Combating Europe's National Populists: Protecting the Vulnerable from the Forces of Transformation

Over a twelve months after the vote that delivered Donald Trump a decisive comeback victory, the Democratic Party has still not released its election autopsy. But, last week, an prominent liberal advocacy organization published its own. The Harris campaign, its writers contended, did not resonate with core constituencies because it failed to concentrate enough on addressing everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, liberals neglected the bread-and-butter issues that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for European Capitals

While Europe prepares for a turbulent era of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a message that needs to be fully absorbed in European capitals. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy makes clear, is optimistic that “patriotic” parties in Europe will soon mirror Mr Trump’s success. In the EU’s core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) top 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 sufficient to troubling times.

Major Problems and Costly Solutions

The issues Europe faces are expensive and era-defining. They encompass the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, dealing with demographic change and developing economies that are more resilient to pressure by Mr Trump and China. As per a European research institute, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could necessitate an additional €250bn in yearly EU defence spending. A significant study last year on European economic competitiveness called for substantial investment in public goods, to be partly funded by collective EU debt.

Such a fiscal paradigm shift would boost growth figures that have stagnated for years.

However, at both the EU-wide and national levels, there continues to be a deficit of courage when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “budget hawks oppose the idea of collective borrowing, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are deeply unambitious. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is overwhelmingly popular with voters. Yet the beleaguered centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – refuses to contemplate such a move.

The Price of Political Paralysis

The reality is that without such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of fiscal tightening through spending cuts and increased inequality. Acrimonious recent disputes over pension cutbacks 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 eagerly leveraged 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 focus any benefit cuts at non-French nationals.

Preventing a Political Gift for Populists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s promises to protect working-class interests were largely insincere, as subsequent Medicaid cuts and fiscal benefits for the wealthy demonstrated. But in the absence of a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Without a fundamental change in economic approach, social contracts across the continent are in danger of being ripped up. Policymakers must avoid handing this electoral boon to the Trumpian forces already on the rise in Europe.