🔗 Share this article

More than a year following the election that handed Donald Trump a clear-cut comeback victory, the Democratic Party has still not issued its postmortem analysis. But, last week, an influential liberal advocacy organization released its own. The Harris campaign, its authors argued, failed to connect with key voter blocs because it did not focus enough on tackling everyday financial worries. In focusing on the threat to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives overlooked the kitchen-table concerns that were foremost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for Europe

While Europe prepares for a tumultuous period of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a lesson that must be fully absorbed in European capitals. 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. Within Europe's core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) lead the polls, supported by large swaths of working-class voters. Yet among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a response that is sufficient to challenging times.

Era-Defining Problems and Expensive Solutions

The issues Europe faces are costly and era-defining. 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 Brussels-based research institute, the new age of global instability could necessitate an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A significant report last year on European economic competitiveness called for substantial investment in public goods, 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 “frugal” nations resist the idea of shared debt, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are deeply timid. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is widely supported with voters. Yet the embattled centrist government – while 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 well-off will bear the brunt of fiscal tightening through austerity budgets and greater inequality. Bitter recent disputes 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 opposed moves to raise the retirement age and has said that it would target any benefit cuts at foreign residents.

Avoiding a Political Gift for Populists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s promises to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as later Medicaid cuts and fiscal benefits for the wealthy underlined. But in the absence of a compelling progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Absent a radical shift in economic approach, societal agreements across the continent are in danger of being torn apart. Policymakers must avoid giving this electoral boon to the populist movements already on the rise in Europe.