🔗 Share this article

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

A Warning 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 European capitals. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy makes clear, is hopeful that “patriotic” parties in Europe will soon 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 working-class voters. Yet among establishment politicians and parties, it is hard to discern a strategy that is sufficient to challenging times.

Era-Defining Problems and Costly Solutions

The challenges Europe faces are expensive and era-defining. They include the war in Ukraine, sustaining the momentum of the green transition, dealing with demographic change and developing economies that are less vulnerable to bullying by Mr Trump and China. According to a European thinktank, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could require an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A major study last year on European economic competitiveness called for massive investment in public goods, to be financed in part by collective EU debt.

Such a fiscal paradigm shift would boost growth figures that have stagnated for years.

But, at both the pan-European and national levels, there remains a deficit of courage when it comes to revenue raising. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations oppose the idea of shared debt, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are deeply timid. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is widely supported with voters. But the beleaguered centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – refuses to contemplate such a move.

The Cost of Inaction

The reality is that in the absence of such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through austerity budgets and increased 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 phenomenon 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 said that it would focus any benefit cuts at non-French nationals.

Preventing a Strategic Advantage for Populists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were deeply disingenuous, as later Medicaid cuts and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. But in the absence of a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the campaign trail. Without a fundamental change in economic approach, societal agreements across the continent risk being torn apart. Policymakers must steer clear of giving this political gift to the Trumpian forces already on the march in Europe.