🔗 Share this article

Over a twelve months after the election that delivered Donald Trump a clear-cut return victory, the Democratic party has still not issued its election autopsy. But, recently, an prominent liberal advocacy organization released its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its writers contended, failed to connect with key voter blocs because it failed to concentrate enough on addressing basic economic anxieties. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, progressives neglected the bread-and-butter issues that were foremost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for European Capitals

While Europe prepares for a tumultuous period of politics between now and the end of the decade, that is a message that needs to be fully absorbed in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy indicates, is hopeful that “nationalist movements in Europe will soon 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) top the polls, backed by significant segments of working-class voters. Yet among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a strategy that is adequate to challenging times.

Era-Defining Problems and Costly Solutions

The challenges Europe faces are expensive and historic. They encompass the war in Ukraine, maintaining the momentum of the green transition, dealing with demographic change and building economies that are more resilient to pressure by Mr Trump and China. As per a European thinktank, the new age of global instability could necessitate an additional €250bn in yearly EU defence spending. A major report last year on European economic competitiveness demanded substantial investment in shared infrastructure, to be financed in part by collective 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 continues to be a deficit of courage when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations resist the idea of collective borrowing, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are deeply unambitious. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is widely supported with voters. Yet the beleaguered centrist government – while desperate to cut its budget deficit – refuses to contemplate such a move.

The Price of Political Paralysis

The reality is that in the absence of such measures, the less affluent will pay the price of fiscal tightening through austerity budgets and increased inequality. Acrimonious recent conflicts over retirement reforms 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 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.

Avoiding a Strategic Advantage for Nationalists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s promises to protect blue‑collar interests were deeply disingenuous, as later healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. Yet in the absence of a convincing progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Absent a fundamental change in fiscal policy, social contracts across the continent risk being ripped up. Policymakers must avoid handing this electoral boon to the populist movements already on the march in Europe.