🔗 Share this article Countering the Continent's Populist Movements: Shielding the Vulnerable from the Forces of Change Over a twelve months after 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 released its own. The Harris campaign, its writers contended, did not resonate with key voter blocs because it failed to concentrate enough on addressing everyday financial worries. By prioritising the threat to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, progressives overlooked the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds. A Warning for European Capitals While Europe prepares for a tumultuous period of politics from now until 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 indicates, is optimistic that “nationalist movements in Europe will quickly mirror 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, supported by large swaths of blue-collar voters. Yet among mainstream leaders and parties, it is difficult to see a response that is adequate to challenging times. Major Challenges and Costly Solutions The issues Europe faces are costly and historic. They include the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, dealing with demographic change and developing economies that are less vulnerable to bullying by Mr Trump and China. As per a Brussels-based thinktank, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could require an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A significant report 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. However, at both the pan-European and national levels, there continues to be a lack of boldness when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “budget hawks resist the idea of collective borrowing, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are profoundly timid. 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 – refuses to contemplate 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 spending cuts and increased inequality. Acrimonious recent conflicts over pension cutbacks in both France and Germany testify to a developing struggle over the future of the European social model – a trend that the RN and the AfD have happily exploited to promote a politics of welfare chauvinism. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has opposed moves to raise the retirement age and has said that it would target any benefit cuts at non-French nationals. Avoiding a Political Gift for Populists In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as later healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. Yet in the absence of a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they worked on the election circuit. Without a radical shift in economic approach, social contracts across the continent are in danger of being torn apart. Governments must steer clear of giving this political gift to the Trumpian forces already on the march in Europe.