CWA # 38
Global Politics
Electoral Rise of the Right: From Trump to Brexit
|
Druta Bhatt
26 June 2018
|
Photo Source:
Any trend as a phenomenon can only sustain itself when backed by common fortunes, miseries and solutions and this one’s no exception. Succumbing to the domino effect, nations in a globalized world are caught in a whirlpool of the movement.
School of Liberal Studies, PDPU, Gandhinagar & Research Intern, National Institute of Advanced Studies, IISc (Bengaluru)
In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan demanded that Mikhail Gorbachev destroy the Berlin Wall. Thirty years later, Donald Trump proclaims that the world needs more walls between nations. From the populist right-wing governments coming to power to the unsettling events of Brexit and election of Trump, it is difficult not to acknowledge the rise of right-wing nationalism in the twenty-first century. Despite having a huge opposition to this trend by a large pool of liberals, the very countries once pioneering global integration is now being torchbearers of isolationism.
In a democratic set- up, what part of the population is supporting nationalistic decisions? Across continents, is there a common civilian character that chooses to colour the national theatre with nativism and global scepticism? To study the nature of such decisions, here are the two most radical highlights of increasing western nationalism and its demographic analysis.
A comparison of who voted for Brexit and Trump
The June 2016 referendum to determine the fate of the UK's membership of EU was won by 51.9 per cent of leave vote, a mere marginal victory. In line with the overall rise of Euroscepticism over the recent past, the three basic arguments for Brexit solicitors were found to be increased immigrants, Britain's reduced sovereignty and its economic slowdown. The arguments were neither unanimous in substance nor in the intensity of conviction across the demos.
The US assumed a large shift in electing the face of their nation from President Obama for the last four terms to President Trump this term. With nobody even expecting Trump to be the Republican candidate to his election as the most powerful man on earth was nothing less than a shock. Nothing, not his complete non – observance of political correctness, his promises to construct a wall against Mexico, his plan of seizing jobs from Indians, Chinese, his open propaganda against Muslims could dissuade a clear majority of the American population to vote for him as their representative.
Following is the comparison of the exit poll analysis of the two events based on certain basic, common criteria.
Age
Brexit: those above 45 (who are a majority in the U.K.) have widely chosen for Brexit. 73 per cent of those aged between 18- 29 voted to remain in EU.
Trump’s election: 37 per cent of adults below the age of 30 voted for Trump while 53 per cent of adults above the age of 65 voted for Trump. He had a clear majority in the voters above 45.
Race
Brexit: 51 per cent of the white Britishers voted to leave EU. Only 29 per cent of Britishers with African –Caribbean origin and 32 per cent Asians voted to leave on the other hand.
Trump’s election: 58 per cent of white Americans voted for Trump. Only 8 per cent Afro-Americans, 29 per cent Latinos and 29 per cent Asians voted for Trump.
Income Difference
Brexit: 66 per cent of the leave voters were ones with a monthly income lower than 1200 Euros. Most people who perceived it hard to make to a living were strongly in favour of leaving. 70 per cent of those in social housing was likely to vote leave.
Trump’s election: 53 per cent of people with a family income less than 30,000 dollars and 51 per cent of those with a family income between 30,000 dollars to 50,000 dollars voted for the Republican candidate. Though Clinton also bagged quite a few votes in the below 50,000 dollar belt.
Educational qualification
Brexit: the ones who have graduated were most likely to vote against Brexit.
Trump’s election: Only 37 per cent of postgraduates, 45 per cent of college graduates and 51 per cent with high school completion or less voted for Trump.
Deciphering the exit poll
Both the instances survived on two basic prevalent sentiments, economic instability and a generalized fear and dislike for the non-natives. In spite of being two stand-alone events in different continents, both of them have striking similarities in the precipitation of national issues and the western manifestation of nationalism. In both the cases the elderly, not highly educated, whites (natives) and people on the lower end of economic strata have strongly supported nativist, right-wing nationalist movements in their respective spheres of influence in both the referred examples.
A study said that when an American white is told that in a few years the Asians, Muslims, Blacks and Chinese combined will outnumber the white population, they become more likely to vote for Trump. This is a common western sentiment in the current scenario where the whites fear that 'others' will take away jobs, ruin their culture and in turn dominate the country to their disadvantage. When members of the majority social group feel threatened, they instinctively or subconsciously start being more traditional and feel more negatively towards other groups. Evidence of racial progress and competition with the coloured lead the whites to experience lower self-esteem because it collides with their schema of 'others' where other races did not deserve the jobs, the status and rights in the first place. To protect their existing beliefs and regain their status, natives support right-wing movements.
The difference in education has brought out the sharpest divide in the voters for both the instances. Researchers at the University of Leicester say that had just 3 per cent more of the population gone to University, UK would probably still be with EU. Despite being caught in the wave of nationalism, most western universities have managed to stay liberal. Education teaches students the benefits of globalisation, free trade and borders open to immigration and global cooperation. The young also are less likely to be stigmatized by racial ideas because they have been acclimatized to live in a cosmopolitan society where the very essence of culture and lifestyle has intermingled and the ‘us versus them’ bias negligible.
In the case of Trump’s election, however, there is a strong racial component attached to age and educational qualification. The deeper demographic assessment says that the percentage population of whites in the younger age group is less than the overall percentage of whites in US population. Forty-nine per cent of graduates in 2015 were non – whites which could have impacted their voting behaviour irrespective of their educational qualification.
Surprisingly the economic divide did not play a major role in deciding votes for Trump. The affluent were as likely to be threatened by the non-natives as were the poor. In Brexit on the other hand income group did play a role in the votes as it was perceived by many that the economic slowdown of UK was due to its EU membership and restrictions. However one cannot predict the economic health of UK were it not a part of EU.
Any trend as a phenomenon can only sustain itself when backed by common fortunes, miseries and solutions and this one’s no exception. Succumbing to the domino effect, nations in a globalized world are caught in a whirlpool of the movement. As seen from both of the above examples, unexpected decisions were the choice of a meagre majority as of yet. The young and educated, who have not surrendered to the populist sentiment, have the privilege and responsibility of halting the accelerated expansion of the right wing sentiment rather than being just another brick in the growing number of walls!
