🔗 Share this article

Over a year following the election that delivered Donald Trump a clear-cut return victory, the Democratic Party has yet to released its postmortem analysis. But, last week, an prominent liberal advocacy organization published its own. The Harris campaign, its authors contended, failed to connect with core constituencies because it failed to concentrate enough on addressing everyday financial worries. In focusing on the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, liberals neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were foremost in many people’s minds.

A Warning for Europe

As the EU braces for a turbulent era of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a message that must be fully understood in European capitals. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy makes clear, is optimistic that “patriotic” parties in Europe will soon mirror Mr Trump’s success. In the EU’s core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) top the polls, backed by significant segments of blue-collar voters. Yet among establishment politicians and parties, it is difficult to see a strategy that is sufficient to challenging times.

Major Problems and Expensive Solutions

The issues Europe faces are costly and era-defining. They include the war in Ukraine, sustaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and developing economies that are more resilient to bullying by Mr Trump and China. According to a Brussels-based thinktank, the new age of global instability could require an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A significant report last year on European economic competitiveness called for massive investment in public goods, to be partly funded by jointly held EU debt.

Such a economic transformation would boost growth figures that have stagnated for years.

However, at both the pan-European and national levels, there remains a lack of boldness when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “budget hawks oppose the idea of collective borrowing, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are deeply unambitious. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is overwhelmingly popular with voters. Yet the beleaguered centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Price of Political Paralysis

The reality is that without such measures, the less affluent will pay the price of financial adjustment through austerity budgets and increased inequality. Acrimonious recent disputes over pension cutbacks in both France and Germany highlight a developing struggle 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 foreign residents.

Avoiding a Strategic Advantage for Populists

In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were largely insincere, 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 worked on the campaign trail. Without a radical shift in economic approach, social contracts across the continent risk being torn apart. Policymakers must avoid handing this electoral boon to the Trumpian forces already on the march in Europe.