Don't Fall for the Authoritarian Buzz – Reform and the Hard Right Are Able to Be Stopped in Their Paths

Nigel Farage depicts his political party as a distinct occurrence that has exploded on to the global stage, its rapid ascent an exceptional epochal event. But this week, in every one of the continent's leading countries and from India and Thailand to the United States and Argentina, hard-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalization parties similar to his are also leading in the public surveys.

During recent Czech voting, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader a prominent figure toppled prime minister Petr Fiala. National Rally, which has just forced the resignation of yet another French prime minister, is ahead the polls for both the French presidency and the legislature. In the German nation, the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Robert Fico’s pro-Russian Slovakian coalition and the Brothers of Italy are already in government, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgium’s Vlaams Belang – all hardline nationalists – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, inspired by far-right propagandists such as a well-known figure, aiming to dethrone the international rule of law, weaken human rights and destroy multilateral cooperation.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge exposes a recent undeniable reality that democrats ignore at our peril: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the Berlin Wall – has supplanted economic liberalism as the leading belief system of our age, giving us a world of firsts: “US priority”, “India first”, “Chinese emphasis”, “Russian primacy”, “group priority” 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 force behind the violations of international human rights law not just by Russia in Ukraine but in almost every instance of global strife.

Understanding the Underlying Forces

Crucial to understand the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have fuelled this recent nationalist era. It begins with a broadly shared perception that a globalization that was accessible yet exclusionary has been a free for all that has been unjust to all.

For more than a decade, political figures have not only been slow to respond to the many people who feel excluded and left behind, but also to the changing balance of world economic influence, transitioning from a unipolar world once led by the United States to a multi-power landscape of competing superpowers, and from a rules-based order to a might-makes-right approach. The ethnic nationalism that this has incited means open commerce is being replaced by protectionism. Where economics used to drive politics, the nationalist agendas is now driving economic decisions, and already more than 100 countries are running mercantilist policies marked out by bringing production home and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, foreign funding and knowledge sharing, sinking international cooperation to its weakest point since the post-war period.

Optimism in Public Opinion

However, there is hope. The cement is still wet, and even as it hardens we can see optimism in the pragmatism of the world's population. In a poll conducted for a prominent organization, of 36,000 people in dozens of nations we find a significant portion are more resistant to an exclusionary nationalism and more inclined to support international cooperation than many of the leaders who rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, only a limited number of hardened anti-internationalists representing 16.5% of the global population (even if 25% in today’s US) who either feel coexistence between diverse communities is unattainable or have a zero-sum mindset that if they or their country do well, it has to be at the expense of others doing badly.

But there are an additional group at the other end, whom we might call dedicated globalists, who either still see international collaboration through open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what an influential thinker calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the global public are somewhere in between: not isolated patriots, as “US priority” ideology would suggest, or all-in cosmopolitans. They are patriotic 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 local area or city wall? Affirmative, under certain conditions. A first group, about a fifth, will back humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are prepared to act out of altruism, backing disaster relief for affected areas. Those we might call “charitable” cooperation advocates empathize of others and have faith in something bigger than themselves.

Another segment comprising 22% are pragmatic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for global progress are spent well. And there is a final category, 21%, personally motivated collaborators, who will endorse cooperation if they can see that it benefits them and their local areas, whether it be through ensuring them basic necessities or safety and stability.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

Thus a clear majority can be constructed not just for emergency assistance if money is well spent but also for international measures to deal with global problems, like climate crisis and disease control, as long as this case is presented on grounds of wise personal benefit, and if we emphasize the reciprocal benefits that flow to them and their own country. And thus for those who have long questioned whether we work together from necessity or if we have a need to cooperate, the answer is both.

And this openness to cooperate across borders shows how we can reverse the xenophobic tide: we can overcome today’s negative, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian nationalism that vilifies immigrants, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we advocate for a optimistic, outward-looking and welcoming national pride that addresses people’s desire to belong and connects to their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the Western nations, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and no one should doubt that it must quickly be managed effectively – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the public are even more concerned about 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 overcome what’s negative, 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 economy and society.

But as the prime minister also reminded us, the extreme right is more interested in exploiting grievances than resolving issues. A Reform leader hailed a ill-fated economic plan as “an excellent fiscal policy” since 1986. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was planned – the largest reductions in public services. The party's proposal to cut government expenditure by a huge sum would not repair struggling areas but damage them, create social division and destroy any sense of unity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be ill, impaired, poor or at-risk. Every day from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which hospital, which school and which public service will be the first to be cut or closed.

The Stakes and the Alternative

“This ideology” is neoliberalism at its most cruel, more harmful even than monetary policy, and vindictive far beyond austerity. What the people are telling us all over the west is that they want their governments to restore our financial systems and our communities. “The party” and its international partners should be revealed repeatedly for policies that would harm 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 improved nation that appeals not just to idealists, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the daily kindness of the nation's citizens.