🔗 Share this article

Over a twelve months after the election that delivered Donald Trump a clear-cut return victory, the Democratic Party has still not released its postmortem analysis. But, recently, an influential progressive lobby group released its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its authors contended, failed to connect with core constituencies because it did not focus enough on tackling everyday financial worries. In focusing on the menace to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives neglected the bread-and-butter issues that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for European Capitals

While Europe prepares for a tumultuous period of politics between now and the end of the decade, that is a lesson that needs to be fully absorbed in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy makes clear, is hopeful that “patriotic” parties in Europe will quickly replicate Mr Trump’s success. Within Europe's core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) lead the polls, backed 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.

Major Problems and Expensive Solutions

The challenges Europe faces are expensive and era-defining. They encompass the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and building economies that are more resilient to bullying by Mr Trump and China. As per a Brussels-based thinktank, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could necessitate an additional €250bn in yearly EU defence spending. A significant study last year on European economic competitiveness demanded massive investment in shared infrastructure, to be financed in part by collective EU debt.

Such a fiscal paradigm shift would stimulate growth figures that have flatlined for years.

But, at both the pan-European 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 EU spending plans for the next seven years are profoundly timid. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is widely supported with voters. But the embattled centrist government – while desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Cost of Political Paralysis

The truth is that without such measures, the less affluent will bear the brunt of fiscal tightening through austerity budgets and greater inequality. Bitter recent disputes 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 eagerly leveraged to promote a politics of nativist social policy. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has opposed moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would focus any benefit cuts at non-French nationals.

Preventing a Political Gift for Populists

In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were deeply disingenuous, as subsequent Medicaid cuts and fiscal benefits for the wealthy demonstrated. But without a compelling progressive counteroffer from the Harris campaign, they worked on the election circuit. Without a fundamental change in economic approach, societal agreements across the continent risk being torn apart. Policymakers must avoid giving this political gift to the Trumpian forces already on the rise in Europe.