Combating the Continent's National Populists: Shielding the Vulnerable from the Winds of Change

Over a twelve months after the election that delivered Donald Trump a decisive comeback victory, the Democratic Party has still not released its postmortem analysis. However, last week, an influential progressive lobby group published its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its authors contended, did not resonate with key voter blocs because it did not focus enough on tackling everyday financial worries. By prioritising the threat to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for European Capitals

As the EU braces for a tumultuous period of politics between now and the end of the decade, that is a lesson that needs to be fully absorbed in European capitals. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy indicates, is hopeful that “patriotic” parties in Europe will soon mirror Mr Trump’s success. Within Europe's core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) lead the polls, supported by large swaths of working-class voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a response that is adequate to troubling times.

Major Challenges and Costly Solutions

The issues Europe faces are expensive and historic. They include the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and building economies that are more resilient to pressure by Mr Trump and China. As per a Brussels-based thinktank, the new age of global instability could require an additional €250bn in yearly EU defence spending. A major study last year on European economic competitiveness called for massive investment in shared infrastructure, to be partly funded by jointly held EU debt.

Such a economic transformation would boost growth figures that have stagnated for years.

But, at both the pan-European and national levels, there remains a deficit of courage when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations resist the idea of shared debt, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are profoundly timid. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is widely supported with voters. But the embattled centrist government – while desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Cost of Political Paralysis

The truth is that in the absence of such measures, the less affluent will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through austerity budgets and greater inequality. Bitter recent conflicts over retirement reforms in both France and Germany testify to a developing struggle over the future of the European welfare state – a phenomenon that the RN and the AfD have happily exploited to promote a politics of nativist social policy. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has resisted moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would target any benefit cuts at foreign residents.

Avoiding a Strategic Advantage for Nationalists

In the US, Mr Trump’s promises to protect working-class interests were largely insincere, as subsequent healthcare reductions and fiscal benefits for the wealthy underlined. Yet without a compelling progressive counteroffer from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the campaign trail. Absent a fundamental change in fiscal policy, societal agreements across the continent are in danger of being torn apart. Policymakers must steer clear of giving this electoral boon to the populist movements already on the march in Europe.