Executive summary:
As the 2020’s decade begins, the problems of the previous decade don’t appear to be shifting. The last decade was the first-time populism properly rose to international consciousness. The mainstream centre ground political parties saw their popularity diminish on an unprecedented scale, as right-wing nationalistic parties rose from the fringes, capitalised and monopolised the political arena. The acceleration of their influence is a symptom of the severe discontent, restlessness and a total erosion of confidence in the political system. And as protestors begin the new decade where they left the last one, with protests ongoing at an unrelenting pace in locations as diverse as France, Lebanon, China, Ecuador, Chile and Sudan, it would be glib to pinpoint this surge as entirely due to the diligent rise of populism. Rather, it appears a gradual decaying of the political system, which populism is simply a beneficiary of.
Analysis:
A report published recently by the risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft found that a quarter of the world’s countries, which is approximately 47 countries, experienced a ‘surge’ in civil unrest in 2019. They underscored the trends are unlikely to die down in 2020.
There are various reasons for the outbreaks. Undemocratic measures such as launching an onslaught on the freedom of press and restrictions on labour unions inspired people from 12 of the 47 countries to take to the streets. More stringent procedures also triggered protests. In Russia, the introduction of a new law tightening restrictions on the internet and new limits placed on oppositions candidates in local elections, prompted the biggest sustained protest movement in the country for eight years.
Crowds at the rally in Moscow roared ‘down with the tsar!’ and waved Russian flags. They demanded that opposition-minded candidates be permitted to run in a city election after they were not allowed onto the ballot.
Another common cause for unrest across the globe was cuts to fuel, food and other subsidies. In Haiti, the government’s plans to lower fuel subsidies, which meant a 38% hike in gasoline prices and 47% increase for diesel, set off anger over a long-running corruption scandal. In Iran, a fuel price hike prompted by U.S. sanctions sparked protests in a dozen cities, resulting in a government crackdown. The plight is similar in France where following President Emmanuel Macron’s proposed pension reform, there have been over 80 days of strikes and protests, with doctors, lawyers and other health professionals joining in. This has compounded the already fractured terrain which has seen the Yellow Vest Movement hold demonstrations every Saturday since November 2018.
But whilst there are ranging grievances in different countries, whether it be repressive or crippling policies, they are all intrinsically linked to the global political and economic trends. Miha Hribernik, head of Asia Research at Verisk Maplecroft, emphasised that ‘Stagnating incomes, growing income inequality, corruption, the loss of faith in established elites, and the erosion of civil and political rights were all among concerns that motivated people to protest in the 47 countries, although to varying degrees.’
Indeed, the 2008 the financial crisis rocked the world and set off a domino effect of bankers which rippled around the world. So, fearing a repeat of the 1930’s Great Depression, central banks poured money into distressed markets and propped up asset prices with massive asset purchase programs. Meanwhile, governments bailed out the banks and transferred the costs of doing so to public budgets. In a nutshell, public debt exploded as governments bailed out the rich.
Most European countries had monumental debts, but Greece was one of the worst with a spiralling deficit. From 2010 onwards, there were repeated bailouts, accompanied by harsh fiscal austerity. By 2017 the Greek economy had shrunk by a quarter and unemployment and poverty was rife. Even when Greece in 2018 successfully completed a three-year Eurozone emergency loan programme and the economy began to grow slightly, deeply unpopular cuts to public spending remained in place.
This was the common global trend and the Conservative government elected in the UK in 2010 embodied this approach. They were elected on a mandate of front-loaded fiscal consolidation. The priority was to limit debts and deficits, so what inevitably followed was a reduction in government spending and an increase in household and business taxes.
But austerity came at a human cost. Cuts to social security and public services, stagnating incomes and rising unemployment were just some of the symptoms of austerity, as a devastating environment where people struggled to make ends meet was engendered, of which the ramifications are still being felt today.
In fact, by 2018, there were 4.1 million children living in poverty, which is 30% of children in the UK. That figure is expected to be at 5.2 million by 2022. The extent of the deterioration was discernible when in 2019 a United Nations poverty envoy released a scathing report slamming the UK government for inflicting ‘great misery’ on its people via ‘punitive, mean-spirited and often callous’ austerity policies. He added that the policies were driven by a political desire to undertake social engineering as opposed to economic necessity.
Incidentally, as a result of the tax and welfare changes implemented post 2010, the poorest two-tenths of the UK population saw greater cuts to their net income, in percentage terms, than every other group, except the very richest tenth, which fortifies the envoy’s assertion.
But this was not an anomaly or a blip, but rather an acceleration of the existing pattern. The World Inequality Report 2018 highlighted that across the globe, over the past four decades, income inequality has increased. In fact, since 1980, the global top 1% of earners have experienced twice as much income growth as the poorest 50%.
Some examples include Lebanon, where the top 1% receive approximately 25% of the nation’s income and six billionaires have a combined personal wealth of about $11billion. Likewise, in Hong Kong, the world’s most unaffordable city for the last decade, it is also one of the most unequal. Its 93 billionaires have a combined worth of more than $300billion meanwhile nearly one in five residents live in poverty.
Therefore, across the world many citizens and communities feel as if the system is failing them. For decades there was a wealth gap, but then the financial crisis and the response reinforced that the existing system profits the minute privileged elite at the expense of everyone else. The neo-liberal system which advocates the extension of free markets and a shift in state capabilities from provider of public welfare to promoter of markets and competition has facilitated and enabled these trends, and people want to put a stop to it.
But it is not just the economic aspect which is prompting fretfulness. The globalised and interconnected world is giving birth to a growing sense of cultural anxiety. The world is becoming metrocentric, with policy orienting around capital cities and the metropolis as well as xenocentric, with trendy international cultures and ideas now residing globally, which for many, threaten traditional cultures.
There is also a shift in the younger generation’s mindset. They are now immersed in the digital age where everything is a click away, and they possess ‘post-materialist’ tendencies that emphasise secularism, personal autonomy and diversity, at the expense of conformity and tradition.
Thus, citizens from across the globe, particularly the older generation, are increasingly feeling like strangers in their own land. Hence, the cultural component apace with the economic inequality breeds a deep yearning for change.
This does not suggest that economic and cultural tensions are always interlinked. But the common sentiment they both propagate is dissatisfaction. And when people are dissatisfied, they need a scapegoat. Right wing populists provide precisely that and often thrive when disenchantment is rife. In the UK, the European Union was the scapegoat and Brexit was the umbrella term employed to express the disgruntled sentiments. The towns that were most affected by deindustrialisation, austerity and public cuts and simultaneously experienced an upsurge in immigration were of the most ardent leave voting seats. Exiting the EU represented a change from the existing damaging arrangement, so when Boris Johnson pledged to get Brexit done, they were seduced.
This same pattern is conspicuous across the globe. In the US, Italy, Brazil and Hungary, among others, where aggrieved tendencies are rampant, political figures have opted for inflammatory and often discriminatory language, exploiting the divisions and pitting society against one particular group in a bid to present themselves as beacons for change.
However, their increased popularity does not point to a unanimous endorsement of their politics. It would be simplistic to contend that people’s preferences are shifting rightwards when it comes to the political spectrum, because it goes beyond that.
Rather, there is an outright rejection of the existing political structure. Mainstream political parties with each passing election are being shattered because of their association to the status quo. With each general election, the global resentment for the elites expands. In Ireland’s latest general election, the left-wing party Sinn Féin, delivered a political earthquake, as the traditional centre ground parties, Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, who have dominated the Irish political landscape for more than a century witnessed their support dwindle. Historically, Sinn Féin has been on the peripheries because of its association with the IRA, but in an election with a stern focus on domestic matters, in a country riddled with problems, particularly with housing and inequality, they were the party least associated with the perceived failures of the past governments and concurrently proposed the most radical changes.
And that is what people are now seeking. Traditional parties are being viewed as a continuation of the damaging neo-liberal status quo. The European Parliament elections in 2019 illustrated the slow death of traditional parties. The big centre-right and centre-left blocs in the European Parliament lost their combined majority. Instead, voices which promised major overhauls and a rejection of the prior direction were of the most victorious, hence the gains for the greens and nationalists.
Conclusion:
Populism is routinely used to describe the chain of events of the last decade. Voters shifting from the centre to the right is how the patterns have been dubbed. But such assertions neglect the wider patterns. The neo-liberal world order has dominated for half a decade now, and the majority of ordinary people have been collateral damage. That migrant-bashing nationalists have enjoyed success because they have weaponised the exasperation does not automatically mean citizens are content with a different captain leading the same ship. The direction needs changing, and that is the message people want to hammer home, hence the unrelenting protests. Right wing populist promise change but operate within the system, and the frustrations of voters may only heighten. Resultantly, the united rejection of the existing order will pose major questions for several years to come. It is a gradual process but one that is developing, and political figures seeking political ascendancy would be wise to consider that.
