Don't Succumb to the Authoritarian Buzz – Change and the Far Right Are Able to Be Halted in Their Paths

Nigel Farage depicts his Reform UK party as a unique phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an exceptional epochal event. But this week, in every one of Europe’s leading countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the US and South America, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also leading in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the conservative, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In the German nation, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Brothers of Italy 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 like Steve Bannon, aiming 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 overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has supplanted neoliberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russian primacy”, “my tribe first” and often “my tribe first and only” regimes. It is this ethnic nationalism 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 international human rights law not just by one nation in conflict but in almost every instance of global strife.

Root Causes Explained

It is important to understand the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this new age of nationalism. It begins with a broadly shared perception 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 slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of global economic power, moving us from a unipolar world once dominated by the US to a multi-power landscape of rival major nations, and from a rules-based order to a might-makes-right approach. The nationalist ideology that this has provoked means open commerce is giving way to protectionism. Where economics used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies characterized by reshoring and friend-shoring and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and knowledge sharing, lowering international cooperation to its lowest ebb since the post-war period.

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 prominent organization, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a significant portion are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to embrace global teamwork than many of the officials who rule over them.

Across the world 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 coexistence between diverse communities is impossible or have a zero-sum mindset that if they or their nation 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 mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

The vast majority of the world's citizens are moderate in views: 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 permanent conflict between the “our side” and the “them”, opponents always divided from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Are most moderates favor a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, about a fifth, will back aid efforts to relieve suffering and are prepared to act out of selflessness, supporting disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists empathize of others and believe in something bigger than themselves.

Another segment comprising a similar percentage are practical cooperators who want to know that any public funds for international development are used effectively. And there is a final category, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will endorse teamwork if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a clear majority can be constructed not just for humanitarian aid if money is well spent but also for global action to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits that benefit them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we work together from necessity or if we have a necessity for collaboration, the answer is both.

This willingness to work internationally shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome today’s negative, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that demonises immigrants, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a optimistic, outward-looking and inclusive patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and connects to 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 promptly be managed effectively – 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, a prominent leader 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 “in decline” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our financial system and community.

But 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 “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in government programs. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by a huge sum 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, needy or vulnerable. Continually from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which hospital, which school and which government service will be the first to be reduced or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is economic theory at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetarism, and spiteful far beyond austerity. What the people are telling us all over the Western world is that they want their leaders to rebuild our economies and our communities. “Reform” and its global allies 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 Reform’s hypocrisy by presenting a argument for a improved nation that appeals not just to visionaries, but to realists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.