🔗 Share this article

More than a twelve months after the election that handed Donald Trump a clear-cut comeback victory, the Democratic party has still not issued its postmortem analysis. But, recently, an influential progressive lobby group published its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its authors contended, failed to connect with key voter blocs because it failed to concentrate enough on tackling everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Warning for European Capitals

While Europe prepares for a turbulent era of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a lesson that needs to be fully understood in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy makes clear, is optimistic that “patriotic” parties in Europe will quickly mirror Mr Trump’s success. In the EU’s Franco-German engine room, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) top the polls, backed by significant segments of blue-collar voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a strategy that is sufficient to challenging times.

Era-Defining Challenges and Expensive Solutions

The issues Europe faces are costly and historic. They encompass the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, dealing with demographic change and developing economies that are more resilient to bullying by Mr Trump and China. As per a European thinktank, the new age of global instability could necessitate an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A major study last year on European economic competitiveness demanded massive investment in shared infrastructure, to be partly funded by jointly held EU debt.

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

However, 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 “budget hawks 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. Yet the embattled centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Price of Political Paralysis

The truth is that without such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through spending cuts and greater inequality. Acrimonious recent conflicts over pension cutbacks 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 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 said that it would target any benefit cuts at foreign residents.

Preventing a Political Gift for Nationalists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were deeply disingenuous, as subsequent healthcare reductions and fiscal benefits for the wealthy underlined. But in the absence of a compelling progressive counteroffer from the Harris campaign, they worked on the campaign trail. Without a fundamental change in economic approach, social contracts across the continent risk being ripped up. Policymakers must avoid giving this political gift to the Trumpian forces already on the march in Europe.