🔗 Share this article

More than a twelve months after the vote that handed Donald Trump a decisive comeback victory, the Democratic party has yet to released its postmortem analysis. However, last week, an influential progressive lobby group released its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its authors argued, did not resonate with key voter blocs because it failed to concentrate enough on tackling basic economic anxieties. In focusing on the threat to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives overlooked the bread-and-butter issues that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for Europe

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 newly released national security strategy makes clear, is optimistic that “nationalist movements in Europe will quickly 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, backed by significant segments of blue-collar voters. Yet among mainstream leaders and parties, it is difficult to see a strategy that is sufficient to troubling times.

Major Problems and Costly Solutions

The issues Europe faces are costly and historic. They encompass the war in Ukraine, sustaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and building economies that are less vulnerable to pressure by Mr Trump and China. As per a European thinktank, 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 shared infrastructure, to be partly funded by jointly held EU debt.

Such a economic transformation would stimulate 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 generating funds. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations oppose the idea of collective borrowing, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are deeply unambitious. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But the embattled centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Price of Political Paralysis

The reality is that in the absence of such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through austerity budgets and greater inequality. Acrimonious recent disputes over retirement reforms in both France and Germany highlight a growing battle over the future of the European welfare state – a phenomenon that the RN and the AfD have eagerly leveraged to promote a politics of welfare chauvinism. 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 Strategic Advantage for Populists

In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as subsequent healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy demonstrated. But without a convincing progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they worked on the campaign trail. Absent a fundamental change in fiscal policy, societal agreements across the continent risk being torn apart. Policymakers must steer clear of giving this political gift to the populist movements already on the march in Europe.