🔗 Share this article

More than a year after the election that handed Donald Trump a decisive return victory, the Democratic Party has still not released its postmortem analysis. However, recently, an prominent liberal advocacy organization published its own. The Harris campaign, its writers contended, did not resonate with core constituencies because it did not focus enough on addressing basic economic anxieties. By prioritising the menace to democracy that Trumpist populism represented, liberals overlooked the kitchen-table concerns that were uppermost in many people’s minds.

A Lesson for Europe

As the EU braces for a turbulent era of politics from now until the end of the decade, that is a message that must be fully absorbed in European capitals. The White House, as its newly released national security strategy makes clear, is optimistic that “nationalist movements in Europe will quickly replicate Mr Trump’s success. Within Europe's core nations, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) top the polls, supported by large swaths of blue-collar voters. But among mainstream leaders and parties, it is hard to discern a response that is sufficient to troubling times.

Era-Defining Problems and Costly Solutions

The challenges Europe faces are costly and historic. They encompass the war in Ukraine, sustaining the momentum of the green transition, addressing demographic change and developing economies that are less vulnerable to pressure by Mr Trump and China. According to a Brussels-based research institute, the new age of geopolitical insecurity could necessitate an additional €250bn in annual EU defence spending. A significant study last year on European economic competitiveness called for massive investment in public goods, to be financed in part by jointly held EU debt.

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

But, at both the pan-European and national levels, there remains a lack of boldness when it comes to revenue raising. The EU’s so-called “budget hawks resist the idea of shared debt, and EU spending plans for the next seven years are profoundly unambitious. In France, the idea of a tax on the super-rich is overwhelmingly popular with voters. But the beleaguered centrist government – though desperate to cut its budget deficit – refuses to contemplate such a move.

The Price of Inaction

The reality is that without such measures, the less well-off will bear the brunt of fiscal tightening through spending cuts and increased inequality. Acrimonious recent disputes over retirement reforms in both France and Germany testify to a developing struggle over the future of the European welfare state – a phenomenon that the RN and the AfD have happily exploited to promote a politics of nativist social policy. Ms Le Pen’s party, for example, has resisted moves to raise the retirement age and has stated that it would focus any benefit cuts at foreign residents.

Avoiding a Strategic Advantage for Populists

In the US, Mr Trump’s pledges to protect blue‑collar interests were largely insincere, as later healthcare reductions and tax breaks for the wealthy demonstrated. But in the absence of a compelling progressive counteroffer from the Harris campaign, they proved effective on the election circuit. Absent a fundamental change in economic approach, social contracts across the continent are in danger of being torn apart. Governments must steer clear of handing this electoral boon to the Trumpian forces already on the rise in Europe.