The far-right movement is surging across Europe, shaking the foundations of the continent’s liberal democracies. Once confined to the political fringes, far-right parties now wield substantial power, either as dominant governing forces or influential coalition partners. From Giorgia Meloni in Italy to Viktor OrbĂ¡n in Hungary, the rise of these movements has been propelled by growing disillusionment with mainstream politics, concerns over immigration, and the impacts of economic stagnation. Europe is witnessing a steady march of nationalist, authoritarian ideologies, threatening its post-World War II consensus on democracy, human rights, and integration. This trend marks a shift in the political landscape, one that reverberates beyond individual nations to challenge the European Union’s cohesion and values.
Austria’s political evolution exemplifies this trend, with the far-right Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) poised to lead the government under Herbert Kickl. Kickl’s ascent signals a dramatic turn in Austrian politics, as he may become the nation’s first far-right chancellor since World War II. His rise follows years of calculated efforts to appeal to voters disillusioned with traditional parties. Once dismissed as an extremist, Kickl has positioned himself as a leader capable of addressing Austria’s economic woes and cultural anxieties. His campaign themes of anti-immigration, fiscal conservatism, and scepticism towards the EU struck a chord with many Austrians, propelling his party to the top of the September elections. Now negotiating a coalition with the centre-right Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), Kickl is likely to form a government that combines far-right nationalism with neoliberal economics, reshaping Austria’s domestic and foreign policies.
The recent surge of the FPĂ– has not occurred in isolation. Historical scandals and governance challenges have paved the way for its resurgence. During its previous coalition with the Ă–VP under Sebastian Kurz, the FPĂ– faced accusations of undermining democratic institutions, raiding intelligence agencies, and fostering connections with extremist groups. Despite these controversies, Kickl managed to reframe the FPĂ– as a defender of Austrian identity and sovereignty. His criticism of pandemic restrictions and his staunch opposition to immigration resonated beyond the FPÖ’s traditional base, enabling him to capture a larger share of the electorate. His rhetoric, invoking the idea of a “Volkskanzler” or “People’s Chancellor,” draws on a potent mix of populism and nostalgia, though it carries ominous historical connotations.
The FPÖ’s policy agenda reflects its ideological alignment with other far-right parties across Europe. Its calls for an end to EU sanctions on Russia, a halt to immigration, and the closure of mosques underscore its nationalist and isolationist stance. While the coalition with the ÖVP might temper some of these policies, the FPÖ’s dominance in the partnership suggests a government increasingly resistant to European norms on human rights and integration. Austria’s stance on issues like asylum, immigration, and fiscal policy will likely shift further to the right, mirroring the authoritarian tendencies seen in Hungary and Poland.
The rise of the far right in Austria is part of a broader pattern influenced by several key factors. Economic insecurity has played a significant role, as stagnant wages, rising living costs, and uneven recovery from financial crises have left many feeling alienated. Populist leaders have exploited these grievances, offering simplistic solutions and scapegoating migrants or EU institutions for national woes. Similarly, cultural anxieties have fuelled the far-right’s ascent, with fears of demographic change and perceived threats to national identity resonating with conservative voters. In Austria, these concerns have been amplified by the FPÖ’s anti-Muslim rhetoric and its portrayal of immigration as a crisis.
Political fragmentation has also contributed to the rise of extremist movements. Mainstream parties, once dominant, have struggled to adapt to changing voter priorities, often appearing out of touch or ineffective. In Austria, the ÖVP’s repeated coalitions with the FPÖ reflect a willingness to compromise democratic principles in pursuit of power, inadvertently legitimising far-right ideologies. Moreover, declining trust in institutions has created fertile ground for populists who position themselves as anti-establishment alternatives. The FPÖ’s portrayal of itself as a champion of the people, fighting against elites, has resonated strongly in this environment.
Austria’s current trajectory bears disturbing echoes of Europe’s interwar period, when political and economic instability created fertile ground for the rise of authoritarian regimes. In the years between World War I and World War II, much of Europe grappled with widespread economic dislocation, hyperinflation, and the humiliation of national defeat. In Germany, the Weimar Republic was plagued by political paralysis, paving the way for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party to exploit public discontent. Hitler’s rise was marked by a rhetoric of national revival, scapegoating minorities, and rejecting international cooperation—all elements present in today’s far-right platforms.
The parallels are particularly striking in Austria, where the FPÖ’s rhetoric invokes themes of cultural purity, national sovereignty, and disdain for liberal institutions. Kickl’s use of the term “Volkskanzler” is a stark reminder of the Nazi era, underscoring the ideological continuities that far-right movements often attempt to obscure. Like their predecessors, today’s far-right leaders capitalise on crises to justify authoritarian measures, presenting themselves as saviours of the nation while undermining democratic norms. The European Union, much like the League of Nations before it, struggles to counter these movements, constrained by internal divisions and an inability to enforce its values uniformly.
The rise of far-right movements across Europe has profound implications for the European Union. The FPÖ’s potential leadership in Austria adds another disruptive voice to a bloc already grappling with challenges from Hungary, Poland, and Italy. Policies requiring unanimity, such as those on climate change, migration, and foreign relations, could face significant obstruction. The FPÖ’s scepticism towards EU integration and its alignment with pro-Russian sentiments further complicate the EU’s efforts to maintain unity, particularly in its response to the war in Ukraine. The parallels to Europe between the two world wars are striking, as nationalist movements then, as now, exploited economic despair and political instability to challenge democratic institutions and promote authoritarianism.
The dangers of this far-right resurgence extend beyond policy disagreements. It threatens the democratic foundations upon which modern Europe is built. Far-right parties often undermine judicial independence, curtail press freedoms, and erode minority rights under the guise of protecting national sovereignty. Austria’s potential drift towards authoritarianism could embolden similar movements elsewhere, creating a domino effect that weakens democratic norms across the continent. The lessons of history are clear: unchecked nationalism and authoritarianism lead to division and conflict. Europe must act decisively to safeguard its democratic principles and resist the forces threatening its unity and stability.
This political moment demands vigilance from policymakers, civil society, and citizens alike. As far-right movements gain ground, the need for robust democratic engagement and a reaffirmation of shared values has never been greater. If Europe fails to address the underlying causes of this shift, it risks repeating the mistakes of the past, with consequences not just for the EU but for democracy worldwide.