What is populism?

Le Regard Libre N° 39 - Diego Taboada

Populism has become a favorite theme among Western media and analysts. But what is populism? Jan-Werner Müller, a German political scientist and professor at Princeton University in the USA, analyzes this in his recent book What is populism? (Ed. Premier Parallèle, 2016) which provides some keys to understanding the phenomenon.

The term «populist» is used to describe a number of parties and movements that have emerged over the last twenty years or so, and are now an integral part of the Western political landscape. Defined by some in a positive light as an emanation of modern politics, these movements are today generating concern. 

But what is populism? It would be reductive to characterize it by the type of voters populist parties attract, or by their positioning - left or right - on the political scale. Contemporary examples show that the populist party is protean, especially from an ideological point of view. Populism can be as left-wing as Podemos in Spain or Syriza in Greece, as right-wing as the SVP in Switzerland, or as hybrid as the Front National in France, which is socially conservative and reactionary, but economically protectionist. According to Jan-Werner Müller, populism identifies itself primarily with the claim that it is «the only one to represent the true people».

A danger for democracy

The author shows that populist parties claim to have a «moral monopoly» on representation. They represent the people, a pure and homogeneous entity by definition, and are their only legitimate representatives. The «real» people are opposed to the corrupt elites who are accidentally brought in to govern. 

These parties are often protest movements, present in parliament but rarely in the executive. But how to justify the incoherence of not having been chosen by the popular majority if they are, in fact, the people's elected representatives? Well, quite simply, populists pride themselves on representing «the silent majority», the masses who have no say. And, in so doing, he questions the value of a ballot manipulated by corrupt elites, brought to power through a dubious procedure that is unrepresentative of what the real people want.

This is why no legitimacy is granted to their political opponents. They are impostors and cannot emanate from the will of the people. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's refusal to take part in debates with members of other parties is indicative of the populists' vision of democracy: discussion is pointless and even harmful, as they are the only ones able to represent and serve the interests of the people.

What is the risk of such movements for democracy? By constructing the image of a people with a homogeneous body, a common will and a single representative, they deny the pluralism and diversity inherent in any society. This conception of politics collides with the ideal of democracy, which is pluralist in essence.

Once in power, the dangers of populism are revealed. Contemporary experiments show an inevitable authoritarian drift, both theoretically and practically. Indeed, why politically integrate the opposition if it has no legitimacy whatsoever? How can we accept criticism when those in power are acting solely for the good of the people? Putin, Erdogan and Orban, to name but the most representative, have shown how a country can be transformed when populists take over. Populism is a danger to democracy insofar as it does not accept a plurality of viewpoints.

Fighting populism

Populism is an increasingly widespread phenomenon, which no longer stems solely from new protest movements, but is also developing within traditional parties. Donald Trump was first and foremost the official candidate of the Republicans. UKIP campaigned for Brexit with the support of a significant wing of the Conservative party. In France, the new leadership of the Republicans is betting on a more populist discourse and trying to climb back up the slope by adopting an identitarian line not unlike the discourse of the Front National. It seems that the reproduction of populist methods is the way these parties have found to cope with the transfer of their voters. But entering into this same logic out of electoral opportunism is a mistake that won't help eradicate the populist virus. On the contrary, it's all the more reason to legitimize these movements.

On the other hand, the majority of the traditional political world portrays the supporters of these movements as individuals reacting with resentment to their situation and attracted by simplistic ideas. Infantilizing an electorate and denying it the ability to make considered, conscious choices is not a satisfactory solution either. Instead of discrediting these parties, we need to take these movements seriously, in order to combat them more effectively. Criticism of the elites, corruption or economic management is not always synonymous with populism, and can on the contrary make democracy healthier and more vibrant. Those who present themselves as the last bastion against populism need to tackle the problems and causes that have led people to turn to this type of movement. Proposing viable, concrete solutions is the only way to turn people away from these parties. It is essential not to play into the hands of these movements, for whom substance is of little importance, and to win on the level of ideas.

Jan-Werner Müller's clear-sighted explanation highlights what populist movements have in common and what identifies them conceptually. Populism is a threat to democracy, but a way of doing politics that is very much present in our societies. Rather than caricaturing parties and their voters, the aim is to accept their existence without normalizing it, and to highlight their contradictions without taking over their modus operandi.

Write to the author: diebo.taboada@leregardlibre.com

Photo credit : pixabay.com