🔗 Share this article

More than a twelve months following the vote that delivered Donald Trump a clear-cut comeback victory, the Democratic Party has yet to issued its postmortem analysis. However, recently, an influential liberal advocacy organization released its own. The Harris campaign, its authors argued, did not resonate with key voter blocs because it failed to concentrate enough on addressing everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, liberals neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Warning for Europe

As the EU braces for a tumultuous period of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a message that must be fully understood in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy indicates, is hopeful that “patriotic” parties in Europe will quickly mirror Mr Trump’s success. In the EU’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 mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a response that is sufficient to troubling times.

Major Challenges and Expensive Solutions

The issues Europe faces are expensive 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 bullying by Mr Trump and China. According to a Brussels-based thinktank, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could require an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A significant report last year on European economic competitiveness demanded massive investment in shared infrastructure, to be partly funded by jointly held EU debt.

Such a economic transformation would stimulate 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 oppose the idea of collective borrowing, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are profoundly timid. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is widely supported with voters. But the embattled centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Price of Inaction

The reality is that without such measures, the less affluent will bear the brunt of fiscal tightening through spending cuts and greater inequality. Bitter recent conflicts over retirement reforms in both France and Germany testify to a growing battle over the future of the European welfare state – a phenomenon that the RN and the AfD have happily exploited to promote a politics of welfare chauvinism. 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 foreign residents.

Preventing a Political Gift for Populists

In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were largely insincere, as subsequent healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. But in the absence of a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they worked on the election circuit. Absent a radical shift in economic approach, societal agreements across the continent risk being torn apart. Governments must steer clear of giving this political gift to the populist movements already on the march in Europe.