🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK leader depicts his Reform UK party as a distinct occurrence that has burst on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from India and Southeast Asia to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalisation parties like his are also ahead in the public surveys.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Putin populist Andrej Babiš overthrew the head of government Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just brought down yet another France's leader, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and parliament. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy 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 global alliance of anti-internationalists, motivated by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, aiming to overthrow the global legal order, weaken human rights and undermine international collaboration.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge reveals a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy ignore at our peril: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought defeated with the historic barrier – has replaced economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “India first”, “Chinese emphasis”, “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 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

It is important to grasp the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It starts with a broadly shared perception that a globalization that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a unregulated system that has not been fair to all.

Over the past ten years, leaders have not only been slow to respond to the millions who feel excluded and marginalized, but also to the shifting dynamics of world economic influence, transitioning from a unipolar world once dominated by the US to a multipolar world of rival major nations, and from a system of international law to a might-makes-right approach. The nationalist ideology that this has provoked means open commerce is giving way to protectionism. Where market forces used to drive politics, the politics of nationalism is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running protectionist strategies marked out by reshoring 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.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can find hope in the pragmatism of the global public. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of thousands of individuals in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are less receptive to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to embrace 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 16.5% of the world's people (even if a quarter in today’s US) 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 other end, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a mutually beneficial arrangement, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

Most people 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 never-ending struggle between the “us” and the “others”, adversaries permanently set apart from each other in an unbridgeable divide.

Do the majority in the middle prefer a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they prepared to accept responsibilities beyond their local area or community boundaries? Yes, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, about a fifth, will support humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are prepared to act out of selflessness, supporting emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “charitable” multilateralists feel the pain of others and believe in something larger than their own interests.

A second group 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, roughly a fifth, personally motivated collaborators, who will approve teamwork if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus 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 climate crisis and disease control, as long as this case is argued on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we stress 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 answer is both.

And this openness to cooperate across borders shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can defeat today’s negative, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that demonises immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a optimistic, globally engaged and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

Although detailed surveys tell us that across the west, illegal immigration is currently the top concern – and it's clear that it must quickly be managed effectively – the public sentiment data also tell us that the people are even more worried by what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their immediate neighborhoods. Recently, the UK Prime Minister gave an emotional speech about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “broken” and “deteriorating” are the words people have for years most frequently used when asked about both our economy and society.

However, as the leader also pointed out, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than ending them. A Reform leader praised a disastrous mini-budget as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also implement a comparable strategy – what was planned – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by a huge sum would not repair downtrodden communities but ravage them, turn citizen against citizen and destroy any sense of unity. Under a far-right government, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, poor or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, the party should be asked which medical facility, which school and which public service will be the first to be cut or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is neoliberalism at its most cruel, more destructive even than monetary policy, 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. “The party” and its international partners should be revealed day after day 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 pointing out Reform’s hypocrisy by setting out a case for a better Britain that appeals not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.