Italy is the only western-European government where radical-right populists are the dominant power. But now they have found the limits to it.
The populist coalition in Italy, of the âfive-stars movementâ (M5S) and the Lega, was recently the object of ironic media commentary, having produced a copy-pasted version of a decreeâto rescue the Italian bank Carige, at risk of defaultâpreviously passed by the centre-left Gentiloni government in 2016, following European Union directives. Ironic because EU institutions and âmainstreamâ Italian political parties have, since 2015, been the target of Lega and M5S propaganda, variously depicting them as technocratic or âpoliticalâ elites serving the logic of financial markets and deceiving the ‘people’.
Can populist forces tackle socio-economic inequalities, loosen up austerity policies and promote more stringent forms of financial regulation? In other words, can they fulfil the social segments of their electoral programmes?
The ambiguous role of the Italian executive on issues of finance and financialisationâa phenomenon which NÃ¶lke has defined as âan especially aggressive form of economic globalizationââcan be regarded as paradigmatic of the approach of many radical-right and nationalist movements in developed economies. To borrow from Shakespeare, we may define the outcome as âmuch ado about nothingâ.
Join our growing community newsletter!
"Social Europe publishes thought-provoking articles on the big political and economic issues of our time analysed from a European viewpoint. Indispensable reading!"
Columnist for The Guardian
On their side, of course, EU institutions dramatically failed, in the last decade, to defend social equality for European citizens from the destructive effects of globalisation by regulating it, or compensating it through a robust welfare state and job creation. Something similar can be said for âmainstreamâ parties, with the entire social-democratic family particularly suffering from the perception of its close links with financial elites and institutions.
Radical-right populists and globalisation
Radical-right populist and nationalist parties have been particularly successful worldwide in being perceived as âcloser to the people’, the core feature of every populist ideology. To do so, these parties mainly focus on local issues, prioritise ânativeâ citizens and opt for national or bilateral solutions over multilateral forms of governance. In this way populist parties present themselves as enemies of globalisation at the international level, and of the national establishment domestically, portraying themselves as eternal outsiders.
It is widely acknowledged that domestic political considerations regarding the costs of delocalisations, in terms of unemployment, together with xenophobia, played a crucial role in such groundbreaking political events as the âBrexitâ vote in the UK, the election of Donald Trump as US president and the electoral gains for radical-right populists in Austria, Germany and elsewhere in Europe. The point, though, is to what extent populist forces can really reverse, or even mitigate, structural processes such as financialisation. European populists seem eager, at least on paper, to fight the disruptive effects of economic globalisation, in particular in relation to renationalisation of some industrial sectors and a focus on social welfare. But, in government, are they actually developing policies to âshieldâ citizens from the impacts of financialisation?
Broadly speaking, it appears that when financial themes (including the role of institutions and financial elites) are on the political agenda of ruling radical right parties, they are merely used strategically, in a rather vague and loose way, to keep electoral support, without clear or original policies being proposed. In other words, discussing global finance and financial markets is only useful during the prior ânegativeâ part of the populist politicsâthe propaganda about âbroken promisesâ, strategic use of fear and frustration, the trivialisation of politics and the exploitation of identity
It is not an easy task for these rising political forces to tackle international finance: nation-states are inserted into an international environment which exerts stronger external constraints to maintain financial deregulation and a neoliberal agenda. The downgrading of Italyâs credit rating by Moodyâs in October 2018 is symptomatic. The agency, assessing the planned policies of the âyellow-greenâ coalition to loosen fiscal austerity and implement a citizensâ income (faced with rising poverty), downgraded Italy from Baa2 to Baa3, with important political repercussionsâeven before we get to the struggle between the government and the EU about the budget deficit.
Role of social welfare
In one way, the capacity of radical-right populists to counterbalance the damaging impacts of economic globalisation and financialisation is often underestimatedâthe role they envisage for social welfare. A growing number of scholars highlight their focus on providing protection to the most vulnerable citizens in periods of deep economic crisis and social frustration, such as the last decade.
Support Social Europe
As you may know, Social Europe is an independent publisher. We aren't backed by a large publishing house, big advertising partners or a multi-million euro enterprise. For the longevity of Social Europe we depend on our loyal readers - we depend on you.
Sheri Berman, for example, contends: âThe origins of fascism lay in a promise to protect people. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, a rush of globalization destroyed communities, professions and cultural norms while generating a wave of immigration. Right-wing nationalist movements promising to protect people from the pernicious influence of foreigners and markets arose, and frightened, disoriented and displaced people responded.â Similarly, Mitchell Orenstein, in a brilliant and controversial article, recently affirmed that an important factor in the success of populism in eastern-European countries, such as Poland, was that it âcares for the poor, and supports familiesâ.
The conundrum faced by populist forces in Europe is complex. On the one hand, many seem to lack the instruments to tackle international finance and financialisation, and so to put in place real alternatives for the national political economy. They gain support, however, not only because of their capacity to channel the frustration of elements of the middle classes towards external âthreatsââsuch as immigrants or the financial marketsâbut also because of their deployment of social welfare, on which they differ from other political subjects, including EU institutions as well as mainstream parties.
So, the urgent question is: for how long will populist forces be able to use social-welfare measures to sustain their rise, while structurally incapable of tackling the systemic imbalances of the contemporary financial context in which they find themselves? Does their inability to form an effective Nationalist International mean that politics for them can never be a case of ‘as you like it’?