Nationalist Populism on the Rise in Europe and the World: Citizens Demanding America First Type Policies

 

Screenshot (Public Domain)

The European Union (EU) has been a central player in shaping European politics and economics since its establishment in 1993. However, there are a number of compelling reasons why the EU should be disbanded. To begin with, the EU lacks democratic accountability. The EU operates through a complex system of institutions that are often unaccountable to the citizens of member states. Decision-making in the EU is often portrayed as opaque and distant from the concerns of ordinary people, leading to a sense of disenfranchisement among many European citizens.

Additionally, the EU employs a heavy-handed approach to member states that do not conform to its rules and regulations. The EU has been bullying smaller countries into adopting policies that are against their national interests, leading to concerns about sovereignty and the ability of nations to govern themselves. The EU's handling of the Greek debt crisis in 2015 is a prime example of this, where the EU imposed harsh austerity measures on Greece in exchange for financial assistance, leading to widespread social and economic turmoil.

Furthermore, the EU's monetary union, the Eurozone, has come under intense scrutiny in recent years. The Eurozone was established to promote economic stability among member states, but it has been criticized for exacerbating economic disparities between countries. The one-size-fits-all monetary policy of the Eurozone has led to diverging economic outcomes for member states, with countries like Greece and Italy struggling with high levels of debt and unemployment.

Moreover, the EU has also been criticized for its bloated bureaucracy and wasteful spending. The EU's budget has been heavily criticized for being opaque and inefficient, with significant portions of funds going towards administrative costs rather than directly benefiting European citizens. The EU's system of subsidies and grants has also been accused of favoring larger, wealthier member states at the expense of smaller, less developed countries.

The European Union has been facing a significant humanitarian crisis in recent years with the influx of “refugees” from countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq among other countries. In response to this crisis, the EU has implemented a number of measures aimed at addressing the needs of refugees and distributing them more “equitably” among member states. One such measure is the implementation of a quota system that would require each member state to accept a certain number of refugees based on factors such as population size and economic capacity.

However, the idea of forcing member states to accept refugees has been met with controversy and resistance from some countries within the EU. These countries argue that they should have the right to control their own borders and determine their own immigration policies, rather than be dictated to by the EU. This has led to tensions within the EU and created divisions among member states on how best to address the refugee crisis.

Member states of the EU and their citizens argue that forcing member states to accept refugees goes against the principles of national sovereignty and self-determination. They argue that each country should have the right to determine its own immigration policies and decide for itself how many refugees it can accommodate. They also argue that forcing countries to accept refugees is leading to social unrest and political instability within those countries because these “refugees” are not willing to integrate and follow their laws.

Despite the backlash surrounding the issue, the EU has continued to advocate for a more unified approach to the refugee crisis. In September 2015, the EU introduced a plan to relocate 160,000 refugees from Italy and Greece to other member states over a period of two years. However, the plan has faced significant challenges, with many member states failing to meet their quotas and some countries refusing to participate in the “relocation” scheme.

The EU's attempts to force member states to accept refugees have also faced legal challenges, with some countries taking the issue to court in a bid to overturn the EU's decision. In December 2017, the European Court of Justice ruled that the EU had the legal right to implement a quota system for the relocation of refugees, dismissing a challenge by Hungary and Slovakia.

Furthermore, the EU's expansionist agenda has raised concerns about the future of European integration. The EU has consistently pushed for further enlargement, with the aim of bringing in new member states from the Balkans and Eastern Europe. However, this expansion has been criticized for diluting the political and economic coherence of the EU, as new member states often struggle to meet the EU's stringent criteria for accession.

Moreover, the EU's handling of the Brexit process has highlighted the flaws in the EU's institutional structure. The prolonged and acrimonious negotiations between the UK and the EU have exposed the inflexibility and lack of adaptability of the EU's decision-making processes. The Brexit saga has also highlighted the deep divisions within the EU, with member states like Hungary and Poland openly challenging the authority of the EU.

In addition, the EU's external policies have been criticized for being weak and ineffective. The EU's attempts to project power and influence on the global stage have often been hampered by internal divisions and lack of consensus among member states. The EU's foreign policy has also been accused of being overly reliant on soft power tools like diplomacy and economic aid, rather than more assertive measures to protect European interests.

Politically speaking, populist nationalist leaders have been elected in various countries across Europe in recent years, as a response to the policies implemented by the EU. These leaders such as Meloni of Italy, support nationalist agendas much like Trump has made America First his pledge and practice, have gained support from voters who feel disenfranchised by the EU's policies Economic hardship fueled resentment towards the EU and paved the way for populist nationalists to capitalize on the discontent of voters. Populist nationalist leaders pride themselves as the champions of border control and national sovereignty. By exposing the EU’s failure on immigration, these leaders have managed to rally support from voters who feel threatened by the loss of control over their countries' borders.

The erosion of trust in mainstream political parties and institutions has also contributed to the success of populist nationalists in Europe. Many voters feel disenfranchised by the political establishment, which they perceive as out of touch with their concerns and interests. The rise of populist nationalists, who position themselves as anti-establishment alternatives, has offered voters a way to express their dissatisfaction with the status quo. The populist nationalists have been able to attract support from disenchanted voters who feel marginalized by the traditional political elite, much like in the United States where Trump is able to garner support for America First policies.

The rise of social media and digital communication has also played a significant role in the success of populist nationalists in Europe. These leaders have been able to bypass traditional media outlets and communicate directly with voters through platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. By utilizing social media to spread their populist messages and mobilize support, these leaders have been able to reach a wider audience and connect with voters who feel marginalized by the mainstream media. The ability to control the narrative and disseminate their message to a broad audience has been a key factor in the electoral success of populist nationalists in Europe.

The Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom served as a catalyst for the rise of populist nationalism in Europe. The decision to leave the EU sent shockwaves across the continent and emboldened populist nationalist movements in other countries. The success of the Brexit campaign demonstrated that it was possible to defy the political establishment and challenge the status quo. Populist nationalists in other European countries seized upon the momentum generated by Brexit, championing themselves as the vanguards of a new era of national sovereignty and independence from the EU.

Does all this sound familiar?

It should. 

We are experiencing much of this right here in the United States.