Populism

By Dorottya Zsiboracs

Corottya is currently a first year BA International Relations student. Her principal interests are security issues, mainly conflict resolution processes, the role of diplomacy in statecraft and great power conflict. Furthermore, she is currently interning at Dryad Global, which is a maritime security risk management company.

“Us” versus “them”- How many different faces does populism have?

Hugo Chavez, the highly criticised former president of Venezuela, brought a significant democratic regression to his country by arresting government critics, manipulating electoral laws, and controlling media. Ahead of polls he propagated himself with the following sentence: “I am not an individual, I am the people” [1]. His political agenda was based on making enemies of the domestic elite, but ultimately targeted the United States as the head of an imperialist conspiracy. The recent rise of populist movements is not always as radical as the Venezuelan example; however, the continuous demise of liberal democracy witnessed partially around the globe undermines the idea of a pluralistic community of free and equal citizens [2].

The term “populism” has been broadly used since the emergence of the Populist Movement in the US in the 19th century.[3] One distinctive feature of populism irrespective of national characteristics includes a charismatic leader representing the “general will” of the people against the “corrupt elite” or “others”. [4] Nevertheless, it is hard to define populism, as it is not an ideology, but rather a style of politics structured around extreme identity politics with an emphasis on “us” versus “them”. Rather than exploring different types of populist movements, this paper will focus on the rise of right-wing populist movements that combine nativism and authoritarianism.

The first issue to be addressed are the causes behind the rise and success of populist movements. As the lack of trust in the established liberal world order grows, populism is gaining ground. Establishment politicians have been accused of being incapable of solving global problems such as the financial crisis of 2008, the migration crisis of 2015 or the latest crisis caused by the coronavirus. In contrast populist leaders can use their direct line communication to the public during crises to their own advantage. Also, they aim to gain popularity by showing strong leadership, simplifying the political debate surrounding crisis resolution and displaying actions to protect ‘their’ citizens.

Another factor behind the rise of populism is its ability to adapt to each new crisis and create new common enemies. [5] For example, Hungarian right-wing populism identified various enemies, such Western liberal democracies as a threat to traditional, national values; Brussel and the EU as a threat to national sovereignty; and migrants coming from other civilizations as a threat to Christian values. Moreover, in the globalised world we live in, populist leaders can succeed by promising collective action in the name of the nation and by cre-

ating a sense of belonging and strengthening national identity against the global, liberal institutions that advocate individual rights and enhance the detachment of people from politics. Since the government represents certain values, such as nation, family, and religion, it undermines pluralist views, established institutions and minority rights. For instance, right wing populism with its strong nationalist character can be hostile to religious and ethnic minorities. [6]

Another form of governance that strengthens the populists’ position and undermines democracy is technocracy, the rule by experts. Populism emerges as a countermovement to technocratic governance by depoliticizing the art of statecraft and gradually dismantling bureaucratic institutions. An interesting example of a failed technocratic type of experts’ government headed by Mario Monti in Italy led to the emergence of bottom-up form of populist Five Star Movement. By bringing politics closer to the people and having their voice heard, populism seems more democratic and inclusive in the eyes of the people.

After the examination of the causes of the rise of populist movement, its future potential and its implications for democracy in the coming decades must be considered. Populist leaders are strengthened by the ever-increasing simplicity of direct interaction between leaders and the people via new communication technologies. [7] With the help of social media, leaders can engage in politics while receiving immediate and direct feedback about the popularity of their actions. Therefore, they can reshape their political agenda according to the changing “will of the people”. This implies that populism will remain intact in the future political landscape.

Another factor that reinforces populism is the dissatisfaction of the citizens with the set political establishment. In a world of constant uncertainty and increasing inequality, the cost of any national or global issue falls on the poor [8] This can be witnessed in the present covid-19 ravaged world, where the white-collar workers have been able to adapt to the new situation by working from home or living up their savings. In contrast, low-paid and low-skilled workers, such as waiters, cleaners, and retail workers, have been affected much worse by losing their jobs. Moreover, with rapid technological developments, many lowskilled jobs will be replaced by AI technology and machines. [9] Populists can exploit this situation and present themselves as the protector of the less fortunate. On the other hand, the question arises whether a populist leader can indeed convince the people without a clear political agenda and achieve long-term credibility without delivering on promises.

Through the case study of Hungarian-EU relations, the external relations of populist leaders and the role of the liberal world in dealing with populism will be examined. Hungary has followed a unique path since 2010 and set up its own national, strategic plan, often derided as the “illiberal democratic model”. [10] Even though the country has preserved the basic pillars of democratic governance, its interference into civil society by closing the status quo critic Central European University and the modification of appointment rules of the Constitutional Court and other such undemocratic actions have destroyed some of the key criteria of being in the democratic community of the European Union. Because of its structural weaknesses, however, the EU was not able to improve domestic politics in Hungary. [11] Orbán reflected on the changing nature

of EU-Hungarian relations since 1989 with the following remark: “Twenty-seven years ago here in Central Europe we believed that Europe was our future; today we feel that we are the future of Europe.” [12] The growing polarization within the EU and globally, the widening gap between illiberal and liberal democratic governments and the surging protectionist policies annihilate the institutions essential to democratic order and create a deeper divide in society.[13] This attack on democracies across the world creates a downward spiral of hostility and division that ultimately benefits populist leaders.

However, one could argue that there is hope for making a meaningful change by strengthening the authority of the EU and other institutions that were created in the name of democratic coherence and by the mobilisation of outside support for civil society organisations and domestic opposition against populist leaders. [14] However, these external and internal political reforms’ successes are uncertain and both directions, the strengthening of liberal democratic order and populism, are viable trends of the future political landscape.

Sources

[1] AFP “‘I Am the People,’ Chávez Tells Followers Ahead of Polls” (Sydney Morning Herald, January 24, 2010) http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/i-am-the-people-chaveztellsfollowers-ahead-of-polls-20100124-mryf.html [2] Rovira Kaltwasser, C., Taggart, P., Ochoa Espejo, P. and Ostiguy, P., The Oxford Handbook Of Populism. (Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2015), 568. [3] Joseph Gerteis, Alyssa Goolsby, Nationalism in America: The case of the Populist Movement (University of Minnesota, 2005) 198 [4] Cas Mudde, Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser Populism: A Very Short Introduction. (Oxford Very Short Introductions, 2017) [5] Kaltwasser, Taggart, Ochoa, Ostiguy, The Oxford Handbook Of Populism 563 [6] Plattner, Marc F. Democracy’s Past and Future: Populism, Pluralism, and Liberal Democracy, (Journal of Democracy 21, no. 1, 2010) 90. [7] Benjamin Moffitt. The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style, and Representation. (1st ed., Stanford University Press, 2016) [8] Birdsall N, Rising inequality in the new global economy , (International Journal of Development Issues Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. . https://doi.org/10.1108/eb045856, 2006) [9] Smith A., Anderson J. Views From Those Who Expect AI And Robotics To Displace More Jobs Than They Create By 2025. (Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech., 2014) [10] Zoltán Ádám Explaining Orbán: A Political Transaction Cost,Theory of Authoritarian Populism, (Problems of Post-Communism, 66:6, 2019) [11] Jenne, Erin K., and Cas Mudde. “Hungary’s Illiberal Turn: Can Outsiders Help?” (Journal of Democracy 23, no. 3 ,2012): 149. [12] “Full Speech of V. Orbán: Will Europe Belong to Europeans?” (Visegrád Post, 24 July 2017) (https://visegradpost.com/en/2017/07/24/full-speech-of-v-orban-will-europebelong-to-europeans) [13] Thomas Carothers, A., How To Understand The Global Spread Of Political Polarization, (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2019) [14] Jenne, ,Mudde. “Hungary’s Illiberal Turn” (2012): 149.

Image Credits

Gwenbauv, Course ‘Dystopic Diversity? Narrating Migration In Populist Mobilization’ At The University Of Helsinki. ( Mobilizing the Disenfranchised, 2017) Europe’s populists are waltzing into the mainstream (The Economist, 2018) https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/2089528/how-rise-populism-bringsmany-risks-also-potential-benefits