Broadway Intelligence Ltd – Global Investigations & Risk Analysis

Credit: The Economist

The three complementary ideologies seeking to destroy liberal democracy, human rights, and the rule of law; and why they are winning.

Voilà dix ans, si on nous avait dit que le propriétaire d’un des plus grands réseaux sociaux du monde soutiendrait une nouvelle internationale réactionnaire et interviendrait directement dans les élections, y compris en Allemagne, qui l’aurait imaginé ?

Ten years ago, if we had been told that the owner of one of the world's largest social networks would support a new reactionary international and would interfere directly in elections, including in Germany, who would have imagined it?

French President Emmanuel Macron, speech to the Conference of Ambassadors on 6 January 6, 2025

The radical right is winning from Washington DC to San Salvador, from Buenos Aires to Budapest, and every day it comes closer to toppling another bastion of liberal democratic values. How soon before we see France, Germany, and the UK run by hard-right populists? How soon before their "traditional values" or "common sense policies" are weaponized to justify exclusionary, discriminatory and repressive policies that roll back liberal values and norms, equality before the law, and the suppression of minority rights.

The "reactionary international," as described by President Macron is dismantling progressivism and normalizing a politics based on hatred and fear. While it lacks the formal organization of Communist internationals of the 20^th Century, it has found expression in new think-tanks, new activist groups, and in both newly successful far-right political parties and recently radicalized conservative parties that were formerly moderate and centrist.

As Professor Oliver Roy at the European University Institute in Florence notes, the reactionary international is more akin to a loose confederation of similar but divergent ideological groups that include deeply conservative Chrisitan Nationalists, identarian groups with a white supremacist agenda, and a high-tech brotherhood that combines technological utopianism with extreme economic libertarianism, and biological hierarchies placing white men at the top of all social pyramids. Naturally, all three share a common enemy: liberal democracy and the rule of law, the universality of human rights, and scientific empiricism.

The Christian nationalists have not eschewed sectarianism but extremist evangelicals and Catholic integralists alike interpret the Bible literally and prioritize personal salvation. They both push a version of Christianity that to many seems anathema to the example and teachings of Jesus Christ. These are the people who insist on "traditional" Christian family values like opposing abortion while simultaneously and enthusiastically supporting the death penalty; or those who seem to have forgotten the basic message of Matthew 25:35 when it comes to their strident view on migration and human dignity.

They also reject the late Pope Francis' urging of Christians not to allow money and materialism to be mistaken for happiness. Instead, they treat anti-Christian libertarian philosopher Ayn Rand and her doctrine of selfishness as a torchbearer for the "Gospel of Prosperity", a theological belief that asserts a direct correlation between faith and material wealth. [Personally, I cannot claim any theological credentials, but in my limited knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ I cannot recall Jesus ever once lauding the rich and denigrating the poor].

Meanwhile, the new generation of Catholic integralists hark back to the Council of Trent and yearn for an identity-oriented Christianity that is authoritarian, homophobic and misogynistic, climate and vaccine sceptical, and which sees the Church as the cultural patrimony of wealthy white men alone. They seek to revive a pre-Enlightenment hierarchy, countering progressive change with divine commandments or their version thereof.

Arch-Catholic integralist US Vice-President J.D. Vance articulated their world vision during his speech to the Munich Security Conference in February 2025. At a time when Russia was prosecuting a war of conquest in Ukraine and when China was seeking every opportunity to undermine the global appeal of democracy in favour of rigid authoritarianism, Vance claimed in his speech that Russia and China were less of a threat than the "enemy within".

Another key element is identity populism, a form of nationalism that resonates with working and middle classes, as well as elites frustrated by cultural shifts leftward. Leaders such as France's Marine Le Pen, Hungary's Viktor Orbán, and Italy's Giorgia Meloni embody this trend, which holds sway in Europe. It strives to protect imagined past glories – which usually mean a vision of European society which was racially homogenous and based on a political and social caste system understood and accepted by all its members. Those who ruled, ruled. And those were ruled accepted their lot happily. But they have also – when its suits them to do so – used Enlightenment ideals to prosecute their never-ending war against Islam and Europe's Muslim populations. Why else do we see Robert Yaxley-Lennon ["Tommy Robinson"] invoking gender-equality ideals when he wants to suggest Muslim migrants are medieval obscurantists and latent rapists. Why does he champion the cause of Israel when his former political home – the British National Party [BNP] – firmly believed Jews were colluding with the "lesser races" to flood Europe with migrants and destroy Christian civilization? As Professor Roy noted in the case of Georgia Meloni in Italy, he nods towards Christianity are superficial, ". . . a stand-in for safeguarding a 'white' Western identity against the great replacement theory".

The final strand is technofascism, where Silicon Valley moguls dream of future tech-enabled 'utopias' where 'personal sovereignty' and 'economic libertarianism' create a society of the fittest, where the weak and vulnerable fall by the wayside, and a new man emerges. They have even revived monarchical absolutism and aristocracy as necessary replacements for liberal democracy. As tech bro extraordinaire Peter Thiel put it, 'liberty and democracy are incompatible'".

They are elitist not populist, and believe in rule by superior people, by whom they mean an ultra-rich white elite in secure enclaves – space colonies or deep-sea cities – with the mass of humanity dismissed as expendable labourers and service providers with no rights of their own [I wonder whether this is why the tend to laud Dubai so much?].

Their reading habits – Schmitt, Spengler, Gobineau, Stuart Houston, Évora, Dugin, and – of course – the ubiquitous Rand, mean their tech utopianism is underpinned by distinctly 19th-century eugenics and racially science. They are true believers in racial supremacy and "elite blood stock". They also embrace more modern theorists of hatred like Costin Alamariu – also known as "Bronze Age Pervert" and Curtis Yarvin, proponent of personalized dictatorship by one extended family.

The coalition coalesces around a common enemy, "wokeism". This ubiquitous slur is used to categorize anything they disagree with, essentially the basic tenets of modern liberal democracy: popular sovereignty, the rule of law, individual rights and freedoms [though rigorously defending their own], civil society, and the protection of minority rights. All too easily, their attacks on these broader, essential values are framed against narrower, targets, anything from gender studies, "decolonization", critical race theory, and net-zero, which are much easier to undermine in the public sphere than a basic commitment to justice, equality, and universally applied human rights.

Can these ideologies - which are largely based on white male grievance, a horror of human equality, and the triumph of will over reason – prevail and definitely replace liberal democracy? Opinion on that is divided.

Optimists argue that the populism [and popularity] of Trump or Orbán is based on identity and culture issues and that – sooner or later – working class voters will realize that their economic policies impoverish them at the expense of a new oligarchy. Then there is the "kakistocracy" argument, that far-right populists are just bad at government and tend to put non-qualified but ultimately loyal people into portfolios they do not understand and cannot manage for the common good. And, of course, there is always democratic resistance to encroaching fascism.

I am increasingly pessimistic that traditional progressive parties can reclaim the narrative and restore balance in democratic nations. The evidence from recent elections, societal shifts, and structural failures paints a grim picture: progressives are not just losing ground; they are often complicit in their own irrelevance, alienating the very voters they need while populists master the art of grievance politics. Hard-right populist thrives on economic insecurity, cultural dislocation, conspiracy theory, and a sense of elite betrayal.

Progressives, meanwhile, often respond with policy prescriptions that feel abstract or moralistic—climate accords, diversity initiatives, or international aid—without addressing the visceral pain of deindustrialization or wage stagnation.

Ultimately, my fear is that without a radical rethink—abandoning identity silos for broad-based economic appeals and confronting populism's emotional pull—traditional progressive parties will remain sidelined. As one observer puts it, we will cycle through extremes before realizing moderation's value, but by then, the damage to our democracies may be irreversible. Populism's formula of simple solutions to complex questions may prove too seductive in an age of uncertainty, leaving liberal democrats watching helplessly as the centre does not just crumble, but disappears altogether, forever.

Send us a message

pd@broadwayintel.com

Give us a call

+447444234194

The global reactionary coalition

The three complementary ideologies seeking to destroy liberal democracy, human rights, and the rule of law; and why they are winning.

French President Emmanuel Macron, speech to the Conference of Ambassadors on 6 January 6, 2025