🔗 Share this article Combating Europe's National Populists: Protecting the Vulnerable from the Winds of Transformation More than a twelve months following the vote that handed Donald Trump a clear-cut return victory, the Democratic party has still not issued its postmortem analysis. But, recently, an prominent liberal advocacy organization published its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its authors contended, did not resonate with core constituencies because it did not focus enough on tackling everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, progressives neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds. A Warning for Europe As the EU braces for a turbulent era of politics between now and the end of the decade, that is a message that needs to be fully understood in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy indicates, is optimistic that “patriotic” parties in Europe will soon replicate Mr Trump’s success. In the EU’s Franco-German engine room, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) lead the polls, backed by large swaths of blue-collar voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a strategy that is adequate to troubling times. Major Challenges and Costly Solutions The challenges Europe faces are expensive and historic. They encompass the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and developing economies that are less vulnerable to bullying by Mr Trump and China. As per a Brussels-based research institute, the new age of global instability could require an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A significant study last year on European economic competitiveness demanded massive investment in public goods, to be partly funded by collective EU debt. Such a fiscal paradigm shift would boost growth figures that have flatlined for years. But, at both the pan-European and national levels, there continues to be a deficit of courage when it comes to revenue raising. The EU’s so-called “budget hawks oppose the idea of collective borrowing, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are deeply timid. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But the embattled centrist government – while desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move. The Price of Inaction The reality 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 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 opposed moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would target any benefit cuts at foreign residents. Preventing a Strategic Advantage for Populists In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as subsequent healthcare reductions and fiscal benefits for the wealthy underlined. But in the absence of a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Absent a fundamental change in economic approach, social contracts across the continent risk being torn apart. Governments must steer clear of giving this political gift to the populist movements already on the rise in Europe.