🔗 Share this article

More than a year after the vote that handed Donald Trump a decisive comeback victory, the Democratic Party has still not released its election autopsy. However, last week, an influential liberal advocacy organization published its own. Kamala Harris's campaign, its writers contended, did not resonate with key voter blocs because it did not focus enough on addressing everyday financial worries. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Maga authoritarianism represented, progressives neglected the kitchen-table concerns that were foremost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson 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 absorbed in Brussels, Paris and Berlin. The White House, as its recently published national security strategy indicates, is optimistic that “nationalist movements 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) lead the polls, supported by large swaths of blue-collar voters. Yet among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a strategy that is adequate to challenging times.

Era-Defining Challenges and Costly Solutions

The challenges Europe faces are expensive and historic. They include the war in Ukraine, sustaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and building economies that are more resilient to pressure by Mr Trump and China. According to a Brussels-based thinktank, the new age of global instability could necessitate an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A major study last year on European economic competitiveness demanded massive investment in public goods, to be financed in part by jointly held EU debt.

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

But, 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 Brussels’ budget proposals for the next seven years are deeply unambitious. In France, the idea of a wealth tax is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But the embattled centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – will not consider such a move.

The Price of Inaction

The truth is that without such measures, the less affluent will bear the brunt of financial adjustment through spending cuts and greater inequality. Bitter recent conflicts over pension cutbacks in both France and Germany testify to 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 opposed moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would target any benefit cuts at non-French nationals.

Preventing a Strategic Advantage for Populists

Across the Atlantic, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect working-class interests were largely insincere, as subsequent healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy underlined. Yet without a convincing progressive alternative from the Harris campaign, they worked 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 handing this electoral boon to the populist movements already on the rise in Europe.