Global shift to far right worrisome
Around the world, the populist, ethnonationalist far right is gaining vote share — in some cases (ahem) even winning elections.
Also around the world, political observers are shocked — shocked! — that such anti-democratic impulses are gaining ground. But an important new study from three German economists suggests that these phenomena could have been predicted. In fact, given the 2007-2008 financial crisis, they were virtually preordained.
First, an overview of the populist political rebellion.
On Sunday, Italian voters rejected a constitutional referendum widely seen as a proxy for establishment politicians. It also was a victory for a consortium of populist parties headed by the anti-globalist, anti-elite, Euroskeptic Five Star Movement.
The same day, Austria held its own highly symbolic election. The leader of the nationalist Austrian Freedom Party, Norbert Hofer, came astonishingly close to becoming the first freely elected far-right European head of state since World War II.
Donald Trump, of course, represents a tremendous victory for the self-described alt-right. This is a populist, white-nationalist movement in the United States, whose informal leader soon will hold one of the most powerful positions in the White House.
Likewise, in Britain, we can see the phenomenon in Brexit and the rising ethnonationalist, populist U.K. Independence Party. And across the channel, France’s antiimmigrant National Front is gaining steam, as is Germany’s comparable AfD party.
Some commentators have analogized this anti-establishment wave to that of the 1930s, when economic instability helped hardline populists gain popularity not just in Europe but also here in the United States. That’s fair. But it’s also limiting.
According to the study I mentioned earlier, systemic financial crises usually have produced similar results. Indeed, the researchers find that several trends recur.
One, political polarization and fractionalization rise. The middle hollows out, and parties on the far right benefit more than those on the far left.
Two, governing becomes much harder, precisely because of this splintering. There are more political crises, and there’s more leadership turnover.
And three, social unrest — anti-government demonstrations, strikes, riots — increases.
“People see financial crises as man-made disasters,” explains Moritz Schularick, an economics professor at the University of Bonn and study co-author. This means that afterward, there is a popular impulse to punish those thought to be responsible. The scapegoats are often minorities and elites.
Schularick theorizes that after periods of economic uncertainty, people are drawn to the far right’s promises of law and order and financial stability.
This is, in my view, among the more tragic implications of this research.
Voters seek out law-and-order politicians precisely because the world has seemingly become so lawless and disorderly; yet those politicians are likely to produce even more chaos, uncertainty and instability.
The one silver lining buried in this depressing study? Right-wing populism already may have peaked. The researchers find that the political effects they document diminish over time, generally reverting back to pre-crisis conditions about 10 years after a crisis. I wouldn’t exactly set your watches yet, but the latest global financial crisis began about nine years ago.