logo
Turning populism's tools against populism

Turning populism's tools against populism

Arab News2 days ago
https://arab.news/b67tw
For UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and other leaders confronting right-wing populist headwinds, the challenge is not only to govern competently, but to do so in ways that make reform visible, fast and politically meaningful to persuadable voters. Otherwise, with voters in many countries beginning to doubt that public policy can actually improve their lives, populism will keep gaining ground, fed by the idea that progressive politics amounts to technocratic talk with no results.
Democratic governments of all political stripes are almost universally failing to recognize this new terrain of political legitimacy. Too many policy programs are built on assumptions from a bygone era: that a consensus can be built gradually, that behavioral change (like the shift to preventive health systems) will be politically rewarded, and that evidence-based policymaking can overcome 'alternative facts.'
This failure reflects a political choice. After all, fiscal rules are almost always broken for war. Hence, in March, incoming German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, before he even took office, convinced the Bundestag to loosen the country's constitutional 'debt brake' to allow for €500 billion ($589 billion) in off-budget infrastructure investments and to exclude defense spending above 1 percent of gross domestic product from the government borrowing limit.
To be sure, defense has long been a powerful tool to galvanize citizens. But it is a go-to issue for populists, who rely on nostalgia for a mythical past when the nation was supposedly strong and united. For those who genuinely want to lead the nation, such rhetoric will not work. Whether he intended it or not, Starmer's recent speech echoing the nationalist and racially charged 'rivers of blood' speech of Enoch Powell, a British Tory of the 1960s and 1970s, will only alienate many of his voters. Such language inevitably rings hollow in a country as deeply multicultural as today's UK.
The choice for progressives is whether to focus on building more housing and other 'stuff,' or to reimagine the political and institutional machinery that provides for such goods. The first option may bring some wins in the short term, but only the second one can deliver a lasting transformation that voters will not soon forget.
Besides, too many governments lack the capacity to deliver even short-term wins. Reform plans tend to be overly bureaucratic and old technocratic habits have dulled the current generation's political instincts. While plans often read well in manifestos, they fail to shift public perceptions or deliver outcomes that ordinary voters will feel and appreciate.
To develop the organizational muscle to deliver meaningful results fast, progressive governments must invest in creative, agile bureaucracies that know how to get things done. The situation demands not only more ambition, but also a sharper sense of how reforms will be received in a political ecosystem defined by short attention spans and deep institutional distrust. Policies need to be thought through both strategically (for the long term) and tactically (short term).
That means focusing on local settings, where legitimacy is rooted. Cities are not only ideal testing grounds, they are also where many elections are won, where social and economic divides are most visible, and where inclusive, experimental governance can make a direct, tangible difference. Rather than pursuing national reforms that will take a decade or more to implement, progressive leaders should craft local policies to deliver results (from green jobs and affordable housing to preventive healthcare) within a single mayoral term.
The reform process needs symbols and stories grounded in everyday experiences, not Excel spreadsheets.
Mariana Mazzucato and Rainer Kattel
Governments can learn from their digital and design teams. The UK's Government Digital Service and New York City's Civic Service Design Studio have shown how cross-disciplinary teams working outside traditional silos can create new channels for citizen engagement, streamline public services and change the bureaucracy from within. These efforts are effective not only practically, but also politically, offering proof that governments can learn, adapt and deliver. This — not Elon Musk wielding a chainsaw — is what government efficiency really looks like.
The climate agenda underscores the need for public sector agility. Although climate-risk messaging is strong and based firmly in science, it has failed to jump-start the necessary reforms at scale. Clearly, the green transition must be treated not only as an environmental issue, but as a defense strategy — as the only path for achieving durable economic and territorial security. The UK's new industrial strategy, the first of its kind in almost a decade, is a step in this direction.
But individual policy programs are tactical. Democratic governments also need new foundations for how to think about the economy, statecraft and value creation over time. That means moving beyond the narrow metrics of cost-benefit analysis or GDP growth.
These metrics reflect a linear logic that no longer applies. Our policy tools must reflect the nonlinear, adaptive and deeply interconnected character of the problems we face, whether climate collapse, rising inequality or technological disruption. Public finance, for example, should be seen not as a constraint but as a tool for shaping innovation and investment. Outcomes-oriented budgets — not fiscal conservatism — should be a government's default position.
Such a broad intellectual shift must be institutionalized across the public sector, including through expert communities that can inform policy from within the government to ensure delivery. Governments will need to build this capacity as a core function of statecraft, not as an add-on.
Make no mistake: the populist far right has not only moved fast, it has built a powerful, well-organized movement that has achieved outsize influence, especially through control of the media narrative. To confront this, democratic-minded governments need to distinguish between the populists' illusion of speed (all the 'efficiency' propaganda) and the reality of what it takes to govern and build lasting capacity.
The right often champions static efficiency — doing the same things faster or cheaper. But what we need is dynamic efficiency: the ability to adapt, learn and transform systems to meet complex, evolving challenges.
Reform can no longer be treated as a technical process, because politics inevitably involves theater. Progressives must put on a performance with a purpose. The reform process needs rituals, symbols and stories grounded in everyday experiences, not Excel spreadsheets.
The far right has understood this, to devastating effect. While the West's democratic governments should not mimic their populist opponents, they do need to meet them on the emotional and cultural terrain where politics is ultimately decided. The future of democratic governance depends on it.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

At least 13 may have killed themselves over UK's Post Office wrongful convictions scandal
At least 13 may have killed themselves over UK's Post Office wrongful convictions scandal

Al Arabiya

timean hour ago

  • Al Arabiya

At least 13 may have killed themselves over UK's Post Office wrongful convictions scandal

At least 13 people are thought to have taken their own lives as a result of Britain's Post Office scandal, in which almost 1,000 postal employees were wrongly prosecuted or convicted of criminal wrongdoing because of a faulty computer system, a report said Tuesday. Another 59 people contemplated suicide over the scandal–one of the biggest miscarriages of justice in UK history. From around 1999 to 2015, hundreds of people who worked at Post Office branches were wrongly convicted of theft, fraud, and false accounting based on evidence from a defective information technology system. Some went to prison or were forced into bankruptcy. Others lost their homes, suffered health problems or breakdowns in their relationships, or became ostracized by their communities. Retired judge Wyn Williams, who chairs a public inquiry into the scandal, said in a report published Tuesday that 13 people killed themselves as a consequence of a faulty Post Office accounting system showing an illusory shortfall in branch accounts, according to their families. The problems at the Post Office, which is state-owned but operates as a private business, were known for years. But the full scale of the injustice didn't become widely known until last year when a TV docudrama propelled the scandal to national headlines and galvanized support for victims. The culprit was a piece of software called Horizon, made by the Japanese firm Fujitsu, which the Post Office introduced 25 years ago across branches to automate sales accounting. When the software showed false account shortfalls, the Post Office accused branch managers of dishonesty and obliged them to repay the money. In all, the report said that about 1,000 people were prosecuted and convicted based on evidence from the incorrect data. The government has since introduced legislation to reverse the convictions and compensate the victims. Williams said that some senior Post Office employees knew–or should have known–that the Horizon system was faulty. But the Post Office maintained the fiction that its data was always accurate, he said. Jo Hamilton, a former Post Office manager and a lead campaigner, said that the report 'shows the full scale of the horror that they unleashed on us.' In a statement, the Post Office's chairman pledged to ensure that all victims are compensated. 'The Post Office did not listen to postmasters and as an organization we let them down. Postmasters and their families have suffered years of pain,' Nigel Railton said. 'It has taken them too long to clear their names and in many cases to receive redress.' Tuesday's report was the first to be published from the inquiry, which was launched by the government and has the power to require evidence from all parties. It's expected to issue a further report at a later date that will address who was at fault for overseeing the scandal and potentially attribute blame.

UK will go further in measures against Israel if situation in Gaza continues: Lammy
UK will go further in measures against Israel if situation in Gaza continues: Lammy

Al Arabiya

timean hour ago

  • Al Arabiya

UK will go further in measures against Israel if situation in Gaza continues: Lammy

British foreign minister David Lammy on Tuesday stressed the need for a ceasefire in Gaza, saying that London will go further in its measures against Israel if the situation continues. 'We have to get the ceasefire,' he told a parliamentary committee of lawmakers. Asked if he would take further measures against Israel if the situation in Gaza continued, he said: 'Yes. Yes, we will.' Developing

The EU presidency says Europe must rearm within 5 years
The EU presidency says Europe must rearm within 5 years

Arab News

time2 hours ago

  • Arab News

The EU presidency says Europe must rearm within 5 years

BRUSSELS: Russia could pose a credible security threat to the European Union by the end of the decade and defense industries in Europe and Ukraine must be ramped up within five years in preparation, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on a speech to the European Parliament marking the launch of Denmark's six-month term as holder of the EU presidency, Frederiksen lamented that 'cutting our defense spending in the past 30 years was a huge mistake.'European officials have warned that President Vladimir Putin could soon try to test NATO's Article 5 security guarantee — the pledge that an attack on any one ally would be met with a collective response from all 32. Most of the allies are EU has been accused of acts of sabotage, cyberattacks and fake news campaigns – largely to weaken European support for Ukraine – and while Europe is not at war, it is not at peace either, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has said.'Strengthening Europe's defense industry is an absolute top priority, and we have to be able to defend ourselves by 2030 at the latest,' Frederiksen told EU lawmakers in Strasbourg, France. 'Never, ever should we allow Europe to be put in a position again where we cannot defend ourselves.'Many European leaders insist they have heard the Trump administration's warning that American security priorities now lie elsewhere – in the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific – but Europe's effort to arm is moving only NATO's ambitions are not enoughAt a key summit last month, NATO leaders endorsed a statement saying: 'Allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defense requirements as well as defense- and security-related spending by 2035 to ensure our individual and collective obligations.'That historic pledge will require them to spend tens of billions of euros (dollars) more over the coming decade, not five years. Spain – NATO's lowest spender with 1.28% of GDP last year – quickly branded the target 'unreasonable.'Belgium has cast doubt over whether it will make the grade. Slovenia is considering a referendum. Heavyweights France and Italy are mired in economic woes and will struggle to get there spent on military support to Ukraine can now be included in NATO's defense calculations, but even that will not hike the GDP military spend by EU's Readiness 2030 planWith the threat of Russian aggression in mind, the EU's executive branch has come up with a security plan. It hinges on a 150-billion-euro ($176 billion) loan program that member countries, Ukraine and outsiders like Britain could dip aims to fill gaps that the U.S. might leave. Spending priorities for joint purchase include air and missile defense systems, artillery, ammunition, drones, equipment for use in cyber and electronic warfare, and 'strategic enablers' like air-to-air refueling and Tuesday, 15 EU countries were permitted to take advantage of another measure — a 'national escape clause' — to allow them to spend more on defense without breaking the bloc's debt up Ukraine 's defense industry is also a pillar. The country produces arms and ammunition faster and more cheaply than its EU partners. Kyiv estimates that 40% more of its industrial capacity could be exploited if Europe were to ambition is one thing, and the reality another.'Things are not moving fast enough to be able to defend ourselves in 5 years,' Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen told reporters last week. 'It's a huge, huge challenge to reach that goal.'On the need to take risksA big part of the problem is that governments and the defense industry are stuck in old ways of thinking and neither wants to take a risk, even with Europe's biggest land war in many decades still raging in its fourth year.'You cannot expect industry to invest in production capacity if you don't have long-term orders,' said Joachim Finkielman, the director of Danish Defense and Security Industries.'If you need to build new factories, if you need to engage a larger workforce, you need to make sure that you have that,' he told The Associated Press on for 155mm artillery shells is a typical example, Finkielman said. 'When you see the kinds of orders that have been placed around Europe, it is two to three years out in time,' he said, while industry needs five to 10 years' worth of orders to take a said that if governments and industries in Britain, France, Germany and Italy start to move, 'the rest will follow.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store