🔗 Share this article Addressing the Continent's National Populists: Protecting the Vulnerable from the Winds of Transformation More than a twelve months after the vote that handed Donald Trump a decisive return victory, the Democratic party has yet to issued its election autopsy. But, last week, an influential progressive lobby group released its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its authors contended, failed to connect with core constituencies because it failed to concentrate enough on addressing basic economic anxieties. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, progressives neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were foremost in many people’s minds. A Lesson for European Capitals As the EU braces for a turbulent era of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a lesson that must be fully absorbed in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy makes clear, is optimistic that “nationalist movements in Europe will quickly mirror Mr Trump’s success. Within Europe's core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) lead the polls, supported by significant segments of blue-collar voters. Yet among establishment politicians and parties, it is hard to discern a response that is adequate to troubling times. Era-Defining Challenges and Costly Solutions The challenges Europe faces are costly and historic. They include the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and developing 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 collective EU debt. Such a economic transformation would boost growth figures that have stagnated for years. However, at both the EU-wide and national levels, there remains a deficit of courage when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations resist the idea of collective borrowing, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are profoundly unambitious. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But the embattled centrist government – while desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move. The Price of Political Paralysis The reality is that without such measures, the less affluent will pay the price of financial adjustment through spending cuts and increased inequality. Bitter recent conflicts over retirement reforms in both France and Germany highlight a developing struggle over the future of the European welfare state – a trend that the RN and the AfD have happily exploited to promote a politics of nativist social policy. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has resisted moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would target any benefit cuts at non-French nationals. Preventing a Strategic Advantage for Populists Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s promises to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as subsequent healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. But without a compelling progressive counteroffer from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Without a radical shift in economic approach, societal agreements across the continent are in danger of being ripped up. Policymakers must steer clear of handing this electoral boon to the Trumpian forces already on the rise in Europe.