🔗 Share this article

More than a year following the vote that handed Donald Trump a decisive 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 writers argued, failed to connect with core constituencies because it failed to concentrate enough on tackling everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives overlooked the bread-and-butter issues that were foremost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for European Capitals

While Europe prepares for a turbulent era of politics between now and the end of the decade, that is a message that needs to be fully understood in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy indicates, is hopeful that “patriotic” parties in Europe will quickly replicate Mr Trump’s success. In the EU’s Franco-German engine room, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) lead the polls, supported by large swaths of working-class voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is difficult to see a strategy that is adequate to troubling times.

Major Challenges and Expensive Solutions

The challenges Europe faces are expensive and historic. 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 global instability could require an additional €250bn in yearly EU defence spending. A major study last year on European economic competitiveness demanded massive investment in public goods, to be partly funded by collective EU debt.

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

But, at both the pan-European and national levels, there continues to be a deficit of courage when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations oppose the idea of shared debt, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are profoundly unambitious. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is overwhelmingly popular with voters. Yet the beleaguered centrist government – while desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Cost of Political Paralysis

The truth is that in the absence of such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through spending cuts and increased inequality. Bitter recent conflicts over retirement reforms in both France and Germany highlight a growing battle over the future of the European social model – a trend that the RN and the AfD have happily exploited to promote a politics of welfare chauvinism. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has opposed 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 Nationalists

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 demonstrated. Yet without a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the campaign trail. Absent a radical shift in fiscal policy, societal agreements across the continent risk being torn apart. Governments must steer clear of giving this electoral boon to the populist movements already on the march in Europe.