Don't Succumb to the Autocratic Hype – Reform and the Hard Right Are Able to Be Halted in Their Tracks

Nigel Farage portrays his Reform UK party as a distinct phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an remarkable epochal event. However this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from India and Thailand to the US and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties like his are also ahead in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš overthrew 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 parliament. In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the most popular party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance 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 hardline nationalists – are part of an global alliance of opponents of global cooperation, motivated by right-wing influencers like Steve Bannon, seeking to overthrow the international rule of law, diminish fundamental freedoms and undermine multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

This nationalist wave reveals a recent undeniable reality that democrats overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has replaced neoliberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of priorities: “America first”, “India first”, “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 many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and this ideology is the force behind the breaches of global human rights standards 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 grasp the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have fuelled this new age of nationalism. It starts with a widely felt sense that a globalisation that was open but not inclusive has been a free for all that has not been fair to all.

For more than a decade, leaders have not only been slow to respond to the many people who feel left out and marginalized, 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 rival major nations, 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 trade barriers. Where economics used to drive politics, the politics of nationalism is now driving economic decisions, and already over a hundred nations are running mercantilist policies marked out by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by restrictions on international commerce, investment and technology transfer, lowering international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can see optimism in the common sense of the world's population. In a recent survey for a major foundation, of 36,000 people in 34 countries we find a clear majority are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to embrace international cooperation than many of the officials who rule over them.

Across the world there is, perhaps surprisingly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the world's people (even if 25% 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 expense of others doing badly.

But there are another 21% at the opposite extreme, 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”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the world's citizens are somewhere in between: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, as “US priority” ideology would suggest, or all-in cosmopolitans. They are devoted to their country but don’t see the world as in a never-ending struggle between the “us” and the “them”, adversaries always divided from each other in an irreconcilable gap.

Do the majority in the middle prefer a duty-free or a dutiful world? Are they willing to accept responsibilities beyond their garden gate or community boundaries? Affirmative, under specific circumstances. A initial segment, 22%, will back humanitarian action to alleviate hardship and are ready to act out of selflessness, backing emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and believe in something bigger than themselves.

Another segment comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any public funds for international development are spent well. And there is a final category, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or safety and stability.

Building a Cooperative Majority

So a definite majority can be built not just for emergency assistance if funds are used wisely but also for global action to deal with global problems, like climate crisis and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument 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 wondered whether we work together from necessity or if we have a need to cooperate, the response 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 forceful and controlling patriotic extremism that demonises immigrants, outsiders and “others” as long as we champion a optimistic, globally engaged and welcoming patriotism that responds to people’s need for community and resonates with their everyday worries.

Tackling Key Issues

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the west, illegal immigration is currently the top concern – and it's clear that it must quickly be brought under control – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the people are even more worried by what is happening in their personal circumstances and within their own local communities. Recently, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s negative, doing so precisely because in most western countries, “dysfunctional” and “in decline” are the words people have for years most commonly cited when asked about both our financial system and society.

However, as the prime minister also pointed out, the far right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. Nigel Farage praised a ill-fated economic plan as “the best Conservative budget” since the 1980s. But he would also enact a similar plan – what was intended – the largest reductions in government programs. Reform’s plan to reduce public spending by £275bn would not fix downtrodden communities but damage them, create social division and destroy any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, needy or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every constituency, Reform should be asked which hospital, which educational institution and which government service will be the first to be cut or shut down.

Risks and Solutions

“Faragism” is neoliberalism at its most inhumane, more destructive even than monetary policy, and spiteful far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are telling us all over the west is that they want their leaders to restore our financial systems and our communities. “The party” and its global allies should be revealed day after day for plans that would harm 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 visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.