Across the West, governments are failing. Trump, Starmer, Macron, Merz and others are losing authority at the very moment crises demand leadership. Far-right movements are fracturing. Neoliberalism has run out of ideas.
In this video, I explore why political legitimacy is evaporating and why a politics of care – grounded in real action, community investment and democratic renewal – is now the only viable way forward.
This is the audio version:
This is the transcript:
Wherever you look, governments are collapsing under their own incompetence.
Right now, governments are failing everywhere.
There is a political crisis emerging right across the West, and the far-right response to this is already falling apart.
This is a moment that requires political imagination. My question is, has anyone got that imagination that is required at this moment to deliver the policies of change that we really require?
Just look across the world. Let's set the scene.
Trump is facing crises, whether they're scandals of his own making or policy failures. Everything he's doing looks like a reaction to the Epstein files, and the consequences are inevitable. This man will not make it to the next election as president; he can't. Not only is his mental capacity failing, his political capacity is collapsing, and unfortunately, we have JD Vance standing in the wings.
In the UK, the situation is little better. Keir Starmer is losing authority by the day. Rachel Reeves' budget is the first in history to unravel before it's even been presented. Labour MPs know that what Starmer is trying to do on immigration is going to be profoundly unpopular, not just with them but in their constituencies, and that they will pay the price for it. Labour has tumbled to fourth in the opinion polls in Scotland. It is a party without a future, and nothing that they can do will change this at present. We have a government that is meant to last for another three and a half years in the UK, which is already out of road.
In France, the situation is no better. The current government is expected to last until a week next Tuesday, because that's about the average life expectancy of a government there at present. Macron is on his fourth or fifth this year, and there's no reason why this one will last any longer. His presidency has become an ignominious failure and a disaster for the people of France.
Whilst in Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz is already losing the confidence of the German people, his party, and the Bundestag.
Just look at those four leading nations, and everyone is facing difficulty.
Canada is in much the same place. Let's be totally honest. Our former governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney might be Prime Minister there now, and tries to exude an air of confidence more successfully than the other leaders I've already mentioned, but the reality is, he's been dealt such a bad hand, he has no clue what to do with it.
We have leaders unable to deal with crises, war, financial meltdown, or climate failure. And throughout all this, there's a broader pattern: the global collapse is of political authority; systems are losing legitimacy at the very moment of crisis.
And all of those crises I've just mentioned are coming together.
We do face the risk of war.
We know that climate meltdown is getting worse.
We do know that internal crises in many countries, largely as a consequence of racism deliberately fueled by politicians, is growing.
We know that there are financial problems, and we know that they could get worse.
At the same time, we have incompetent leaders right across the Western world who are causing and worsening the situations that we face. Failure at the top is infecting the whole system, and the right-wing is not providing any answer to this.
Trump's own base is fracturing. The resentment of the positions he's taking in authority, plus his association with Epstein, is collapsing the MAGA in the USA. There is no unity there, and nor is there in the UK. Recent research has shown that the people who say they'll vote for Reform come from many incompatible factions.
Some are indeed hard-right.
Some are profoundly racist, but many aren't; let's be clear about that. Many are just disaffected people on moderate or low wages who want an alternative to the situation they're in, where they see the wealthy getting wealthier and they're getting weaker, and that's why they look to Farage for something different.
But the fact is, he can't provide that. Nor can he reconcile their positions with that of the young men who are looking for an alternative because they feel left outside society, and reconcile either of those with the position of the hardcore racists.
Reform has no foundations, and Le Pen in France is too well known to be credible now, whilst the AfD in Germany faces a fundamental problem. It is the party of the East. Literally, the old East Germany provides it with most of its support, but the West is not going to accept government from the East. That's not why reunification took place, in their opinion, and so that is not a viable basis for any alternative government either. And in fact, let's look at the Netherlands, because the far-right has already been rejected there. The far-right offering has peaked too soon, and the reality is, as a result, that what we are seeing is an entire political order collapsing.
Neoliberalism, which in some way or other fuels the thinking of all these politicians, has run out of ideas and legitimacy. Quite clearly, it doesn't work. The pursuit of so-called profit on behalf of the wealthy is not an answer to any known question anymore, if it ever was. The technocracy is now trying to defend its failures, but they have no solutions left to offer. We are in a situation where neoliberalism has quite literally run out of road.
People are asking for something different. They want governments that understand crises because they know we've got them and they know they're going to get worse unless we deal with them.
They want leaders willing to use state power responsibly because they know there is no other way out of the crises we face.
They want a politics that respects people, and they're being offered a politics of hate by far too many.
And they want hope-grounded, in practical action; action that they can actually see is going to happen in the communities where they live. And so far, none of the politicians that I'm hearing in almost any of the countries that I've referred to are offering anything like that.
We need then a politics of care, that thing that I keep on talking about.
The far-right is offering anger and not solutions.
The state is walking away from its obligation to resolve shared crises, and there is a recognition now that austerity was always a choice, and a ruinous one.
So what we now know is that we need collective solutions requiring collective action. We have a series of events converging. The government's authority in many countries is evaporating because its policies are no longer functioning, and the narratives that have been pursued in politics for too long have lost power, and a political vacuum is opening.
So what happens next is that we will see the familiar political order fragment. The moment of collapse has arrived, and there won't be a renewal. There is no chance of neoliberalism getting through this crisis. It's over, finished, dead, gone, it's nailed to its perch, if you can remember the old Monty Python joke. The point is quite simple. That era is over.
Now people are looking for coherence, and they're looking for purpose, and this is the moment when a new political story can emerge. It's that which I'm working on. We need to have new narratives; the world survives on the stories it tells itself, and what we need are new leaders who can talk about the crises we face and face them with a new model that will let them say they have answers to the questions that we know need to be addressed.
The far-right can't do that, but the politics of care can.
We can provide workable alternatives.
We can use the power of the state to create money, to use that power to deliver what people need.
We can use that power to regenerate the communities where people live.
We can do that to revive faith in democracy.
We can, as a consequence, rebuild people's lives.
We can eliminate the politics of hate.
We can increase incomes, and we can do all of that while supporting care, investment, and accountability.
We can, in other words, do so much better.
This is the moment when a politics of imagination is required, and the opportunity to deliver it is emerging.
This is the moment for a politics of care.
Do you agree? There's a poll down below. Let us know.
Poll
Loading ...
AI: How to use it as a campaigner
We have produced a guide on how to use AI as a campaigner, for which we're already getting good feedback. It's available as a free download here. Take a look. We think you'll find it useful.
Comments
When commenting, please take note of this blog's comment policy, which is available here. Contravening this policy will result in comments being deleted before or after initial publication at the editor's sole discretion and without explanation being required or offered.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
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!

Interesting report from The Grauniad here
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/nov/20/british-jews-turn-to-greens-and-reform-uk-as-support-for-main-parties-drops
Just to throw another possibility into the list of potential and actual disasters, Civil War in Russia anybody?
The poll isn’t working
That was a result of yesterday’s cobnfusion: sorry. It is there now.
Poll still not there
It is now
Good post but:
“Neoliberalism, which in some way or other fuels the thinking of all these politicians, has run out of ideas and legitimacy”
It never had any ideas, it never had any legitimacy. It went against everything that humans had learned in the last 2500 years: inequility is very very bad, neoliberalism breeds inequality it is a feature of the system. It was based on that imbecile Hayek’s assertion that socialism leads to fascisim and that “markets know best”. A.Innes (Late Soviet Britain) claimed it was a “utopian project” – but utopian for who? Not for the middling sort (= most visiting this blog). I agree with the list at the end. A start would be asset reduction wrt the very rich – let’s start with those with more than £100m and work our way downwards. & this is not envy, this is the need to move society back into balance.
I think it did have ideas. It’s just that they were bad ones. And now it’s run out of them. There has to be a silver lining in there somewhere. Chin up!
Yes, I entirely agree, poll or no poll (I cannot see one FYI).
And, may I offer a reason why?
Last night, whilst recuperating from medical treatment I decided to watch the Danish documentary called Black Swan on BBC iPlayer. In many ways, not your typical English fair, it was ponderous and rather stiff, but it was basically about deceit – mostly over money – and how far people go even in wonderful(?) Denmark to avoid paying taxes and defrauding the government and each other.
But what I really focussed on was this concept of the ‘black swan’:
‘The black swan theory or theory of black swan events is a metaphor that describes an event that comes as a surprise, has a major effect, and is often inappropriately rationalized after the fact with the benefit of hindsight’ This is how Wikipedia describes it.
And this is in line with one Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s book in 2010 after the credit crunch of 2008. What an opportunist!
My view is that Taleb, and this concept is complete baloney. The black swan ‘theory’ can only ever exist within the faulty world of Neo-liberalism (NL). Because NL insists that people will work on the basis of their ‘own rational self interest’ and not be greedy, corrupt or criminal because they will be caught out.
But what we know about human beings is this (and those earlier societies who practised debt jubilees and the Greeks I think were the first to point this out): that people do get greedy, do become corrupt, over powerful and behave like criminals – particularly over money (pleonexia).
So, the Taleb feint of hand is to pretend that even when greedy, corrupt bastards behave like we know they will do, it is just a ‘surprise’, unexpected and no-one could have anticipated it. Ahhh…………
So what you have with NL and Black Swan is a wilful negation of the dark side of human nature – a exceptionally sunny view of people and money. Too many pretend to be surprised about market crashes, the poor outcomes of privatisations, corrupt politics via private political funding.
A society that is in denial of greed, self interest and corruption in pursuit of wealth is bound to collapse at some time.
And Taleb is just another Neo-lib apologist, a charlatan, like Hayek, Friedman, Rand etc.
In order to get this message through, for people to understand what’s been going on for the past 50 years or so, there needs to be a better word, or words, or even a slogan, than “neoliberalism”, because it means little to the man in the street.
I would suggest “Thatcherism”, because it gives a name to a misguided market-led philosophy that continues to dominate much political thinking, but I’m sure someone could come up with something better. Either way, I fear continuing to rail against neoliberalism, while correct, won’t cut much ice without a much simpler message.
You have to be 45 to remember Thatcher, and 50, really. That does not work. I suspect 80% of th Uk population have no idea who she is.
Probably, but it needs a better word or words than neoliberalism
I will think about it
Had exactly this debate recently in an economics group I’m part of, with a very progressive economics professor as a key member. He ticks us off for misusing terms like neoliberalism, orthodox or mainstream. So I listed the attributes we refer to – the usual suspects of shrink state, leave it to the marker, deregulate etc, etc. He came back with the suggestion of ‘Thatcherism’! I take the point about recognition of Thatcher amongst younger folk (<40?) but equally terms like neoliberalism may be meaningless to people with little interest in economics.
There is a post coming in the morning
Poll is AWOL?
It is there for me.
Might you refresh your page?
It’s appeared
🙂
Morning Richard, great post and in complete agreement as usual.
Have you read Aurelien’s latest post? He suggests that the current political breakdown and societal issues in the west are due to liberalism (as well as neoliberalism, which you could argue is a form of liberalism). What he writes makes a lot of sense – I would recommend a read if you have time and interest. Although you discuss slightly different matters (Aurelien tends to stick to politics), I think there is some alignment in what you describe in political economics (I.e., the political compass?).
Cheers
Not read yet…but marked to be read later.
I recommend G. Elliott Morris’ Strength in Numbers substack, in which today he shows his new and I say brilliant analysis of the American electorate. https://www.gelliottmorris.com/p/not-just-left-vs-right-most-voters?utm_campaign=email-half-post&r=110j3&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email. He encapsulates with “Most voters want a party that emphasizes cost of living issues and makes the world a better place. Few Americans think in solidly ideologically terms. “Moderates” are mostly non-ideological.”
For my part, I look at the state of the global economy, and it’s parlous. I see wars and in Europe the unquestionable danger of Putin, and I think about defense. So if we’re going to think about defense, for the UK, Europe, Ukraine, we’re going to have to think about the whole of a society; but right now, I don’t see any whole societies.
Tell me, is there an England? Or is there London, and the North, and Wales, and. . .
In the US, we are so divorced from one another, see Morris’ analysis, that there is no single society and thus society is not fit for purpose. We see a lack of investment in infrastructure, housing, education, we see the US is a country of many cities and states and no way to generate local wealth. We see the dismantling of government and financing at the federal level, while the demented president and GOP are trying to create a federal authority uber alles.
Wales is not in England.
But, noted and I will try to take a look.