action 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 emphasize the reciprocal benefits that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we work together from necessity or if we have a need to cooperate, the response is each.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome current pessimistic, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that vilifies newcomers, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a positive, globally engaged and welcoming national pride that responds to people’s need for community and connects to their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must promptly be brought under control – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more worried by what is happening in their own lives and within their own local communities. Recently, the UK Prime Minister gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can overcome what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and society.

But as the leader also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in using complaints than ending them. A Reform leader hailed a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since 1986. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in public services. The party's proposal to cut government expenditure by £275bn would not fix struggling areas 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. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which educational institution and which government service will be the first to be reduced or shut down.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“Faragism” is neoliberalism at its most inhumane, more destructive even than monetary policy, and spiteful far beyond austerity. What the people 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 repeatedly for plans that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be in the future, we can go beyond pointing out Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a case for a improved nation that resonates not just to idealists, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.