Brexit is not a repeat of the interwar period, but there is cause for concern

By Hadas Aron & Emily Holland

Migration as a trigger issue.

The shocking decision by British citizens to leave the European Union is the latest example of events in Europe that raise comparisons to the tragic interwar period. Indeed, the combination of the 2008 financial crisis and the surge of migration from conflict areas has ushered in surge of far right populism, polarization, economic protectionism and xenophobia. But while it seems we are entering a period of deep civilizational strife, are we really doomed to repeat history? Here are a few points of comparison and contrast between the dark interwar years and our own gloomy epoch.

1. A Surge in Economic Protectionism: The source of Brexit, as well as a host of other social and political changes across the continent, is a widespread sense of existential crisis. Entire sectors or classes in many Western countries are concerned that future generations will not be able to enjoy the same benefits that they were raised to expect. Whether due to global economic competition, the loss of jobs to overseas workers, the continual shrinking of the welfare state or the stagnation of wages for the lower and middle classes, life is not living up to the expectations of previous generations. Of course globalization has brought growth, but as we all know by now, growth is not enjoyed equally across classes, and indeed many will never see its benefits. Moreover, although the markets have recovered from the 2008 crisis, Europe is still dealing with the repercussions: youth unemployment rates are still unconscionably high and some European leaders have responded by discriminatory policies. Capitalizing on these fears, politicians like Boris Johnson and Donald Trump call for protectionist economic measures. Similarly, the Great Depression of the 1930s was marked by economic protectionist trade policies like imposed tariffs and exchange controls. In fact, there has not yet been a significant curtailing of trade so far, but Brexit is a large step in that direction.
2.  Populism: While we have not yet seen the implementation of strict protectionist policies, we have certainly witnessed an increase in major political figures promoting populist policies. Trump and Johnson are the loudest proponents of this, but as of yet, they are still merely would be leaders. In other countries however, both democracies and non-democracies, nationalist populist leaders are already in positions of power: Putin in Russia is the most prominent example, but also Edogan in Turkey, Modi in India, and Orban in Hungary amongst others. Many analysts have noted that the rise in populism coincides with a decline in democratic and liberal indicators such as freedom of speech, press, minority rights and property rights. Are these leaders a step in the direction of the wave of fascism that spread across Europe in the 1930s? Not necessarily. As we discuss below, fascism is a specific ideology: some of its characteristics are evident today, others are absent. Moreover, arguably none of the leaders have yet shown themselves to be major threats to international security. But even if we do not face the immediate prospect of World War III, populist regimes are still hugely problematic. We have already witnessed the curtailing of rights as well as the hateful incitement of violence against minorities and migrants. 
3. The Collapse of International Institutions: One of the more troubling aspects of the interwar period was the utter collapse of international institutions. The League of Nations failed in its mandate to prevent the onset of the Second World War. Current international institutions are far stronger than the League of Nations, but the UK’s break with Europe show large cracks forming. Institutions are merely as strong as the interests of its participants. Once these interests diverge, can we expect them to survive? So far institutions like NATO seem resilient, but what happens if a Trump America no longer supports it? While this may seem like a doomsday scenario, in the wake of Brexit it is no longer out of the realm of possibility. The British vote risks the stability and integrity of the European Union. It is not difficult to imagine a scenario in which other major states seek independence, and small states fear the growing power of Germany within the institution. Say what you will about the European Union (heavy bureaucracy, general incompetence and non-democratic practices), it had a stabilizing influence in the region and beyond, and has contributed to the promotion of democratic standards and protection of minorities. Further strife within the EU should worry all who care about these vital issues.
4. Extreme Ideology: The definitions of fascism are myriad, but there are a few key elements. Using Umberto Eco’s classic definition we can find several similarities between today’s populist trend and interwar fascism: an appeal to a frustrated middle class, nationalism and xenophobia, anti-elitism, the exaggeration of an enemy threat and the rejection of modernism. However, others like Robert Paxton stress not the sentiment but the structure and action as key to fascism: a strong militant party, violence as value and external expansion. These structural elements are not evident in all of today’s populist regimes and in the presumptive populist leaders. 
5. A Surge in Migration: We cannot emphasize enough the magnitude of the issue of migrants seeking shelter in Europe. Far right leaders across the continent have mobilized support for their regimes on the back of this issue. At best the migrant crisis has been framed as an economic issue: leaders have accused migrants as abusing the welfare system and stealing jobs. At worst, it has been portrayed as a civilization conflict between an educated West and masses of savage, fanatic and even terrorist ‘others’ that are transforming the face of Europe. Migration is a trigger issue that channels economic frustration and nationalist chauvinism: we have seen the efficacy of this strategy in the Brexit and Trump campaigns. It was the same in the interwar years as well. In the early 1920s as immigrants were arriving en masse to the United States, the Ku Klux Klan successfully campaigned on anti-migration sentiment and managed to attract over five million members. This sentiment culminated in the Immigration Act of 1924, which restricted immigration to the US according to the national origin of migrants. This act is not dissimilar from Donald Trump’s proposed immigration reform. However, under a different political climate Europe and other regions have managed to rise to the challenge of migration. In the wake of WWII, Europe faced a migrant crisis of unprecedented proportions. While it took over a decade to resettle the uprooted, both Europe and the United States emerged stronger. The question we are now faced with is how to rise to the current challenge and how much we will allow our politicians to use it for cynical purposes.

 
Despite Brexit, it is clear that there are some major differences between the interwar period and the current troubling atmosphere. However, like the interwar period, we are faced with the challenges of xenophobia, populism, nationalism and the prevailing atmosphere of fear. How we respond to them will be the crucial test that puts the West on a path to recovery or collapse.