Podcast Summary: The National Interest—Politics After Globalisation

Podcast: LSE: Public Lectures and Events
Episode Date: February 5, 2026
Host: Peter Ramsey (B)
Panelists: Dr. Philip Cunliffe (D), Prof. Anand Menon (E), Prof. Helen Thompson (C)

Overview

This episode explores whether we are witnessing the end of globalization, the return of the national interest to the centre of politics, and the implications for democracy, sovereignty, and international cooperation. The discussion, prompted by recent political shifts and high-profile speeches such as that of Canadian PM Mark Carney, revolves around Dr. Philip Cunliffe’s book The National Politics After Globalisation. The panel critically examines the meaning and practicality of “the national interest” in a rapidly changing global order marked by renewed populism, geopolitical competition, and structural economic challenges.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Defining the National Interest (04:45–13:25)

• Philip Cunliffe:
  • The idea of “national interest” has resurfaced due to global shocks: US expansionism, trade wars, destabilization within Western alliances (04:45).
  • The previous era was marked by attempts to dilute national interest via international law, global markets, military alliances, and activism.
  • This left political elites ill-equipped to respond to current pressures because they lack frameworks for national self-determination.
  • Critiques the “trap” of seeing national interest as a static document or concept to be “rediscovered”—argues it’s a practice, not a thing.
  • National interest should be understood as dynamic, flexible, and a way of organizing public deliberation and representation:

    “The national interest is about effective representation. It’s about public deliberation, not arcane expertise.” (11:30)

  • Counter-populist potential: By channelling collective will through representative structures, national interest can offer a democratic alternative to populist shortcuts.

2. Critiques of Globalisation and Domestic Failures (13:26–20:03)

• Anand Menon:
  • Carney wasn’t declaring globalisation dead but urging a rethink, especially in relations with the US (13:26).
  • Globalisation brought benefits such as poverty reduction, but was poorly managed and imposed with insufficient democratic input.
  • The core issues lie within domestic political economies, not “out there”—UK’s system of political and economic inequality is key.
  • First-past-the-post and adversarial party dynamics result in “political inequality” and a chronic failure to deliver essential reforms (e.g., social care).
  • Short-termism and inability to pursue long-term policies are endemic.
  • Worry: Emphasis on nationhood and national interest risks hijack by the populist right, turning an inclusive idea into exclusionary or racist policies:

    “It is basically racism under another name. And my danger is that this sort of enterprise is too easily hijacked, which makes me personally quite nervous about it.” (18:48)

3. Nationhood, Geopolitics & the Limits of European Sovereignty (20:03–34:05)

• Helen Thompson:
  • The meaning and impact of “globalisation” are complex and multifaceted; financial globalisation endures, but the framing of the world has changed.
  • The nation state has reasserted legitimacy, as seen in Brexit, but the shift to explicit geopolitical competition (US–China, Russia’s reintegration/alienation) is central.
  • Democracy and nationhood are historically intertwined, but it’s difficult to (re)build cultural mechanisms for shared national belonging in today’s context.
  • European states’ sovereignty is constrained:
    • Denmark’s lack of control over Greenland due to US military presence illustrates “performative” sovereignty.
    • True sovereignty requires more than formal independence, especially in security and energy.
  • Concludes that the outlook for European autonomy is especially challenging under current conditions:

    “What is the specific ground in which your optimism is coming from?” (33:53)

4. Rebuttals & Optimism for Political Renewal (34:24–43:29)

• Cunliffe’s Response:
  • The “retrenchment” of US power (Trump era) creates a challenge and opportunity for other states to take responsibility for themselves.
  • Overcoming “political infantilization” of member statehood can lead to more effective, legitimate democracies.
  • National interest as a framework for bold politics and renewing legitimacy.
  • Culture wars are a reaction to politics without representation; renewed national interest deliberation can help heal these divides.
  • Avoiding both autarky and return to old-style protectionism—favors political self-sufficiency, not economic self-isolation:

    “There’s nothing appealing about the idea of economic self sufficiency, but there’s plenty that’s appealing about political self sufficiency.” (41:53)

5. The Future of Globalisation, Demographics, and Political Architecture (43:54–56:24)

• Audience Q&A:
  • Declining birth rates: Cunliffe is less alarmed, seeing loss of collective identification as a root of demographic malaise. Menon (“I’m quite panicked by it, to be honest…” 50:42) worries about fiscal sustainability and political honesty about immigration.
  • New architecture of globalisation: Shift from US- or China-centric models likely; future may entail several competing blocs.
  • European sovereignty & bloc logic: Thompson (52:45) doubts a return to past globalisation; resource-poor European states will need to cooperate but will face renewed competition.

6. Protectionism, Social Contracts, and the Populist Right (57:11–68:15)

• Renegotiating the social contract:
  • Audience: Calls for rebalancing power between labor, business, and finance—“What else do we need to rip up and start again with?” (58:35)
  • Cunliffe: National interest politics can enable (but doesn’t guarantee) more effective state intervention and regulation of markets, as well as a social contract that favors domestic rather than global capital.
• Populist right and the national interest:
  • Risk of “the national interest” being co-opted by exclusionary forces like Farage or Trump.
  • Cunliffe: The national interest provides grounds to meaningfully critique and defeat populists—but only if mainstream elites are willing to embrace it as a source of political representation and legitimacy, rather than just process or proceduralism.

7. Leadership, National Interest, and Political Transformation (71:52–86:00)

• Where will change and leadership come from?
  • Concerns expressed about lack of effective, durable leadership in Western democracies.
  • Thompson: Endemic short-termism and leadership churn are linked to the lack of solutions for deep-seated economic challenges.
  • The party system as known in Britain is fragmenting, potentially opening the way for new political coalitions or parties—but also for heightened instability and populist disruption.

Notable Quotes & Moments

• Philip Cunliffe (on the national interest):

  “If we’re going to have democratic self government, then we absolutely need the national interest. If we don’t have the national interest, then we don’t have political representation. And if we don’t have political representation, then we don’t have democratic self government.” (12:50)

• Anand Menon (on domestic failure as core issue):

  “We have a political economy that tolerated and tolerates huge iniquitous levels of economic inequality. And it does so because it’s a system that was founded upon basically political inequality.” (15:28)

• Helen Thompson (on the difficulty of reviving nationhood):

  “What are the specific mechanisms either culturally, materially or politically… that are actually going to have large numbers of people believe that they belong to the same democratic nation again?” (26:34)

• Cunliffe, responding to populism and representation:

  “Until Democrats are willing to wield the national interest, it will be left to the populists to claim the mantle of representation.” (61:44)

• Anand Menon (on the current moment):

  “A better future is possible. I just really struggle to discern it in the fog of the horror we’re living through at the moment.” (67:48)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:14 – Introduction and context (Peter Ramsey)
• 04:45 – Opening argument: Philip Cunliffe introduces his book’s thesis
• 13:26 – Anand Menon’s critique: globalisation, political economy, and risks of populism
• 20:03 – Helen Thompson: history, culture, and hard limits of European sovereignty
• 34:24 – Panel rebuttals and perspective on optimism or pessimism
• 43:54 – Audience Q&A begins: new global models, demographics, bloc logic
• 57:11 – Protectionism, social contracts, and risk of the populist right
• 71:52 – Leadership and path forward; panel summary reflections

Conclusions

• The national interest is not a simple policy fix or document to be dusted off—it’s a contested practice that calls for democratic renewal, institutional reform, and a reimagining of sovereignty.
• While “globalisation” as previously understood is under threat, total retreat into autarky or nationalist closure is neither feasible nor desirable.
• The future will likely involve new political bargains, revived national debates, and immense uncertainty—creating risks of further populist ascendancy if inclusive, representative politics do not take centre stage.
• Leadership, broad-based democratic engagement, new alliances, and conscious reckoning with long-term challenges—especially demographic and economic—are all necessary to move toward a stable, just politics after globalisation.

This summary has focused on the substantive debate and omitted non-content sections, ads, and logistical remarks. It reflects the argumentation style and language of the speakers.