Italy’s referendum might well have been one of the biggest smoke screens in modern Italian politics. Many Eurosceptics have wrongly portrayed the vote as a plebiscite on Europe. What was presented as a noble institutional reform became a vote of confidence in the Italian government and the prime minister Matteo Renzi himself. In fact, it was nothing more than an all-too-familiar rejection of the Italian political establishment.

Renzi’s defeat was written in the stars; a sitting government linking its fate to a referendum almost always ends in tears. The historical examples are abundant. The Dutch and French referendums of 2005 on the European constitution were successfully hijacked by opposition parties, who turned them into a plebiscite on the government of the day. However, the example that best explains Renzi’s defeat is the 1969 referendum in France called by Charles de Gaulle.

Italy’s referendum result is not another Brexit or Trump | Luigi Scazzieri Read more

The similarities are striking. Both votes proposed a drastic diminishing of the senate’s role and both of them wanted to change the relationship between regional and central government. Just like Renzi, De Gaulle personalised the referendum by announcing he would step down if the French voted “no”. More than 52% did so. The hero of the second world war had failed to understand that the France of the “deadlocked 1950s” had been replaced by the one of May ’68.

Matteo Renzi was equally blind in not recognising that Italians are fed up with the country being run – or rather: mismanaged – by the two old socialist and conservative groupings. In 2013, Renzi entered national politics as a young lion promising change, but he proved to be nothing more than a younger version of the old crocodile Silvio Berlusconi. He tried, but failed, to hide the fact that the main goal of the referendum was to give electoral bonuses to the two big parties and to punish political initiatives outside the old party structures.

The young crocodile struck a deal with the old one by trying to prevent new political movements from flourishing, despite the fact this is exactly what Italian voters crave: fresh blood in their out-of-date political system. The way politics in Italy is organised has a real and devastating effect on people’s lives. Youth unemployment in Italy is sky-high, yet the kids of well-connected families get well-paid jobs. Pension reform is on hold, while government officials give themselves very generous schemes. The list goes on.

It is because of these core issues that Italians voted “no”. It was not a vote against the European ideal, as some populists have tried to spin it. Italian voters are fed up with the static division of power between the two big groupings, who have mismanaged both Italy and Europe for decades.

The result of the presidential election in Austria, meanwhile, was a victory against the hard-right populism engulfing the west. It is telling that Arron Banks, a close confidant of Nigel Farage and bankroller-in-chief of Ukip, yesterday tweeted after the result that “I suppose they [the Austrian people] haven’t suffered enough rape and murder yet.” In one tweet, the mask slipped and the ugly xenophobic, racist face of the populist right was exposed for all to see.

It’s telling that many in Norbert Hofer’s party actually blamed Farage’s intervention for its defeat – after he went on US television to suggest that Hofer would propose a referendum on EU membership if he won. Austrians remain in favour of EU membership, with the latest polls suggesting 34% wish to leave the EU, down from 49% prior to the UK referendum. As a result of the Brexit referendum, support for EU membership has increased significantly across Europe. Did Europe’s Brexit backlash help defeat Hofer? Quite possibly.

Austria defeated the far-right Norbert Hofer – finally, some hope for Europe | Julia Ebner Read more

Of course, this increase in support for EU membership must not be taken for granted. Arguably, the EU remains one or two elections away from disintegration. But the Austrian result shows that so-called “alt-right” populist coup attempts can be defeated, even in the current climate. If we dare to radically reform the EU, then the tide can be turned. The upcoming Brexit negotiations offer the possibility to start this process.

If the EU is to survive, people want to see that it is capable of producing results. They want a convincing European stimulus package to end the economic crisis and tackle the obscene youth unemployment plaguing so many European countries. They want a sizable border and coast guard that can actively manage the refugee crisis. Moreover, they want an EU that will intervene to manage globalisation so that it offers opportunities for everyone, not just the few. So long as mainstream politicians continue to play party-political games with referendums, instead of putting genuine radical reforms on the ballot paper, people will continue to vote “no”.