🔗 Share this article

More than a twelve months following the vote that delivered Donald Trump a clear-cut comeback victory, the Democratic Party has yet to issued its postmortem analysis. But, last week, an influential liberal advocacy organization released its own. The Harris campaign, its writers contended, did not resonate with core constituencies because it did not focus enough on tackling basic economic anxieties. By prioritising the threat to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, progressives overlooked the bread-and-butter issues that were foremost in many people’s minds.

A Warning for Europe

As the EU braces for a turbulent era of politics between now and the end of the decade, that is a lesson that must be fully understood in European capitals. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy indicates, is hopeful that “patriotic” parties in Europe will soon replicate 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 large swaths of blue-collar voters. Yet among mainstream leaders and parties, it is difficult to see a strategy that is sufficient to troubling times.

Era-Defining Challenges and Costly Solutions

The issues Europe faces are costly and historic. They include the war in Ukraine, sustaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and developing economies that are more resilient to pressure by Mr Trump and China. According to a European research institute, the new age of global instability could require an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A major report last year on European economic competitiveness called for substantial investment in public goods, to be financed in part by collective EU debt.

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

However, at both the EU-wide and national levels, there remains a deficit of courage when it comes to revenue raising. The EU’s so-called “frugal” nations resist the idea of collective borrowing, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are profoundly timid. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But the beleaguered centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Cost of Political Paralysis

The truth is that in the absence of such measures, the less affluent will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through austerity budgets and increased inequality. Acrimonious recent disputes over retirement reforms in both France and Germany highlight 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 resisted moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would target any benefit cuts at foreign residents.

Preventing a Political Gift for Nationalists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s promises to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as subsequent Medicaid cuts and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. Yet without a compelling progressive counteroffer from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Without a radical shift in economic approach, societal agreements across the continent are in danger of being torn apart. Governments must steer clear of giving this electoral boon to the populist movements already on the rise in Europe.