Don’t fall for the authoritarian hype – reform and the far right can be stopped in their tracks | Gordon Brown
nEagle Farage portrays his UK Reform Party as a unique phenomenon that exploded onto the world stage, its meteoric rise an extraordinary historical event. But this week, in every major country in Europe, from India and Thailand to the United States and Argentina, far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-globalization parties like his are leading in the polls.
In the Czech elections that took place last Saturday, the right-wing populist who supports Putin, Andrej Babis, won Deposed Prime Minister Peter Fiala. National AssemblyThe party, which just ousted another French prime minister, is leading in opinion polls for both the French presidency and parliament. in germany, The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party Currently it is the most popular party. The Hungarian Fidesz party, the pro-Russian Slovakian coalition led by Robert Fico, and the Italian Brotherhood already participate in the government. Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ), Netherlands Freedom Party (PVV) and Belgium Flams Belang – All ultra-nationalists – are part of an international coalition of anti-internationalists, inspired by far-right propaganda e.g Steve BannonIt seeks to overthrow the rule of international law, abridge human rights, and destroy multilateral cooperation.
The wave of populist nationalism is revealing an inescapable new truth that Democrats are ignoring, to our peril: Authoritarian ethnonationalism—once thought to be overthrown by the Berlin Wall—has replaced neoliberalism as the dominant ideology of our time, giving us a world of firsts: “America First,” “India First,” “China First,” and “Russia First” regimes. first”, “my tribe first”, and often “my tribe first and foremost”. It is this ethnic nationalism that helps explain why the world is made up now 91 countries are authoritarian and only 88 are democraticEthnic nationalism is the force behind violations of international human rights law, not only by Russia in Ukraine, but almost throughout the world. One of 59 in the world Cross-border conflicts and civil wars.
It is important to understand the basic forces shared by almost every country that have fueled this new era of nationalism. It begins with a widespread sense that globalization, which was open but not inclusive, was free-for-all and not fair to all.
For more than a decade, leaders have been not only slow to respond to millions who feel neglected and left behind, but also slow to the changing balance of global economic powers, which is moving us from a unipolar world once dominated by the United States to a multipolar world of competing great powers, and from a rules-based order to a power-based order. The ethnic nationalism this has provoked means that free trade is giving way to protectionism. Where once economics drove politics, the politics of nationalism now drive economic decisions, and more than 100 countries already operate trade policies characterized by repatriation, pro-friendliness, and embargoes on cross-border trade, investment, and technology transfer, bringing international cooperation to its lowest levels since 1945.
But all is not lost. The cement is still wet, and despite the solidity of this material, we can find hope in the common sense of world public opinion. In a Scanning by Focaldata For the Rockefeller Foundation, among 36,000 people in 34 countries, we find a clear majority that is more resistant to exclusionary nationalism and more willing to embrace international cooperation than many of the leaders they govern.
Perhaps surprisingly, around the world we find only a small group of hard-line anti-internationalists who represent 16.5% of the world’s population (even if they are 25% in the United States today) who either feel that coexistence between ethnic and religious groups is impossible or have a zero-sum mentality that if they or their country is doing well, it must be at the expense of others who are doing poorly.
But there is another 21%, by contrast, who might be called committed internationalists, who either still view cross-border cooperation through open trade as a positive, win-win sum, or are, as the American philosopher and writer put it, Kwame Anthony Appiah They are called “rooted cosmopolitans.”
The vast majority of global public opinion lies somewhere in between: neither narrow-minded and inward-looking nationalists, as the “America First” ideology suggests, nor comprehensive cosmopolitans. They are patriotic but do not view the world as an endless struggle between “us” and “them,” adversaries permanently separated from each other in an unbridgeable divide.
Would the majority in the middle prefer a duty-free world or a duty-based world? Are they willing to accept commitments beyond their garden gate or city wall? Yes, under certain circumstances. The first group, 22%, would support humanitarian work to alleviate suffering and are willing to act altruistically, supporting emergency assistance to disaster areas. Those who might be called “good cause” are pluralists who feel the pain of others and believe in something greater than themselves.
The second group, consisting of 22%, are realistic multilateralists who want to know that any taxes paid for international development are well spent. A third group, 21%, are self-interested multilaterals who would support cooperation if they saw that it benefits them and their societies, whether that is through ensuring food on the table or peace and security.
So it is possible to build a clear majority not only for humanitarian aid if the money is well spent, but also for global action to deal with global problems, such as the climate crisis and pandemic prevention, as long as the issue is discussed on the basis of enlightened self-interest, and if we emphasize the mutual benefits that flow to them and their countries. So for those who have long wondered whether we cooperate out of necessity or whether we have a need to cooperate, the answer is both.
After promoting the newsletter
This openness to cross-border cooperation shows how we can push back against the tide of xenophobia: we can defeat the negative, inward-looking, aggressive, and often authoritarian nationalism that demonizes immigrants, foreigners, and “others” as long as we stand for a positive, outward-looking, and inclusive nationalism that responds to people’s desire to belong and resonates with their immediate concerns.
Although in-depth polls tell us that illegal immigration across the West is now the biggest national issue – and no one should doubt that it must be brought under control quickly – snapshots of public opinion also tell us that the general public is becoming more interested in what is happening in their lives and within their communities. Last month, Keir Starmer Speak impressively About how what is good in Britain can drive out what is bad, precisely because in most Western countries, “broken” and “in decline” have been the words people have been citing for years when asked about our economy and society.
But as the Prime Minister also reminded us, the far right is more interested in exploiting injustices than ending them. Farage praised Liz Truss’s disastrous small budget as “The Tories’ best budget since 1986But it would also enact Truss II – which is what it had planned to introduce – the largest cuts ever to public services. The reform plan for – Reducing public spending by 275 billion pounds It will not reform oppressed communities, but will destroy them, turning citizen against citizen, destroying any spirit of solidarity. Under Farage’s hard-right regime, you wouldn’t be able to afford to be sick, disabled, poor or vulnerable. Every day from now on, in every constituency, we should ask reform which hospital, which school, which public service will be the first to be cut or closed.
“Fragivism” is neoliberalism in its most inhuman form, more destructive than even the critical and retaliatory school that goes far beyond austerity. What ordinary people across the West are telling us is that they want their governments to rebuild our economies and civil societies. “Islah” and its global allies must be exposed day after day due to policies that would destroy both of them. For those of us who believe our best days may be ahead, we can go further than highlighting the hypocrisy of reform by making the case for a better Britain, one that appeals not only to idealists, but also to the pragmatists, self-interests, and everyday sympathies of British people.