****** - Verified Buyer
4.5
In this thought-provoking book, British academics Roger Eatwell and Matthew Goodwin help explain the rise of populism. They believe that the failure of politicians to address the concerns of ordinary people has led to several political upsets in the West – most famously the Brexit vote and the election of Donald Trump.The authors identify four “historic shifts” that explain the rise of populism in the West: rising inequality, growing distrust of elites and institutions, the effects of mass immigration and the weakening of old party alliances. The authors believe that national populism prioritizes “the culture and interests of the nation and promises to give voice to a people who feel that they have been neglected, even held in contempt, by distant and often corrupt elites.” They believe that national populism will have a much longer life expectancy than many assume because there has been a collective failure to identify, grasp and respond to the underlying causes.National populists have enjoyed record election results in Italy, Sweden, Austria and elsewhere, while support for social democratic parties has slumped or collapsed. In 2017 Ipsos Mori surveyed nearly 18,000 voters in 25 countries. The poll asked voters if they felt “traditional parties and politicians don’t care about people like me," lots of respondents across Europe agreed (ranging from a low of 44% in Sweden to 61% in Poland and 67% in France). It found that 43% of the British, 54% of Hungarians and 63% of Italians believed that “immigration is causing my country to change in ways that I do not like.”Liberals such as Tony Blair have argued that the solution to populism is more globalization, not less. Many of Europe's political elite view the nation-state as an anachronism. However, many ordinary Europeans still believe in the nation-state and fear globalization. In Britain, nationalism and patriotism used to be encouraged.Many voters in Britain believe they have little control over the policies and actions of EU bureaucrats. Mark Blyth who teaches economics at Brown has claimed that the EU has a sinister agenda and it wants to drag wages in Western Europe down to East European levels so that it can better compete with China. Britain relies increasingly on cheap, non-unionized migrant workers. To the people at the top, the increased profits look like wealth creation, but the people at the bottom don’t see any benefits. As one member of the public is quoted as saying: “That’s your bloody GDP, not ours.” Blyth claims that the EU imposed austerity on southern Europe and dismantled the welfare state in Greece in order to protect German banks who lent recklessly.The authors believe that a lot of ordinary people feel they have been left behind and are getting a raw deal. There is a belief among many liberals that populists are either unemployable losers or old, white, racist men who will soon die and be replaced by more enlightened millennials. However, more than 62 million voted for Trump and 17 million for Brexit. The authors claim that simple stereotypes don’t work once you analyze the data.Many people, on the right and the left, from Robert Reich to Steve Bannon have noticed that inequality is causing problems, they just disagree on the solutions. Mark Blyth argues that both major parties in the U.S. have written off the bottom 30% of society and the same has happened in Britain. He claims that the American working class has not had a pay rise since 1979 and that globalization has failed them. He believes this explains the anger behind the Trump phenomenon.National populists are offering protection from the challenges of globalization. Discontent has been inflamed by how poorly many people feel they are being served by their politicians. People look at the mainstream parties and fail to see people they identify with or trust. They are now looking to outsiders who express a similar cynicism with the status quo and offer an alternative. The Oxford philosopher David Miller has argued that the basic responsibility of governments is to maximize the welfare of their citizens and listen to their wishes. Voters believe that the politicians they elect should serve their interests, but the politicians appear to be serving others. In the U.S., polls show support for gun control and action on climate change, but the politicians won’t let it happen.Many of those who voted to leave the EU are dismissed as stupid, uneducated, and racist. I have read such comments in the New York Times. The metropolitan left across Europe and in America have embraced what the writer Mark Lilla calls “identity liberalism,” and many white working-class voters have felt ignored. The authors claim that “It is hard to imagine any other group being treated with as much contempt” as Brexit or Trump voters. Eatwell is an expert on fascism and the authors explain why contemporary national populists are different from historical fascists. The authors demolish some of the stereotypes about Trump and Brexit supporters being almost exclusively white and old.The American, French and Russian Revolutions happened because people had grievances that were ignored by the elites. The Germans had grievances in 1932 when they elected Hitler to shake things up. The lesson from history is that you ignore the anger of the masses at your peril. Many European liberals in the media have suggested that the people are too stupid to make decisions on the big issues and so they should be ignored and perhaps even disenfranchised. That seems both dangerous and stupid. The authors believe that most ordinary people in the West are not giving up on democracy even if the elites are. They are also more open to more “direct” forms of democracy, like referendums. The authors suggest this would give people a greater say in the decisions that affect their daily lives. However, the elites in the EU like to ignore referendum results when they disagree with the outcome. They now view them as a nuisance. President Macron told a British TV interviewer that the French people would vote to leave the EU if they were given a simple choice in a referendum.In many ways, the populists have changed the debate. For the authors, national populism is not a passing phenomenon and will have a “powerful effect on western politics for many years to come.” The book tries to disabuse liberals of any lingering hope that the last three years have been but a blip, after which transnational, elite-led politics will return. I found the book enjoyable and thought provoking.
