Don't Fall for the Autocratic Hype – Change and the Far Right Are Able to Be Stopped in Their Paths

The Reform UK leader portrays his political party as a unique phenomenon that has exploded on to the global stage, its meteoric rise an remarkable historic moment. However this week, in every one of the continent's major countries and from the Indian subcontinent and Thailand to the United States and South America, hard-right, anti-immigration, anti-globalisation parties similar to his are also leading in the opinion polls.

In last Saturday’s Czech elections, the rightwing, pro-Russian leader Andrej Babiš toppled the head of government Petr Fiala. A French political group, which has just brought down yet another France's leader, is leading the polls for both the presidential race and parliament. In Germany, the right-wing AfD party is currently the leading party. Hungary’s Fidesz party, Slovakia's governing alliance and the Brothers of Italy are already in power, while the Freedom party of Austria (FPÖ), the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV) and Belgian Vlaams Belang – all staunch nationalist groups – are part of an international coalition of opponents of global cooperation, inspired by right-wing influencers like Steve Bannon, seeking to overthrow the international rule of law, diminish human rights and destroy international collaboration.

Rise of Populist Nationalism

The populist nationalist surge exposes a recent undeniable reality that democrats ignore at great risk: an authoritarian ethnic nationalism – once thought toppled with the historic barrier – has supplanted 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 “my tribe first and only” regimes. It is this nationalist sentiment that helps explain why the world is now composed of 91 autocracies and only 88 democracies, and ethnic nationalism is the force 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

It is important to understand the underlying forces, widespread globally, that have driven this recent nationalist era. It begins with a widely felt sense that a globalisation 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 millions who feel left out and marginalized, but also to the shifting dynamics of world economic influence, moving us from a US-dominated era once led by the US 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 protectionist strategies marked out by reshoring and ally-focused trade and by bans on international commerce, foreign funding and technology transfer, sinking global collaboration to its lowest ebb since 1945.

Hope in Global Public Sentiment

But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and even as it solidifies we can find hope in the pragmatism of the global public. In a recent survey for a major foundation, of 36,000 people in dozens of nations 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 rule over them.

Across the world there is, maybe unexpectedly, 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 peaceful living between ethnic and religious groups is impossible 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 another 21% at the other end, whom we might call committed internationalists, who either still see cooperation across borders through open trade as a positive sum win-win, or are what a prominent philosopher calls “rooted cosmopolitans”.

The Global Majority's Stance

Most people of the world's citizens are moderate in views: not narrow, inward-looking nationalists, 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”, opponents 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 obligations beyond their local area or city wall? Yes, under specific circumstances. A first group, 22%, will back humanitarian action to relieve suffering and are ready to act out of selflessness, supporting disaster relief for disaster zones. Those we might call “good cause” cooperation advocates feel the pain of others and have faith in something bigger than themselves.

A second group comprising 22% are practical cooperators who want to know that any public funds for global progress are used effectively. And there is a third group, 21%, self-interested multilateralists, who will endorse teamwork if they can see that it benefits them and their communities, whether it be through ensuring them food on the table or peace and security.

Forging a Collaborative Consensus

So a clear majority can be built 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 case 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 cooperate out of need or if we have a necessity for collaboration, the answer is both.

And this openness to work internationally shows how we can turn back the anti-foreigner sentiment: we can overcome today’s negative, inward-looking and often aggressive and authoritarian patriotic extremism that vilifies newcomers, foreigners and “different groups” as long as we champion a optimistic, globally engaged and welcoming national pride that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their immediate concerns.

Tackling Key Issues

Although in-depth polls tell us that across the west, unauthorized entry is currently the biggest national issue – and it's clear that it must quickly be managed effectively – the snapshots of opinion also tell us that the people are even more worried by what is happening in their own lives and within their immediate neighborhoods. Last month, the UK Prime Minister spoke movingly about how what’s positive in the nation can drive out what’s bad, 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 society.

However, as the prime minister also reminded us, the extreme 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 the 1980s. But he would also enact a comparable strategy – what was planned – the largest reductions in public services. The party's proposal to reduce public spending by £275bn would not repair struggling areas but damage them, turn citizen against citizen and wreck any spirit of solidarity. Under a hard-right regime, you will not be able to afford to be sick, impaired, poor or vulnerable. Continually from now on, and in every electoral district, the party should be asked which hospital, which educational institution 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 inhumane, more destructive even than monetarism, and vindictive far beyond fiscal restraint. What the people are indicating all over the Western world is that they want their governments to rebuild our financial systems and our communities. “The party” and its international partners should be revealed day after day for policies that would devastate both. And for those of us who believe our best days could be ahead of us, we can go beyond pointing out the party's contradictions by setting out a case for a improved nation that appeals not just to idealists, but to realists, to self-interest, and to the everyday compassion of the British people.