🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage depicts his Reform UK party as a unique phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an remarkable epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the United States and South America, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are also leading in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist a prominent figure toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just brought down yet another French prime minister, is leading the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. 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 power, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (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 such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the global legal order, diminish human rights and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave reveals a new and unavoidable truth that supporters of democracy ignore at great risk: an nationalist ideology – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has replaced neoliberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russia first”, “my tribe first” and often “exclusive group focus” regimes. It is this nationalist sentiment that helps explain why the world is now composed of 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and this ideology is the driver behind the violations of global human rights standards not just by Russia in Ukraine but in almost every instance of global strife.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

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

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been delayed in addressing to the many people who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the shifting dynamics of global economic power, transitioning from a unipolar world 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 ethnic nationalism that this has incited means free trade is giving way to protectionism. Where economics used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, and already more than 100 countries are running protectionist strategies characterized by bringing production home and friend-shoring and by restrictions on international commerce, foreign funding and knowledge sharing, lowering global collaboration to its lowest ebb since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the common sense of the global public. In a recent survey for a prominent organization, of 36,000 people in dozens of nations we find a clear majority are more resistant to an divisive nationalist agenda and more willing to support global teamwork than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Globally there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a limited number of hardened anti-internationalists representing a minority of the world's people (even if 25% in the United States currently) who either feel peaceful living between ethnic and religious groups is unattainable or have a win-lose perspective that if they or their nation 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 an influential thinker calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

The Global Majority's Stance

The vast majority 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 devoted to their country but don’t see the world as in a never-ending struggle between the “our side” and the “them”, adversaries permanently set apart from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Are most moderates prefer a obligation-light or a responsible global community? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or city wall? Affirmative, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, about a fifth, will back aid efforts to alleviate hardship and are ready to act out of altruism, supporting emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and believe in something bigger than themselves.

Another segment comprising a similar percentage are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any public funds for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through ensuring them basic necessities or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a definite majority can be constructed not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for global action to deal with worldwide issues, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is argued on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the mutual advantages that flow to 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 turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome today’s negative, isolated and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies newcomers, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a optimistic, outward-looking and inclusive national pride that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their everyday worries.

Addressing Public Concerns

And while in-depth polls tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must quickly be brought under control – the public sentiment data 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, a prominent leader gave an emotional speech about how what’s good about Britain can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “dysfunctional” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our financial system and community.

However, as the prime minister also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in using complaints than ending them. Nigel Farage hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. The party's proposal to cut government expenditure by £275bn would not fix downtrodden communities but ravage them, create social division and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be sick, impaired, poor or at-risk. Continually from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which school and which public service will be the first to be reduced or closed.

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 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 global allies should be revealed day after day for policies that would harm 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 improved nation that appeals not just to visionaries, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the daily kindness of the British people.