Many loud voices have
proclaimed the dangerous situation of Western democracies in the past few
years. Extreme right-wing parties, which question the foundations of democratic
politics, have suddenly grown stronger, such as the Alternative for Germany and
the Fidesz party in Hungary.
Neither the US nor Great
Britain have been threatened by new neo-fascist parties. But in both of the
world’s oldest democracies, governments have simultaneously been brought to a
standstill by the most extreme forces in established conservative parties. The
path back to normal politics is unclear.
The United States currently
has no functioning national government, due to the shutdown brought on by
Trump’s insistence on funding for a wall on our southern border. Although the
immediate conflict pits Republican Trump against a Democratic majority in the
House, lack of unity within his own party prevented Congressional funding for a
wall for the two years when Republicans had complete control of Congress. Republicans
could have used their slim Senate majority to give Trump the $5 billion that he
has demanded, but they would have had to eliminate the filibuster. Although
some of the most conservative Republican Senators advocated eliminating
the filibuster when they first took over the Senate in 2015, enough
Republicans are against that “nuclear option” that it
won’t happen. Congressional Republicans have been satisfied up to now with
giving Trump only $1.6
billion a year in funds for building barriers at the border. Now that Trump
has made building the wall a do-or-die issue, he has more support within his
own party, but cannot do anything without support from the Democrats in the
House.
In London, the ruling
conservative party also could not overcome a deep split within its ranks to
push through a plan for Great Britain to leave the European Union. The
agreement that Prime Minister Theresa May negotiated with the EU failed by an
unprecedented margin last Tuesday, because more than one-third of
Tory Parliamentarians voted against the rest of their party. Various members of
her Conservative Party support the whole range of Brexit possibilities, from
the “no-deal” option to holding another referendum.
In both countries, the
extreme wing of the ruling conservative party has pushed a “populist” policy
that is widely rejected by the public. Various polls at the end of 2018 showed most
Americans do not support building a wall. Although wide margins of Republicans
support the wall and Democrats take the opposite view, the
majority of independents who are opposed tip the balance. A significant
majority wanted Trump to compromise on his anti-immigration stance in order
to prevent a shutdown. In fact, a border wall never attracted majority support:
an exit poll after the 2016 election gave the wall only
41% support.
In England, the situation is
more complex, because there are many options on the table besides the deal that
May negotiated. On the far right is the “no-deal Brexit”. On the other side are
those who would like to remain in the EU. And another form of compromise choice
is the hope that a different deal could be negotiated, even though the EU
leaders have clearly said they would not do that. The no-deal Brexit favored by
the most extreme Tories does not have majority popular support. A poll in July
2018 gave that option only
28%, and the same result occurred in November.
The great dilemma in Britain is that none of the options garners a majority of
either voters or Parliamentarians. But as in the US, a majority
of the Tory “base” favors the most extreme plan, the no-deal Brexit.
In both cases, these extreme
policies are based on false claims. Much of what Trump says in support of his
border policies is not true. Despite Trump’s assertions about invasion, the
number of illegal border crossings has been lower since he became President
than at
any time since before 1990. He claims that a wall would lessen the dangers
posed by heroin illegally coming in from Mexico, but the Drug Enforcement
Administration says that 90% of heroin, and 87% of cocaine and methamphetamines
come across at ports of entry, not where a wall would be constructed. Despite
his alarming statements about how “thousands of Americans” have been killed by
illegal immigrants, studies show no link between immigration and crime. He
claimed that all the previous Presidents told him they supported a wall, but all
living Presidents deny that.
The Tories who favored
leaving the EU during the referendum in 2016 made many significant claims about
the process that they
have since repudiated, including that leaving the EU would be simple
process and that no transition deal would be necessary. They tried to frighten
the English about massive
immigration from Turkey if that country’s efforts to join the EU were
successful.
More significant, the
Brexiteers promised a great financial boon to the population. Instead the
opposite will occur. A bright red bus for the Vote Leave campaign in 2016
proclaimed that Britain sent the EU 350
million pounds a week that could be spent on the National Health Service, a
wildly inflated estimate of how much Britain contributes to the EU budget. In
October, a survey found that most Leave voters still
believe that figure. In fact, the British economy is already about
2.5% smaller than it would have been if the Remain voters had won, a cost
of about 500 million pounds a week. Britain will have to pay a 39 billion pound
“divorce bill” if it leaves the EU, and one study shows that the British
economy will continue to be negatively impacted for at least another decade,
costing each person on
average about 1000 pounds. Even May’s government accepts that the costs
of Brexit will be enormous: an economic hit to the economy of between 2%
and 4% by 2035 under May’s plan and at least 8% under a “no-deal” Brexit.
The politics of the extreme
right wings of the Republican Party in the US and the Conservative Party in the
UK are based on ideology, not reality. They appeal to a minority of voters.
They have already damaged both economies and have stopped both governments from
dealing with actual political issues.
The ability of extremists in
both cases to win some popular backing for their ideological schemes is based
on an appeal to insular nationalism and fear of foreigners. These dangerous
forces remain powerful in the 21st century, stoked shamelessly by
right-wing politicians whose economic policies are most dangerous for those
people to whom anti-foreigner sentiments have most appeal – less educated
whites.
Steve Hochstadt
Berlin
January 22, 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment