One of the big questions in 19th-century history is how Britain avoided the revolutions that shook Europe. The most plausible explanation, in my view, is that the painful experience of going through our own, two centuries earlier, inoculated us against the urge to indulge in further bloodshed.
Watching the political turmoil in Europe, I wonder if a similar process is at work. Having suffered a nasty bout of populist self-harm and seen the damage Brexit has done us, we’re unlikely to go through another. Instead, we’re choosing stability: a centrist government with no razzmatazz and sensible policies it is likely to implement without changing prime ministers every five minutes.
Whatever the reason, it’s undeniable there has been a sharp reversal in the relative positions of Britain and its peers of late. Since 2016, being British has been an embarrassment. Responding to queries from foreigners about the state of the nation — usually expressed in the delicate manner of an inquiry into the condition of a mad relation — has involved explaining away first Brexit, then the choice of a television comedian on a zipwire waving union jacks to remedy the damage, then the selection as prime minister by 172,000 elderly people of a woman determined to burn her fellow citizens’ money. By the time her successor had taken over, the foreigners were laughing too hard for there to be any chance of restoring Britain’s long-lost reputation for stability and moderation.
Abroad, for most of those years, was a rather sane and sensible place. America, true, had a rush of blood to the head and elected Donald Trump, but put that right in 2020. Europe, meanwhile, was full of moderation. Emmanuel Macron had curbed the revolutionary tendencies of the French. The Italians put aside their normal political chaos and appointed a technocrat as prime minister, the Netherlands changed coalitions constantly but kept the same chap in the job and the Germans just went on being German.
That was then. In the past couple of years, European countries have one by one tipped into a populist maelstrom. Hard-right blondes — Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders, Marine Le Pen and Alice Weidel — are in power or in the ascendant in Italy, the Netherlands, France and Germany.
Anzeige
On Sunday, the French will choose either a hard-right government that will spend the next three years tussling with a centrist president, or a coalition of centrists and leftists who will agree on nothing except the importance of keeping out the hard right. The German chancellor’s party has been overtaken by the hard-right AfD and three quarters of Germans are dissatisfied with their government. The Dutch went without a government for a year because nobody would govern with Wilders or could govern without him. Italy, where the hard right has taken power, is compounding the impression of a continent turned upside down: for the moment, it looks the stablest of the lot.
Labour’s assumption of power in Britain will make the country stand out in two unfamiliar ways. First, our government will be to the left of most of Europe. Second, the scene will look somewhat like a 19th-century cartoon, in which sensible John Bull observes with alarmed disapproval the turbulence on The Continent. Sir Keir Starmer would fit the role nicely if he put on a few pounds.
And it’s not just Europe that’s a mess. Unless the Democratic Party manages to pull an enormous rabbit out of its hat, by November America will elect either a man who regards democracy as merely a route to acquiring power or one who appears senile. Britain, for the first time in a long time, will look like the only grown-up among the big, rich countries. That will not just be good for our national self-esteem. It will also bring material benefits.
Historically, a Labour government was regarded as bad news for the economy. Investors would take fright in anticipation of left-wing policies. That has changed for a couple of reasons.
First, these days the right is just as likely to splash the cash as the left. The Conservatives’ careful guardianship of taxpayers’ money has been replaced by a profligacy that would have horrified the grocer’s daughter. Boris’s enthusiasm for spraying the national wealth around is shared by his fellow blonde bombshells on the European mainland, so investors worried about fiscal responsibility are more likely to favour a stolid centrist like Starmer.
Anzeige
Second, the more uncertain the world has become, the higher the premium investors place on stability. They want governments to respect the institutions whose job is to act as guardrails to the politicians. Liz Truss tested the markets’ appetite for the sudden adoption of extreme policies, and the markets explained very clearly that they had none. They are more interested in knowing they’re not going to be buffeted by changing political winds than they are by the direction of policy. The slump in French markets after the first round of the parliamentary elections was an eloquent expression of their lack of enthusiasm for uncertainty. True, the markets boomed under Trump as under Biden, but America plays by superpower rules. Second-rank nations have to try harder.
Certainly, there are aspects of Labour policy, such as the strengthening of workers’ rights, that do not fill the business community with joy. But everything in life is relative, and Britain is going to look like a relatively good place to invest in the next few years. Which, economic benefits aside, will be rather enjoyable: now we can start asking foreigners with an air of concern why their countries are in such a mess.
