Round Table
‘It’s the
Identity, Stupid!’: 3 Writers on Europe’s Rising Far Right
Oct. 12,
2026, 1:00 a.m. ET

Credit...Bina
Thorsen
By David
BroderCaroline de GruyterMattia Ferraresi and Tim Schneider
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/12/opinion/europe-far-right-trump.html
Mr. Broder
is the author of “Mussolini’s Grandchildren.” Ms. de Gruyter is a columnist for
the Dutch newspaper NRC. Mr. Ferraresi is a writer for the Italian newspaper
QN. Mr. Schneider is an editor in Times Opinion.
The far
right has been rising in Europe for a long time — Edward Luttwak called fascism
“the wave of the future” back in 1994 — but last month’s
electoral breakthrough in Saxony-Anhalt by the Alternative for Germany party,
or AfD, felt seismic. For the first time in Germany’s postwar history, a
far-right party stands on the brink of power. The AfD joins a legion of others,
not least Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally
in France, either in office or perilously close to it.
In a written
online conversation, Tim Schneider, an editor in Times Opinion, hosted David
Broder, author of “Mussolini’s Grandchildren”; Caroline de Gruyter, a columnist
for the Dutch newspaper NRC; and Mattia Ferraresi, a writer for the Italian
newspaper QN, to discuss Europe’s thriving far right, the roots of its success,
its plans for power and, of course, what President Trump has to do with it all.
Tim
Schneider: An easy
one to start: How did we get here?
David
Broder: The
post-2008 period is often described as a temporary “populist moment.” But
nativist parties obsessed with civilizational decline have since established
themselves as major forces, even where electoral systems or national histories
offered apparent defenses against them. The reasons are many: a drop-off in
mainstream parties’ ability to guarantee social progress; the specter of
immigrants undermining national identity; and fewer people voting. The
financial crisis helped undo the old mainstream. Now, some of these parties are
becoming the right-wing establishment and building effective coalitions.
Caroline
de Gruyter: The
world is changing fast. Governments can’t keep pace, are incompetent or, for
various reasons, don’t meet voters’ demands. Far-right parties jump into the
void. But they do not win elections by just criticizing governments and
uttering extremist views: They need the media to pay attention and, crucially,
they need parties from the political center to start copying them. It is only
when other political parties start shifting to the right that the far right can
attract a sufficient amount of voters.
Mattia
Ferraresi: I guess
the short answer, for me, is the crisis of liberalism in the post-Cold War era.
Mainstream liberal politics, in both its left- and right-wing versions, failed
to deliver on its promises, not only in terms of welfare and economic growth
but also in the more complex realm of identity and meaning. The apparent
triumph of that worldview paved the way for its own demise. What we’re seeing
today, all over the world, are different — sometimes very different —
expressions of the same disillusionment with liberalism and its policies.
Schneider:
A common perception
is that these parties appeal to a particular type of voter, often older workers
in left-behind, deindustrializing areas. Is that true? Is there a core
far-right constituency in Europe?
Ferraresi:
There’s some truth
to the far right’s appeal to the post-working class, I guess, but I would tie
it to a lack of political and cultural identity. The AfD’s strength in eastern
Germany is only partly linked to the region’s dire economy; at a deeper level,
the party offers a framework for identity. Voters across Europe who are drawn
to the far right are often united by a sense of meaninglessness that was once
filled by other structures and parties (mainly Christian Democracy and
Communism). James Carville’s line about the economy was an effective campaign
message for Bill Clinton, but it was ultimately shallow and wrong. It’s the
identity, stupid!
Broder: These parties draw moral force from
claiming to represent people the left forgot. Even their more middle-class
voters like to think they’re on the side of the underdog. The real picture is
more mixed: The National Rally, for instance, grew earlier in the areas you
mention, but now its support is rising faster among white-collar groups. Though
lower-educated voters in deindustrialized rural eastern Germany were early
backers of the AfD, the party has since captured much broader attention and
support. In many countries, these parties harvested former social-democratic
voters after 2008. Today, they are cannibalizing the mainstream center right.
De
Gruyter: Most voters
will go for centrist parties — we are middle-class countries, after all. The
problem is that if mainstream parties leave the center and all that is on offer
is the far right, part of the electorate will go for that, and some will simply
stop voting. People vote for far-right extremist parties because that is what
is on offer. I think it is a myth that voters are shifting to the right.
Parties are shifting to the right!
Schneider:
It’s interesting
that we’ve not really mentioned immigration, which most people regard as these
parties’ signature issue. What about the rest of their platform — what is their
offer economically or culturally?
Sign up
for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big
ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
De
Gruyter: What they
usually offer is the opposite of what mainstream parties offer. And they
flip-flop in order to catch votes. For example, Ms. Le Pen used to protect the
working class, with a plan to bring down the retirement age and so on. But now,
with France drifting toward huge deficits and financial markets taking note,
she suddenly switches tactics and proposes big cuts to welfare. N’importe quoi,
really.
Broder: Often these parties are called
“welfare-chauvinist,” in that they seek to protect social services by barring
new arrivals. I think this is simplistic. Most offer some renewed idea of
meritocracy and even retool the Third Way promise to reward “hard-working
families,” while also prioritizing the nuclear-family model. They may even
speak of integrating some deserving immigrants. But broadly the story is that
migrants are unfairly cutting in line or being pushed ahead by elites, at the
expense of hard-working nationals.
Ferraresi:
Anti-immigration
policies are essentially about providing an identity, whether rooted in
whiteness, language, Christianity or something else. That, I think, is why they
are so effective at energizing voters — far more so than other culturally
conservative causes, such as traditional family values or opposition to
abortion. In a culturally conservative country like Italy, Ms. Meloni did not
win the election, and go on to lead the longest-serving government in the
history of the republic, by rallying against abortion or same-sex marriage.
Schneider:
What does Ms.
Meloni’s tenure tell us about the far right in office?
Ferraresi:
I think it tells us
that going mainstream is the only way to govern. Ms. Meloni’s story is that of
a shrewd politician who understood right away that her only chance of political
survival lay in being legitimized by the European elite. Her success was forged
in Brussels, so much so that when she was forced to choose between Mr. Trump
and the European Union, she picked the latter. I’m not sure there’s a broader
lesson here for other far-right parties, but the strategy has certainly worked
for her.
Broder: Ms. Meloni has inspired imitators to
become pro-NATO, pro-business parties who aim to change the European Union from
within. Yet it’s also no surprise that a new further-right party, National
Future, is quickly rising in Italy and ideas like so-called remigration are
spreading. This is in part a critique of Meloni-style mainstreaming — she
hasn’t delivered on more fiery promises — but also shows how such governments
open space for more radical proposals.
De
Gruyter: Ms.
Meloni’s tenure tells us that part of the far right mellows when in power —
though not all! The AfD is different, as is the Freedom Party of Austria. Once
in power, Ms. Meloni suddenly became pro-NATO, pro-E.U. and pro-Ukraine. The
far right in many other countries, including France, has also made huge
U-turns. They do not want to exit the European Union anymore but to change
Europe from the inside. This is a completely different strategy than before.
Schneider:
The general shift of
these parties toward accommodation with the bloc makes me wonder: Is a
far-right European Union a contradiction in terms?
Broder: Though Ms. Meloni’s party still
sometimes paints Brussels as a liberal blob, once-radical ideas like
outsourcing border control to non-European states are now the norm — and
conservative and far-right forces have repeatedly formed majorities, including
in dismantling the bloc’s earlier green push. Most of the parties we’re talking
about trade in vague ideas like a “Europe of nations,” emphasizing both
civilizational solidarity and the defense of national sovereignty. They have no
shared federalist project, obviously, but faced with issues like high energy
prices or rearmament, they can agree to some cross-border collaboration. And no
one really wants to dynamite the euro.
Ferraresi:
The reality is that
on some issues, most notably immigration, the Overton window in the European
Union has shifted significantly over the past decade. On other subjects, the
pendulum has swung in the opposite direction: Positions on abortion or same-sex
marriage that are now considered fringe were common among conservatives until
relatively recently. We could find plenty of shifts in other areas. Remember
when the Union was remarkably soft on Vladimir Putin’s Russia and eager to do
business with it? That was not so long ago.
De
Gruyter: Short
answer: yes. Europe is about living together on a crowded continent. The only
way far-right parties can succeed in European politics is by making compromises
and seeking alliances. This is exactly what they are doing now in the European
Parliament. Have you noticed that these parties all support protecting the
single market against China and the United States? And condemn Mr. Trump for
intending to snatch Greenland?
Schneider:
We clearly need to
talk about Mr. Trump. Let’s start with his administration’s support for these
far-right parties, especially the AfD: How significant is that?
Ferraresi:
It’s hard to prove
or measure, but I think the AfD benefited very much from the Trumpian
endorsement. Overall, it’s still a small party, but the Trump administration,
and especially Marco Rubio’s State Department, was instrumental in creating a
platform where parties like it could thrive. A pretty huge boost, all things
considered.
Broder: The Trump administration and figures
like Elon Musk undermine any attempt to wall off more radical parties like the
AfD or Restore in Britain. So, they definitely give a platform to minoritarian
forces. Yet it’s also true that the practical consequences of Mr. Trump’s
conduct can be bad for these parties if they are in or near power. Mr. Trump’s
Middle East policy, for example, has had direct effects on voters’ pockets.
De
Gruyter: Well, it
doesn’t always work: When the United States went all in for Viktor Orban in
Hungary, he lost! Mr. Trump is incredibly unpopular in Europe, including with
far-right voters. So, far-right parties are keeping their distance. Remember
also when Ms. Le Pen was found guilty of embezzlement and Mr. Trump supported
her? She hated it and refused to talk about it.
Schneider:
If not always a
successful booster, is the Trump administration — militantly anti-migrant,
economically protectionist, culturally aggressive — a useful template for what
far-right governments in Europe could look like?
Broder: Many battle lines are comparable to
the United States, on identity and immigration, though some countries (like
France) have a far more racialized political conflict than others (like
Poland). Still, most European societies are less violent than the United States
and I think ICE-style units aren’t quite on the agenda, even if Europe’s own
border agency, Frontex, has also been implicated in the illegal pushback of
migrants. Fundamentally, the European Union is not the same kind of power as
the United States.
De
Gruyter: What you
see in America is exactly what you saw in Poland and Hungary during the reign
of the far right. Most people did not vote for Law and Justice or Fidesz
because they wanted to abolish democracy. They voted for them because of
gasoline prices or other dissatisfactions with the performance of the previous
government. When the parties started to attack democracy, voters turned away
from them. That’s why, in the end, they lost.
Ferraresi:
I don’t think a
successful far-right governing party in Europe could realistically look like
the Trump administration. One reason is the dense web of E.U. ties; another is
that parliamentary systems are mostly designed to balance political forces, at
the expense of executive power (and sometimes governability). Ms. Meloni, I
think, is once again a case in point. I suspect any far-right party that wants
to govern would have to follow a similar path.
Schneider:
There are elections
in Spain next month, in France and Italy next year, and in Britain and Germany
before too long. By the end of these contests, far-right parties could be in
power, jointly or alone, in all of them. So the last question is simple: How can
they be stopped?
De
Gruyter: By other
parties. The far right needs other parties to get into government. So if
center-right parties stay the course and make clear they will not work with the
far right, many unhappy voters will not go for the far right — because that
would make their vote pointless. It is only when center-right parties express
willingness to cooperate with the far right that those parties can attract
great numbers of votes. It’s quite simple, really.
Broder: Not just by warning against them but
by mobilizing more people for something better. That may sound trite. But Pedro
Sánchez did that last time in Spain: Back then, he ran on a record of
cost-of-living measures, as well as criticizing the conservative and far-right
alliance. Ultimately, angry nativist parties’ message takes root when
mainstream parties fail to uphold a broadly accepted model of social progress
and reward for hard work. Attending to that is the key antidote.
Ferraresi:
In a democracy,
far-right parties can only be stopped by other parties offering something more
appealing to voters who are confused, scared and feel voiceless. Whether we
like it or not, unregulated immigration is a source of concern for many in
Europe, and mainstream parties need to face that and come up with competitive
platforms. The far right thrives on the questions everyone else refuses to
answer.
David Broder
(@broderly) is the
author, most recently, of “Mussolini’s Grandchildren: Fascism in Contemporary
Italy.”
Caroline de
Gruyter (@CarolineGruyter)
is a Brussels-based columnist for the Dutch newspaper NRC and Foreign Policy.
Mattia
Ferraresi (@mattiaferraresi)
is a writer for the Italian newspaper QN.
Tim
Schneider is an editor in Times Opinion.

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário