Don't Fall for the Authoritarian Buzz – Change and the Hard Right Can Be Halted in Their Tracks

The Reform UK leader portrays his Reform UK party as a distinct occurrence that has burst on to the world stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional historic moment. But this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the US and Argentina, hard-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties similar to 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. A French political group, which has just brought down yet another France's leader, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In Germany, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the leading party. A Hungarian political force, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Austrian FPÖ, the Dutch PVV and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an global alliance of anti-internationalists, inspired by right-wing influencers such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, diminish fundamental freedoms and destroy multilateral cooperation.

The Populist Nationalist Surge

The populist nationalist surge reveals a recent undeniable reality that supporters of democracy overlook at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought defeated with the Berlin Wall – has replaced neoliberalism as the dominant ideology of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “America first”, “Indian focus”, “China first”, “Russia first”, “group priority” and often “my tribe first and only” regimes. It is this nationalist sentiment that helps explain why the world is now composed of many autocratic states and fewer democratic ones, and ethnic nationalism 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.

Root Causes Explained

Crucial to understand the underlying forces, common to almost every country, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It begins 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.

Over the past ten years, 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 unipolar world once led 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 ethnic nationalism that this has incited means open commerce is giving way to trade barriers. Where economics used to drive government policies, the politics of nationalism is now driving financial choices, 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 knowledge sharing, sinking international cooperation to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Optimism in Public Opinion

But all is not lost. 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 thousands of individuals in 34 countries we find a significant portion are less receptive to an divisive nationalist agenda and more inclined to support global teamwork than many of the leaders who govern them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a small group of staunch global cooperation opponents representing 16.5% of the global population (even if a quarter in today’s US) who either feel coexistence between diverse communities is impossible 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 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 positive sum win-win, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “locally engaged global citizens”.

Worldwide Public Position

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

Do the majority in the middle favor a obligation-light or a dutiful world? Are they prepared to accept obligations beyond their garden gate or city wall? 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, backing emergency help for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” multilateralists feel the pain of others and have faith in something larger than their own interests.

A second group 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%, personally motivated collaborators, who will approve cooperation if they can see that it advantages them and their communities, whether it be through guaranteeing them basic necessities or peace and security.

Building a Cooperative Majority

Thus a definite majority can be constructed not just for emergency assistance if funds are used wisely but also for international measures to deal with global problems, like environmental emergency and pandemic prevention, as long as this argument is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we stress the reciprocal benefits 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 each.

And this openness to work internationally shows how we can reverse the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can defeat today’s negative, isolated and often forceful and controlling nationalism that demonises immigrants, outsiders and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a positive, globally engaged and inclusive patriotism that responds to people’s desire to belong and connects to their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

And while in-depth polls tell us that across the west, illegal immigration is currently the biggest national issue – and no one should doubt that it must quickly be managed effectively – the public sentiment data also tell us that the public are even more worried by what is happening in their own lives 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 negative, doing so precisely because in most developed nations, “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 leader also reminded us, the far right is more interested in using complaints than resolving issues. A Reform leader hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also implement a similar plan – what was intended – the biggest ever cuts in public services. Reform’s plan to cut government expenditure by a huge sum would not fix downtrodden communities but ravage them, create social division and destroy any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be sick, disabled, needy or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, Reform should be asked which medical facility, which school and which public service will be the first to be cut or closed.

Risks and Solutions

“This ideology” is neoliberalism at its most inhumane, more harmful even than monetarism, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are telling us all over the west is that they want their governments to restore our economies and our communities. “The party” and its international partners should be exposed 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 highlighting Reform’s hypocrisy by presenting a argument for a better Britain that resonates not just to visionaries, but to pragmatists, to personal benefit, and to the daily kindness of the British people.