U.S. may follow worldwide election trend.

This has been a bad year for parties in power faced with elections. They have been losing them, if not absolutely, then relatively. Attention has been focusing on a series of elections where so-called right-wing parties have been performing better, sometimes much better, than parties in power considered to be left-wing. Notable examples are Argentina, Venezuela, Brazil and Denmark. And one might add the United States.

What is less commented on has been the reverse situation – right-wing parties in power losing to forces on the left, or at least losing seats at the national and/or provincial levels. This has been true, in often quite different ways, of Canada, Australia, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Italy and India.

Maybe the problem is not the programs being put forth by the parties but simply the fact that parties in power are being blamed for bad economic situations. One reaction, which we have seen almost everywhere, is right-wing, xenophobic populism. And another reaction is to demand more, not fewer, welfare state measures, which is called being “against austerity.” It is of course quite possible to be xenophobic and anti-austerity at the same time.

But if a party reaches power and has to govern, it is expected to make a difference in the lives of all those who voted them into power. And if they can’t do that they may face a severe reaction at elections in the future, often quite swiftly. This is what Prime Minister Narendra Modi in India learned when less than a year after a sweeping national election, his party did badly in provincial elections in Delhi and Bihar, where his party had done very well just before.

I don’t think this volatility is going to cease anytime soon. The neoliberal mantras of growth and competitivity are not able to reduce significantly the rate of real unemployment. As a result, they can primarily force the transfer of wealth from the lower strata to the richer strata. This is very visible and is what leads to the denunciation of austerity programs.

The xenophobic reaction responds to a psychic need, but does not in fact lead to greater employment, and therefore not to greater real income. Such voters may withdraw from electoral politics, as may those pursuing left-leaning objectives, such as increased taxation on the wealthy. In turn, the governments – left, center or right – have less money for any social protective measures.

Warfare is both intimidating and remunerating in the short run, even if it is humanly devastating and exhausting in the longer run. So, when the U.S. debates how to pursue its interests in Syria or Afghanistan, the pull to increased, rather than lessened, military involvement is very strong.

All in all, it is not a pretty picture. The point for the political parties is this is not a good time to hold elections. Some parties in power are beginning to decide that they shouldn’t hold them, or at least not hold even marginally competitive ones.

IMMANUEL WALLERSTEIN is the author of The Decline of American Power: The U.S. in a Chaotic World.