August 10, 2023 - 3:00pm
According to a Politico report, “Right-wing and Eurosceptic parties are set to surge in the next European election at the expense of centrist parties.”
Politico‘s polling analysis predicts that parties belonging to the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group could come third in next year’s European Parliamentary elections — they’re currently neck-and-neck with the liberal Renew Europe (RE) group, which is predicted to lose seats.
The European Parliament is presently controlled by a grand alliance of moderate pro-European conservatives, social democrats and the aforementioned liberals — which sounds like, and indeed is, an establishment stitch-up.
However, the rise of the populists means that an alternative grand alliance is conceivable — one that junks the social democrats and unites the Right. This really would be a breakthrough for the populists: having already ascended into government in a few member states, they now have a chance to remake the whole of the EU in their image.
Although national populism has re-emerged from its mid-Covid slump, it is nevertheless a long way from conquering all before it. For instance, the recent Spanish general election resulted in a major setback for the Vox party. Santiago Abascal’s abrasive campaign did not go down well with voters — and his party lost 19 of its 52 seats. It was such a poor result that the expected coalition with the mainstream conservative party ended up well short of a majority.
But, arguably, it’s when they do reach power that the populists really come unstuck. For instance, in Italy Giorgia Meloni ran on a promise of cutting immigration, but as Prime Minister she has felt compelled to accept increased levels of legal immigration to supplement the greying workforce. There was a further humiliation this week, when her attempt to introduce a windfall tax on the country’s banks was watered down.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“European populism, therefore, is an unseemly mess, incapable of uniting to get things done. Which may be the most European thing about it.”
Perhaps these populists are national populists, inclined to put national considerations above the conformism of the EU. Why should they unite, as that is not what they are about?
Ominous for the EU.
Well said. These parties are putting the needs of their countries first.
The quoted statement reveals the author’s basic misunderstanding of the populist movement. The populist movement is not a traditional political movement at all, but a reaction to globalist overreach and a resistance of people being reduced to powerless pawns in the hands of the super rich and multinational corporations, who are increasingly making the important decisions that used to fall to elected governments. Being a reactionary movement, populism does not follow the established behavior of ‘normal’ political parties, which are tied to particular issues or platforms and can be easily categorized in the existing political spectrum. Normal parties build from a small group with a similar set of ideals. They start locally, win elections, then expand, branch out, bring in like minded groups through their success, gradually expand their tent, reaching compromises with other groups, building coalitions of power, etc., and maybe eventually becoming a dominant party such as the author describes. Populists, on the other hand, are an inherently local movement pushing for more local, decentralized control, so of course they look wildly different in different countries with different histories, cultures, and issues of concern. So far, they have found most success in the right leaning parties, and so are perceived as being a right wing movement, but there is no guarantee this state of affairs will continue. Left leaning parties will eventually feel the populist push as well, because there is no populist agenda, no populist platform, no political hill where they plant their flag and declare themselves. Defeat one and another pops up two hills over, because they appear wherever there is an undercurrent of anti-elite sentiment and where trust in the existing parties and existing power structures is low, and where isn’t that that the case? They are more properly viewed as a nascent revolutionary movement finding outlet within established political systems. No amount of politicking will defeat populism, nor will it be assimilated easily into existing party systems. It is very much an out of context problem for today’s elites, who seem incapable of comprehending that this political monster is just a mirror of themselves, a perfect foil that opposes whatever move they make. It will continue to exist as long as they do. It will only cease to be a political force when they cease to be a political force.
Very interesting summary and analysis. You’ve given me a lot to consider.
Very interesting summary and analysis. You’ve given me a lot to consider.
Well said. These parties are putting the needs of their countries first.
The quoted statement reveals the author’s basic misunderstanding of the populist movement. The populist movement is not a traditional political movement at all, but a reaction to globalist overreach and a resistance of people being reduced to powerless pawns in the hands of the super rich and multinational corporations, who are increasingly making the important decisions that used to fall to elected governments. Being a reactionary movement, populism does not follow the established behavior of ‘normal’ political parties, which are tied to particular issues or platforms and can be easily categorized in the existing political spectrum. Normal parties build from a small group with a similar set of ideals. They start locally, win elections, then expand, branch out, bring in like minded groups through their success, gradually expand their tent, reaching compromises with other groups, building coalitions of power, etc., and maybe eventually becoming a dominant party such as the author describes. Populists, on the other hand, are an inherently local movement pushing for more local, decentralized control, so of course they look wildly different in different countries with different histories, cultures, and issues of concern. So far, they have found most success in the right leaning parties, and so are perceived as being a right wing movement, but there is no guarantee this state of affairs will continue. Left leaning parties will eventually feel the populist push as well, because there is no populist agenda, no populist platform, no political hill where they plant their flag and declare themselves. Defeat one and another pops up two hills over, because they appear wherever there is an undercurrent of anti-elite sentiment and where trust in the existing parties and existing power structures is low, and where isn’t that that the case? They are more properly viewed as a nascent revolutionary movement finding outlet within established political systems. No amount of politicking will defeat populism, nor will it be assimilated easily into existing party systems. It is very much an out of context problem for today’s elites, who seem incapable of comprehending that this political monster is just a mirror of themselves, a perfect foil that opposes whatever move they make. It will continue to exist as long as they do. It will only cease to be a political force when they cease to be a political force.
“European populism, therefore, is an unseemly mess, incapable of uniting to get things done. Which may be the most European thing about it.”
Perhaps these populists are national populists, inclined to put national considerations above the conformism of the EU. Why should they unite, as that is not what they are about?
Ominous for the EU.
“The ECR tends to be strongly pro-Nato, while the ID group is more sympathetic to Moscow.”
Are they sympathetic to Moscow, or just opposed to the war in Ukraine?
I’d have thought if you were pro-Moscow, you would also be pro-war?
I’d have thought if you were pro-Moscow, you would also be pro-war?
“The ECR tends to be strongly pro-Nato, while the ID group is more sympathetic to Moscow.”
Are they sympathetic to Moscow, or just opposed to the war in Ukraine?
“They now have a chance to remake the whole of the EU in their image.”
Given that the EU Parliament has zero power, this isn’t the case at all.
“They now have a chance to remake the whole of the EU in their image.”
Given that the EU Parliament has zero power, this isn’t the case at all.
‘The Right’, ‘The Left’, LBGT+, BAME etc.; all these so-called movements and communities beloved of intellectuals and commentaors are artificial categories that do not exist in the material world.
‘The Right’, ‘The Left’, LBGT+, BAME etc.; all these so-called movements and communities beloved of intellectuals and commentaors are artificial categories that do not exist in the material world.
(?) Populists of the right have traditionally been mavericks and fierce individualists, marching to the beat of their own drummers: all that’s ever really united them are their antipathy for big government and the homogenizing forces of internationalism and cosmopolitanism. Why would anybody expect this to eradicate the profound differences between a German populist intent on preserving village traditions, and a Greek populist who’s simply concerned about getting enough to eat–never mind an American populist who’s persuaded life would be better if only he could shoot all bureaucrats?
(?) Populists of the right have traditionally been mavericks and fierce individualists, marching to the beat of their own drummers: all that’s ever really united them are their antipathy for big government and the homogenizing forces of internationalism and cosmopolitanism. Why would anybody expect this to eradicate the profound differences between a German populist intent on preserving village traditions, and a Greek populist who’s simply concerned about getting enough to eat–never mind an American populist who’s persuaded life would be better if only he could shoot all bureaucrats?
Is not the key phrase used by the Author – ‘it’s when they do reach power that the populists really come unstuck’.
And of course no clearer example than in our UK with the Brexit shambles and simultaneous increase in net migration! You really couldn’t make it up.
If you lie via your Populist slogans and do not get on the level about the trade offs, timescales for practical policy solutions and the need for strong multi-national collaboration to solve many of our problems you will inevitably come unstuck and disappoint.
There are legit right of centre responses to many of our collective european problems. Over promising and lying Populism just creates even more dissatisfaction. At some point you got to grow up and talk to your electorate like an adult.
Is not the key phrase used by the Author – ‘it’s when they do reach power that the populists really come unstuck’.
And of course no clearer example than in our UK with the Brexit shambles and simultaneous increase in net migration! You really couldn’t make it up.
If you lie via your Populist slogans and do not get on the level about the trade offs, timescales for practical policy solutions and the need for strong multi-national collaboration to solve many of our problems you will inevitably come unstuck and disappoint.
There are legit right of centre responses to many of our collective european problems. Over promising and lying Populism just creates even more dissatisfaction. At some point you got to grow up and talk to your electorate like an adult.