Don't Fall for the Authoritarian Buzz – Reform and the Far Right Are Able to Be Halted in Their Paths

The Reform UK leader portrays his political party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable historic moment. But this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the United States and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another France's leader, is ahead the polls for both the presidential race and parliament. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. A Hungarian political force, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Italian political group are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Dutch PVV and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, seeking to overthrow the global legal order, diminish human rights and destroy multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

This nationalist wave reveals a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy overlook at our peril: 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 priorities: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russia first”, “group priority” and often “exclusive group focus” regimes. It is this ethnic nationalism that helps explain why the world is now composed of 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and ethnic nationalism is the driver behind the violations of international human rights law not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

Crucial to understand the root causes, widespread globally, 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 free for all that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the millions who feel left out and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, moving us from a US-dominated era once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of competing superpowers, and from a system of international law to a might-makes-right approach. The nationalist ideology that this has incited 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 mercantilist policies marked out by reshoring and friend-shoring and by bans on cross-border trade, foreign funding and knowledge sharing, sinking international cooperation to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The situation is not fixed, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the pragmatism of the global public. In a poll conducted for a major foundation, of thousands of individuals in 34 countries we find a significant portion are less receptive to an exclusionary nationalism and more willing to support global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the global population (even if a quarter in the United States currently) who either feel coexistence between ethnic and religious groups is impossible 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.

But there are an additional group at the opposite extreme, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through free commerce as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

The vast majority of the global public are somewhere in between: not isolated patriots, as “America first” 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 responsible global community? Are they willing to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or city wall? Yes, under certain conditions. A first group, 22%, will support aid efforts to relieve suffering and are ready 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 22% are practical cooperators who want to know that any public funds for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, roughly a fifth, self-interested multilateralists, 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.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a clear 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 argument is argued on grounds of wise personal benefit, 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 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 aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that demonises immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a optimistic, outward-looking and welcoming national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

And while detailed surveys tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the top concern – and no one should doubt that it must promptly be brought under control – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more concerned about what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their immediate neighborhoods. Last month, the UK Prime Minister gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can overcome what’s bad, 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 society.

However, as the leader also pointed out, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. A Reform leader praised a disastrous mini-budget as “an excellent fiscal policy” since the 1980s. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was planned – the largest reductions in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by £275bn would not fix struggling areas but ravage them, turn citizen against citizen and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, poor or vulnerable. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which medical facility, which school and which government service will be the first to be cut or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are telling us all over the Western world is that they want their governments to restore our financial systems and our civic societies. “Reform” and its international partners should be revealed repeatedly for plans that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our greatest achievements could be in the future, we can go beyond highlighting the party's contradictions by presenting a argument for a improved nation that resonates not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.