🔗 Share this article

Over a twelve months after the election that handed Donald Trump a clear-cut return victory, the Democratic Party has still not issued 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 core constituencies because it did not focus enough on addressing everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, liberals neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Warning for European Capitals

As the EU braces for a tumultuous period 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 makes clear, is optimistic that “nationalist movements in Europe will soon mirror 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 significant segments of blue-collar voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a response that is sufficient to troubling times.

Major Problems and Costly 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 developing economies that are more resilient to bullying by Mr Trump and China. As per a European research institute, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could require an additional €250bn in yearly EU defence spending. A major study last year on European economic competitiveness demanded substantial investment in public goods, to be partly funded by collective EU debt.

Such a economic transformation would boost growth figures that have stagnated for years.

However, at both the EU-wide and national levels, there continues to be a lack of boldness when it comes to generating funds. The EU’s so-called “budget hawks oppose the idea of shared debt, and Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are deeply unambitious. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is widely supported with voters. Yet the embattled centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – refuses to contemplate 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 fiscal tightening through austerity budgets and greater inequality. Acrimonious recent disputes over retirement reforms in both France and Germany testify to a developing struggle over the future of the European social model – a trend 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 stated that it would target any benefit cuts at non-French nationals.

Preventing a Political Gift for Nationalists

In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were deeply disingenuous, as subsequent Medicaid cuts and fiscal benefits for the wealthy underlined. But without 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 are in danger of being torn apart. Policymakers must avoid handing this political gift to the Trumpian forces already on the rise in Europe.