🔗 Share this article

Over a year following the election that handed Donald Trump a decisive return victory, the Democratic Party has yet to released its postmortem analysis. However, last week, an prominent liberal advocacy organization released its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its writers contended, did not resonate with key voter blocs because it did not focus enough on tackling everyday financial worries. By prioritising 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 quickly 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, supported by significant segments of working-class voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a strategy that is sufficient to troubling times.

Major Problems and Costly Solutions

The issues Europe faces are costly and historic. They include 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 yearly EU defence spending. A major report last year on European economic competitiveness called for massive investment in shared infrastructure, to be partly funded by jointly held EU debt.

Such a economic transformation would stimulate growth figures that have flatlined 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 shared debt, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are profoundly timid. 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 – will not consider such a move.

The Price of Inaction

The reality is that in the absence of such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through austerity budgets and increased 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 happily exploited to promote a politics of nativist social policy. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has resisted moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would focus any benefit cuts at foreign residents.

Avoiding a Political Gift for Nationalists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s promises to protect blue‑collar interests were deeply disingenuous, as subsequent Medicaid cuts and tax breaks for the wealthy demonstrated. But in the absence of a convincing 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 steer clear of giving this political gift to the populist movements already on the march in Europe.