There are many signs that Euroscepticism, distrust in the European Union (EU) and opposition to European integration, has been on the rise for the past decade. The causes of this upsurge are numerous and distinct, such as a feeling of endangered national identity and sovereignty, perspective that the EU is overly bureaucratic, or opposition to immigration and refugees. Most of these views have been exploited successfully by populist politicians, and many countries are consequently facing a sharp rise in the number of Eurosceptic legislators and officials. The values promoted by these demagogues are not merely against greater European integration but also against globalism in general. Evidently, a policy of always prioritizing national interest, shutting down borders to migrant workers and refugees, generally opposing centralization, and engaging with international causes only when they are in line with state interests, cannot promote global unity and surely leads to division and fragmentation. In a time where pressing global issues can only be solved through collective engagement, Eurosceptic views risk endangering our way of life, and eventually, this planet.

Anti-globalist views, specifically Eurosceptic views, reinforce isolationist and often supremacist tendencies. Both these views have long since been hijacked and weaponized by populists. By promoting such views, they undermine collective action on urgent global issues. Collective action necessarily requires compromise, because the interests of several countries cannot always be convergent. However, these populist politicians paint this compromise as a loss. While they may celebrate their momentary wins by being unaccommodating, they will lose out along with all others if issues such as climate change fail to be solved in the long run. Not only do such anti-integration movements and policies prevent decision-making in the global interest, but they also sow discord among the general public. Moreover, such isolationist groups also demonize the intelligentsia for being global-minded, leading to a distrust of academics and intellectuals. Hence, in their attempts to hurt global interest, they also end up hurting the interests of their own people.

The recent German elections present evidence of a growing schism between pro-European and globalist groups on the one side and far-right populist groups on the other. In eastern Germany, the far-right AfD party emerged as the strongest in two states. Many far-right groups in Germany and across Europe have seized on the social restrictions during the pandemic to promote anti-state views under the garb of individual freedoms and are now opposing vaccination requirements in the same way. Yet, the elections simultaneously brought good news: climate change was one of the central issues for urban voters, which signifies that concern for global issues is mainstream among a large proportion of the population. 

Currently, support for pro-integration and globalist parties is greatest among the younger voters. However, there are signs that populist governments are trying hard to get a piece of that pie. For instance, in Hungary and Poland, the right-wing governments have amended the school curricula to include more nationalist and isolationist content. This is expected to lead to a rise in right-wing support among the youth in the future, reversing current voting trends and paving the way for more right-wing parties to form governments. In Poland, the government has also been appointing its loyalists to the judiciary. A culminating effect came this month as the Polish constitutional court declared the primacy of Polish law to EU law and indicated that some EU laws were not compatible with Polish law. Such judicial decisions would impact regional cooperation as people and corporations from other countries may not feel that their rights and interests would be protected.

The most useful instrument to tackle this surge in anti-globalist views is education itself, by highlighting the urgency of issues such as global climate change, environmental degradation, and nuclear  proliferation, as well as the importance of collaboration and compromise to address these problems. At the same time, it should be understood that some concerns of the skeptic crowd, such as the lack of development and jobs in rural regions, do have some degree of validity. By addressing — instead of ignoring —  their concerns, it is possible to engage in constructive dialogue. Ultimately, a fragmented humanity has little chance of surviving this century.