Summary
The rise of far-right parties in Europe, notably Germany's AfD, can be attributed to disillusionment with neoliberalism, which has eroded trust in traditional political parties.
Many working-class people feel marginalized under neoliberal policies, leading to a backlash against established centrist parties.
The left has largely failed to present a compelling alternative to neoliberalism, leaving a void that is now being filled by the far-right.
To beat the far-right, viable left-of-centre economic policies that prioritise the needs of ordinary people are essential.
In this morning's video I note that the far-right won an election in Germany last weekend, following on from successes elsewhere.
Why is it so popular? And how can it be contained?
The answers all come down to neoliberalism. It has destroyed faith in existing political parties, undermining the left in the process. Until the left comes up with a plausible way of beating neoliberalism the far-right will be on the ascendant.
The audio version is here:
The transcript is:
Why is the far right so popular in Europe?
I ask the question for very good reason. As many viewers will know, last weekend the AfD party in Germany, which is neo-fascist in my opinion and far right in the opinion of others - and I don't think the difference is worth arguing about - won one of the regional elections in that country.
There are sixteen regions in Germany and most of those in what was once East Germany are now swinging towards the AfD. Now, in this case, they actually won the vote for the first time ever since 1945, taking 33 per cent of the popular vote, with the chance, therefore, that they will be the biggest party in the local parliament, although not necessarily guaranteeing them power because it is not at all clear that other parties will actually wish to go into coalition with them.
But, the point is that they won, and in another of the German regions, they came very close to winning, and this is a pattern that we are seeing replicated across Europe.
We know it's happening in Sweden.
We know that it happened in France and it was only by some fairly drastic action in the second round of their general election in June that the far right were prevented from winning.
And we've seen it in other countries, not least in the UK. Reform is a far-right party in the sense that it is definitely beyond the Tories, and they are without doubt as right-wing as they have been in generations, and therefore we're seeing this pattern replicated all over the place.
So, what is the appeal of these parties? And my answer to that question is really very straightforward. It is that lots of people feel as though they have suffered badly under neoliberal governments. In the case of Germany, for example, from the Christian Democrats and from the SPD - the Social Democrats - with a bit of Green thrown in every now and again, because they, unfortunately, in Germany, seem to be pretty neoliberal as well.
In the case of the UK, the Tories and Labour. But actually, frankly as well, most of the Liberal Democrats and quite a lot of the SNP have also been pretty neoliberal too.
In the case of France, there is Macron, who is refusing to even appoint a left-wing Prime Minister, even though they won the election. And he's certainly not appointing a right-wing one because his centre group aligned with the left to keep the right-wing out.
We have an apparent hegemony of power being maintained by these centrist neoliberal parties across Europe to exclude anyone on the left.
We're also seeing that in Ireland, by the way, as well, where the two parties that spent a century opposing each other have now gone into coalition to hold out Sinn Fein, who are genuinely more left-wing than either of them are, and we're seeing that in other places as well.
So, we're seeing the centrist parties trying to cling on to power at all cost and maintain neoliberalism.
But what people know is that neoliberalism has failed them. Working people know that there has been a decline in benefits. They have not seen an improvement in their well-being as a consequence of neoliberalism. For the whole of this century, at least, most people in most countries in Europe who are working on what we might call average earnings have basically seen their pay stagnate. And they're fed up with that.
They're fed up with it because what they are definitely seeing is that those with wealth and those on high earnings are having their position improve. The wealth of the wealthiest people in the UK rose substantially in the decade from 2010 to 2020 but the wealth of ordinary people didn't change at all.
So, there is a backlash, and the backlash is against that neoliberal system that seems to exist to wholly benefit a few in society at cost to most.
Now, is it very surprising that in a democracy, we see a reaction? After all, democracies are there to represent the views of the majority. The majority are losing out, and they want to find a way to express their frustration with that.
Brexit was a very clear way in which that happened in the UK, at considerable cost to us all, I think.
But it is happening now in general elections as well.
And my point is a very simple one. The right are the only people. who are really standing up against neoliberalism. In most countries, the left, and I include in this the Labour Party in the UK and the German Social Democrats, and the traditional left in France, have moved towards being decidedly neoliberal.
Keir Starmer: he's further to the right, in my opinion, than David Cameron was when he became Prime Minister.
He's further to the right than Tony Blair was when he was Prime Minister. And I would call Tony Blair an arch-neoliberal.
So, my point is very simple. The left has disappeared from the political stage in most European countries.
Or, where it remains, it is very much the underdog. And it's not attracting attention because it doesn't know how to put forward ideas that will represent ordinary people.
It hasn't got the support of trade unions, or it isn't shouting enough about the support for wages and working conditions and social housing and everything else that people want and feel they're being deprived of by the neoliberal system.
Until it does that, until it is willing to stand up for those people and challenge the economics of neoliberalism, then the only people who are are the populists, who are claiming all sorts of things that aren't true.
I mean, what Nigel Farage has claimed about what he would do if he actually got power is complete nonsense.
And likewise, what the AfD says in Germany is a great deal of stuff that is actually utterly undeliverable in practice but the appeal is there, and we can see it in the USA as well. Of course, it is nonsense that Trump spews all the time. But the far right are at least saying something which is not neoliberal.
So if we are to get rid of the far right, and I most certainly want to, because I hate their misogyny and their racism and their discrimination and all the other things that they promote, we have to have a viable left-of-centre ideology, in the sense of parties committed to change that will put the people of a country at the centre of their thinking.
We haven't got that in the UK right now. Labour's been elected and some of us had hopes. Even I had somewhere deep down a sort of naive hope that we might genuinely see a Labour Party of the sort that I knew when I was young emerge from the wreckage of Starmer's election campaign and that we'd discover he really was a Social Democrat after all. But we haven't. We haven't seen that at all.
We've seen him confirm that he's committed to child poverty.
We've seen him take on pensioners and cause them positive harm.
And we've heard that he's going to inflict pain on ordinary working people.
And why? All to keep financial markets happy.
If that is what the supposed centre-left of politics is offering, there can be no surprise that people are moving to the far right.
We have to have viable, alternative, economic policies that support ordinary people, if we are to get rid of the curse of the far right.
That's what I'm working on, that's what these videos are all going to be about, and that's why I'm working with Danny Blanchflower.
We call ourselves the Mile End Road Economists precisely because the Mile End Road is where ordinary people live outside the city walls of London.
We need to beat the far right, but to do it, we have to succeed on the left.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
From todays Grauniad
https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/article/2024/sep/04/working-class-parents-do-not-see-film-and-tv-as-viable-career-for-their-children
Sigh…….
But correct in many ways
Q. Why are the far-right so popular?
A. They are better at getting their message across.
They are better at demonising the “commie” left.
They have more support from the State.
My Yank view:
Donald Trump and Nigel Farage have given false hope to a group of disenfranchised people who had no hope. This group of disenfranchised people believe Donald Trump and Nigel Farage can and will deliver what they want.
No other UK or USA political parties have given these people much.
The difficult thing is that what these people say they “want” will not solve their problems.
Getting “rid” of immigrants is not going to increase one’s paycheck, decrease the queue at the NHS or get a child a school place at the school of their choice..
“Drill Baby Drill” is not going to decrease the the US or UK price for a gallon (liter) of gasoline (petrol) or the price of a sirloin steak at Publix or Waitrose.
Much to agree with
It’s a good question to which many here will know the answer.
I still think that Fascism – or its techniques – are unconsciously used in political discourse anyway in this country – it has crept in – the language we used to use to define our enemies – Germany/Japan – is now used at home on each other.
Why? Because it replaces ideas – of which – apparently – there are none. Ideas offer hope you see.
Fascism offers fear and a redoubt for those fears – it’s a vertical package. Create the fear and then create the answer to it – premeditated of course.
But there is something more sinister going on related to the lack of ideas.
Without ideas you cannot solve problems, so the only thing you can do in the face of the issues now coming at us – mass migration because of war and global warming for example – is to batten down the hatches, pull up the drawbridges and make enemies of those who need your help.
You said it yourself in a book you wrote.
Fascism/right wing reactionism is cowardice in the face of problems. You deny the problems legitimacy – because if you made them legitimate you’d have to help them – which is hard work and costs money and is politically inconvenient because politics has no ideas.
And then instead, you can say ‘oh dear’ when the problems wash up on the beach or you see in broad daylight problems carted off to extermination camps or arrested for trying tell people what is going on.
The other thing about Fascism is that it is selfish and narrow minded. It appeals to the grasping body politic of a certain number of people in our society who were enabled by Thatcherism – people who have no concept other than their own needs and nothing of the needs of others. Think about how those top Nazis hoarded treasure, similarly to the billionaires we have now.
Thatcher has made us ill. And now that condition has become chronic. The symptoms are all around us.
PSR
you say, correctly, “Without ideas you cannot solve problems “. I agree. Control of ideas is essential to maintaining the power structure.
IMHO we need to remember that ‘Far Right’ leaders can call on finance and support from vested interests in Wall Street ( Cambridge-Analytica had the backing of an American billionaire ) and the City of London. Also from their control of the media. The Far Right. to a large extent, is the street army of the same interests who steer the neo-liberal agenda. In 1984 the Opposition was run by the party. Very similar.
Good points, though I can’t see the Mile End Road reference meaning anything to people who don’t live in London.
Yes, agree. I happen to know where the Mile End road is but many people won’t. If you want to get new ideas heard and understood across the media it needs a more generic title – and a catchy one too that will grab people’s attention
The Men on the Clapped-out Omnibus
The current set of political parties are mostly exclusionary – they are little better than filter mechs’ to ensure that disrupters never get far & if an upset happens (Corbyn) action is taken to move things back to what passes for a neo-liberal “normal”.
People in the street (the “umma” ) may not desribe it like this – but they are not mugs – hence the thin vote for Starmer and the big vote for the AfD (ditto in France and Meloni in Italy). Expressed another way: in most of Europe (& the US) there is a one-party state that runs a given country for the benefit of the neo-liberals, who also control media outlets. Power is concentrated in political villages (Washington, London, Brussels, Berlin, Paris) where a combo of bureaucrats & political placemen “follow orders”/”follow neo-lib norms”.
Such systems enable assorted clowns (Farage, Trump, le Pen) to cause trouble, but so far (East Germany excepted – but it might be too early to see how this plays out), the neo-lib system has been able to compensate. Question is: what happens when it can’t? Things could get quite nasty – particularly towards those that put their heads above the parapet. The example of what happened to the journalist Sarah Wilkinson shows what happens to individuals that step out of the norms set by the neo-liberal system. She has been silenced as was Corbyn, as was Varoufakis as have been many others.
“So, we’re seeing the centrist parties trying to cling on to power at all cost and maintain neoliberalism.” True – and it’s a terrible, terrible mistake – exactly the same mistake the political status-quo made in Europe in the 1930s: feeling so threatened by radical left solutions that they – consciously or not – facilitate the extreme right into power.
The left did present an alternative, in 2017 and 2019.
The left has not disappeared.
It has been systematically eradicated.
And Labour has been hijacked, yet again.
Many on the left are grasping at straws now, with multiple tiny factions and no coherence. My friends were discussing Corbyn’s independent group at the weekend, a small step, but given the hell that Corbyn was subjected to, internally by his own officials, his reticence is probably very sensible. As for the unions, maybe three are led by lefties at best. The Greens remain a hope, although Labour’s smear machine has already cranked up, accusing them of accepting former Labour members who, all 120,000 of them, are apparently rabid anti-semites (even the many Jews).
The national and international situation is as bad as I can remember (I go back as a sentient adult to the 60s); possibly only the nuclear scares of the 80s compare. In other times I would be enthused by the radicalism of younger people, but I’m now depressed by the reach of the far right through social media and the infections of racism and misogyny that abound. Farage has an enviable profile currently, and although the stars of Tate, Rogan and Peterson have waned, others are surfacing, male and female.
Angela Merkel and the CDU changed the federal constitution to include government budgets. Budgets are limited to 0.35 per cent. The current government has gotten away with recent deficits by saying we are in an emergency due to COVID/Ukraine. However the political opposition lead by the CDU is planning to take the government to court if it continues to break the constitution. This is a very difficult line to tread when there is a party planning to rewrite the constitution in its own image.
Germany has a very unhealthy relationship with debt. And the euro zone crisis has probably worsened it.
Thank you, Richard.
Not unrelated and from Aurelien: https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/the-machine-stops.
Just arrived in my inbox
Thank you, Richard.
Richard and readers may be interested in: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/09/whats-next-for-germany-after-sundays-elections-show-major-backlash-against-status-quo.html.
Well worth reading
This is all geting quite serious
If I was an owl and knew a pussy cat I might set sail to sea with a runcible spoon
But I’m not, so I will give the issue some thought
@Richard
It seems to me that the “Neoliberals” do not understand that the “electorate” wants public money spent on public projects (NHS, pot holes, school places, potable water & sanitary sewer system, public housing, social care…etc…etc.) and if the “Neoliberals” cannot find a way “fund” such projects then the “electorate” will elect someone (Nigel Farage???) who will.
We must never forget that Hitler, who was elected, expanded and maintained his grip of power on Germany by government spending on public projects that the “electorate” could see and benefit from after all the “austerity” imposed by the Paris Peace Conference and Treaty of Versailles.
The Tories and LINO are playing with fire as both parties could end up on the ash heap along with The City of London.
Apropos ‘sailing away with a pussycat’… W B Yeats comes to mind:
“I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
And a small cabin build there…”
Sadly, The Second Coming seems more relevant:
“The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.”
The first, from 1888- but the second, from 1919.
Here’s hoping that ‘the best’ – who DO have convictions, as here and elsewhere, and aren’t yet (?) shut down – can overcome those ‘worst’.
Trips to Innisfree or Avalon (or Wicken Fen) still needed, no doubt.
Wicken Fen is the easiest, for me
‘The Machine Stops’.
This is a bit misleading maybe?
Hmmm – if we look at the way in which Neo-liberalism(referenced in the essay) has corroded politics and its institutions, we can see that Tim Snyder’s idea of ‘no new ideas’ can also be seen as ‘Path Dependency’ (the organisational version) – that politicians have become reliant on concepts like ‘privatisation’, ‘trickle down’ and ‘choice’ as well as any number of other dodgy stuff because the returns to both politicians (money to fight elections, opportunities to gain personally) and those who sponsor them (low taxes, low regulations, opportunities to exploit state retrenchment) have been good, if not increasing over time. So, why change? They like it like this. It works. For them.
So in path dependency ‘speak’ what our politics is really, is STABLE. The whole rotten lot has stabilized – become established and comfortable in how it works.
It has arrived at a certain way of working which benefits those in the system (that is where the stability is, because that is where the returns are) even though it creates less stability for those of us on the outside.
Therefore, nothing has stopped I would argue. The machine has NOT stopped. It is still working well for those deep within it and will go on working and delivering nothing or very little to us.
Because what Macron is doing is that he is resisting some sort of change. Like May did in Britain, when her government – because of BREXIT – effectively stopped working for the country (but the MPs, ministers still all got paid, and parliament still sat, and even though the Tories should have stood down they stayed where they were).
And this will continue until some sort of external shock or intervention (there is a particular word for this but I have forgotten it) comes along and makes them change.
I am not an expert on French politics at all, but for British politics, that external shock would be major changes to political funding such as it being nationalised as well the standards for public life being ripped up and started again.
Path dependency is a symptom of corruption – especially I would argue in politics and maybe also in academia (economics).
I make this observation as my final go at this thesis: If something bad endures, it can only be because it is of benefit to someone or a certain group.
Thanks. A neat argument.
The word applied to forces of change in path dependency parlance is ‘punctuation’ – these can be evolutionary, or just new information or best practice – that is simply ignored. The people and practices that endure and ignore outside factors of change become like ‘time travellers’ or ‘time ships’ – beings from a past age operating in new environments that they simply do not understand or even care about (us!).
For these people, its as though von Hayek and Friedman have just been discovered and economic development ended there.
Therefore the ‘punctuations’ need to be more impactful, forceful – so the argument goes.
Unfortunately the rise of the rigjt is 80% xenophobia and 20% austere conditions for the poorest.
They prey on the narrative “it’s the foreigners to blame” instead of whichever government.
@John
You are so correct! This is exactly why Reform is promoting xenophobia.
When the results of austere conditions begin to hit the lower-middle class and middle-middle class there will be a breaking point. Why does Labour not see this brewing storm that has already washed away the Conservatives?
when I was young in the 1960s we saw poor white Americans in the south voting for Conservative politicians like Governor Wallace who vowed to defend segregation. Martin Luther King shifted his emphasis from race to improving conditions for poorer people. He was in Memphis to support a strike by refuse collectors when he was shot.
An American who was a mature student at my college, had an explanation which was having someone to look down on was a compensation for low status. The politicians who wanted more opportunity -Liberals- were portrayed as a threat to the social order.
@Ian Stevenson
“An American who was a mature student at my college, had an explanation which was having someone to look down on was a compensation for low status. The politicians who wanted more opportunity -Liberals- were portrayed as a threat to the social order.”
Your friends statement/explanation is 100% true and correct. Many US Southerners (along with English readers of The Daily Fail) actually still think like this but now it is called “Woke” even though few people using the term actually understand the definition of “Woke”.
FYI: A “Liberal in the UK and a “Liberal” in the USA are NOT the same species let alone the same animal.
I have commented before on reasons why, you can also add news articles and opinion pieces on immigrant crime.
As for Neo liberalism, what is behind what could be seen as a race to the bottom with things like Uber, Deliveroo, Yodel, Hermes, Amazon and Just Eat and similar, the amount of complaints I have heard about these companies, along with complaints about the demise of the Highest Street, only to se the majority of those complaining actively using those companies, along with food from chain restaurants.
I have also seen many photographs of Britain in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, unfortunately there are many comments about immigration, but I do see a lot commenting about the lack of cars. When asked “when are you giving up your car?” The reply is usually along the lines of “oh no, others should give up their cars before I do” you can see these comments applied to things such as “other” people should stop having children to tackle rising population, people on around £10k more than me should pay more taxes, etc…
Human nature feeds neo liberalism very well unfortunately.
“When asked ‘when are you giving up your car?’ ”
When my employment no longer necessitates that I have a car.
In the USA, It is almost impossible to “work” without a car unless one lives in NYC, Chicago or San Francisco. Employers expect to you to have a car (or motorcycle).
I would not own a car in London now.
In rural England it is hard to do without one, even though my mileage is low.
Is Ely, Cambridgeshire considered rural England or is it considered suburban England?
In the USA there is a BIG difference between rural and suburban communities.
We are rural
You can tell because if there’s a traffic jam here (and it’s rare) it is a tractor that is causing it
Cambridge would be suburban, and we have commuters, but my nearest field is maybe 200 metres away and I can meet deer at the end of my road
Thanks Richard for your response.
I was curious as I got a good glimpse of Ely, Cambridgeshire on TV.
It’s a tiny city surrounded by farm land and a lot of rivers that drain the fens
When I saw the labour fiscal rules my first thought was how soon will there be rioting in the streets.
The right fill a vacuum that the left vacated.
The left has no vision for the future, no confidence, no backing, no friends, no passion, no energy , no ideas. At best it’s good at fighting rearguard actions against the obvious enemies. But it fails to confront the neo-liberals within its own ranks, the managerialists who believe they know best , and the opportunists and the corrupt who know a good meal ticket when they see one.
Which just leaves the readers of this blog. From small acorns….
Good analysis. But I seriously question your description of Sinn Féin as “genuinely” left wing.
Sinn Féin are classic populists. If they are talking to someone on the left, they will claim to be left wing. But if you’re anti-immigration, they will nod along with you and sympathise with your “legitimate concerns”. They cannot be trusted.
Let’s agree to disagree
From The Spectator on 06 September 2024:
“The annual hotel bill for asylum seekers now stands at £3 billion – twice the £1.4 billion in savings forecast by scrapping the winter fuel allowance.”
If this is true and correct, it goes a very long way in explaining why some voters are turning to Nigel Farage’s reform and the far-Right. This is a perfect sound bite for the far-Right
Think how much could be saved by speeding up decision making.