The rise of populism: a feeling of déjà vu

Guest article published in Le Regard Libre N°25

«Trump-ci, trump-ça», «les gauchos-ci, les gauchos-ça», «les populistes par-ci, et les populistes par-là», ... Impossible to read, view or listen to any media without coming across, at one time or another, ready-made expressions and news that seem out of proportion.

Grey no longer seems to exist in this Manichean world, where we take pleasure in labeling individuals as «leftists», «lefties», «dirty socialists», ’ecologist-utopians« on the one hand, and »fascists«, »racists« or »neo-Nazis« on the other. Aren't all these formulas, which tend to discredit the person before they've even had a chance to express themselves, the fruit of our media age where the speed of information seems to take priority over its efficiency and reliability?

Indeed, the digital age, which enables us to spontaneously inform the masses of current events, hides a dark side: the rapid spread of erroneous information around the globe, the very information that shapes our opinions, and therefore influences our actions.

That's why, when I was invited to write for this opinion journal, I decided first and foremost to research the facts in depth and present them to you in a way that allows everyone to form their own opinion, just as I have done.

Right turn

Both in Europe and on the other side of the Atlantic, political trends in recent years seem to be veering to the right, or even to the far right. Take Erdogan's Turkey, the UK's Brexit, the election of Donald Trump in the USA or the expansion of the neo-Nazi Aube Dorée party in Greece, which has had 18 seats in the National Assembly since September 2015. In France, over 35% of 18-24 year-olds would vote Front National, while in Germany, the AfD («Alternative für Deutschland») party is gaining momentum.

Switzerland, ranked fifth in Europe for authoritarian populism by the Swedish research institute Timbro, is no exception. Last October, a neo-Nazi rally attracting almost 5,000 people took place in St. Gallen, while others were planned. In Valais, the case of survivalist Piero San Giorgio did not leave Valaisans indifferent, revealing a gulf between those who were outraged by his insensitive speech and those who supported his ultra-nationalist ideology, as could be seen in the comments on the video shared on social networks.

In this interview between Daniel Conversano and the former survivalist consultant hired by Oskar Freysinger, we hear xenophobic remarks such as «50,000 migrants arriving by boat doesn't scare me, because if you put 20 machine guns in front of them, it's all over’ or »socialism, leftism, humanism, human rights and all that crap mean that people who shouldn't exist do exist«, as, according to Piero San Giorgio, is the case with the sick and disabled.

This «new fashion» that attracts some people frightens others, who sense a return to the dark ages. At the heart of this phenomenon, one term seems to resonate in the media and discussions: populism.

Populism, or the three-beat waltz

Although this controversial concept can seem pejorative and be used to discredit a political figure or ideology, it is sometimes considered a quality by certain groups, such as the Front National, which claims to be a populist party. Populism refers to a group that sees itself as the sole representative of the people against a corrupt elite, and often assumes a charismatic leader with a strong public aura, potentially benefiting from a large electorate.

Political scientist François Cherix, author of the book Who will save Switzerland from populism?, compares the populist method to a «three-beat waltz». The first step is to attack the elites with a discriminatory discourse that pits them, «corrupt and cheating», against the «pure, healthy and just» people. The second stage occurs when the populist leader claims to be the sole representative of the «true» people. Finally, this leader allows himself to «verticalize» democracy, authorizing authoritarian and sometimes even brutal behavior, and taking on the sacred mission of saving society and restoring the country of yesteryear.

But who are the people? And who are the corrupt elites? It's worth noting that «the people» and «the elites» are never clearly defined. Indeed, they are merely a vague, fictitious construct whose purpose is polarization - a lack of nuance and vagueness that is the very fuel of populism. Indeed, the people, who have never been so diverse, cannot be described as a homogeneous entity:

«Populists are very often intuitive. [...] They know their country well, and they use all the anxieties and difficulties that are real, and we mustn't deny them. [...] But they use an extremely dangerous method, which is to bring people together through exclusion rather than inclusion. In other words, they will designate this famous people (American, for example), homogeneous, pure, victims of the elites, while rejecting other specific people who are designated as harmful: Mexicans, journalists, ecologists, homosexuals, etc. This is what is very dangerous. So that's what's very dangerous about populism: you create a federation through the democratic exclusion of all of society's diversity.» (François Cherix, RTS)

Erwan Lecoeur, sociologist and specialist in populism, explains that there are two types of historical populism: «On the one hand, there's democratic populism, which defends the small against the big, from a social class point of view. On the other, there's ethnic populism, which defends a people according to its ethnic characteristics» and is based on fear of the other. Ethnic populism can, however, hide behind the sometimes misleading appearance of democratic populism, claiming to defend the interests of the most disadvantaged for purely strategic reasons. This is the case, for example, with the Front National and the Union Démocratique du Centre (UDC), who play on the fear of losing one's job (the argument of democratic populism) to highlight and justify national preference and the exclusion of foreigners (ethnic populism).

When politics becomes hypocrisy and a merry-go-round of lies...

Mathias Reynard, a member of the Swiss Socialist Party, points out that once in power, movements and parties that declare themselves populist take decisions that are completely contrary to what they claim to stand for: «Just look at Switzerland: these are the same people who want to raise the retirement age, cut training grants, and go against all social policies and improvements in working conditions and wages for the most disadvantaged.»

These are also the same people who dare to use the sad case of «Maria», who can no longer pay her rent, as a pretext for opposing migrants... Indeed, as Valais State Councillor Esther Waeber-Kalbermatten points out, «this poster comes from the same circles". (editor's note: SVP) who demanded and obtained from Parliament that welfare benefits be significantly reduced in 2016.»

Let's take Donald Trump as another example. In his inaugural speech, he claimed to be defending the American people who have been «left behind», such as «mothers and children trapped in poverty», whereas in seven decades, with a personal fortune of over 3.7 billion dollars, he has never contributed in any way to improving social conditions in the United States.

Careful not to repeat past mistakes

Mathias Reynard argues that populist rhetoric «always plays on hatred, on fears, on the dark side of the human being» and that we need «to have a bit of memory and remember the history of our continent». He's not the only one trying to sound the alarm. Pope Francis recently warned the people of Europe against the rise of the far right:

«For me, the most typical example of European populism is Germany in 1933. A people submerged in a crisis who searched for their identity until this charismatic leader (Hitler) came along and promised to give them back their identity, but who gave them back a perverted identity and we all know what happened.»

On December 22, 2016, Prince Charles warned of a rise in many populist groups around the world, increasingly aggressive towards those who adhere to minority beliefs. In his view, this violence «has disturbing echoes of the dark days of the 1930s». In Germany, as the far-right AfD party gains momentum, Angela Merkel declares that «we will get nowhere by trying to solve problems through polarization and populism» and that «even if some dream of a “return to a small world”, the right answer is openness».

How can we combat the rise of populism?

While Obama took advantage of his last days as President to sign a law against disinformation and propaganda, Angela Merkel also seems to be concerned about the phenomenon of digital disinformation, which she believes contributes to the rise of populism by manipulating public opinion. Will regulating the dissemination of «fake news» help to enlighten the public by disillusioning them with erroneous information, or will it, on the contrary, run counter to the fundamental right of freedom of expression, thus constituting a new tool of manipulation in the hands of the government? The question remains, indeed, delicate and debatable.

According to François Cherix, there's no point in insulting populists or dismissing them from a moral standpoint. «You have to take the phenomenon seriously, as well as the issues from which it develops. But we must always fight them on their diagnoses, on their assertions which are, for the most part, erroneous.»

In fact, according to various fact-checking organizations such as Politifact, more than two-thirds of Donald Trump's claims over the past year have been false, without in any way undermining his credibility with voters.

Is the exercise of thought a civic duty?

Hannah Arendt, the famous German philosopher and political scientist, wrote in her book Moral considerations the term «banality of evil», underlining the extent to which the exercise of thought is essential to prevent evil. Indeed, based on her observations during the trial of Adolf Eichmann, she notes that even «the average person, who is neither wicked nor motivated (...) is capable of infinite evil» simply because he is never confronted with the exercise of thought, and will thus be unable to discern good from evil. She also stresses the need to «go back to experiences rather than doctrines». According to Arendt, non-thinking «teaches people to cling firmly to whatever the rules of conduct prescribed by such and such a time, in such and such a society, may be» without ever questioning them. It's as if «everyone were asleep», she writes.

«The manifestation of the wind of thought is not knowledge; it's the ability to discern right from wrong, beautiful from ugly. And this may well prevent disasters.» So it would be the duty of every citizen to use his or her mind to deconstruct propagated information and differentiate between truth and falsehood.

The world wakes up

In the USA, troops of protesters joined indigenous tribes at Standing Rock and fought together for several months against the construction of the «Dakota Access» pipeline, despite frequent arrests and harsh winter conditions. Meanwhile, a hundred companies and multinationals such as Google, Apple and Uber have joined forces to counter Donald Trump's anti-immigration executive order.

Over a million Britons have signed a petition calling for the cancellation of a state visit by the new US president, who is deemed unworthy of meeting Her Majesty the Queen because of his «misogyny» and «vulgarity». In Austria, although some polls predicted a victory for far-right candidate Norbert Hofer of the national-populist FPÖ party, it was the ecologist Alexander Van der Bellen who was elected president with 53.6% of the vote against 46.4%. In Valais, the indignation of Valaisans and the collection of over one thousand three hundred signatures in a petition forced State Councillor Oskar Freysinger to dismiss Piero San Giorgio. In addition, a rally of around a thousand concerned citizens took place in the town of Sion on Saturday February 18, calling for a more open and progressive Valais - a sign of the «raz-le-bol» felt by part of the population.

Can this counter-movement to the growing trend of right-wing populism be called left-wing populism? Although one might think so, political scientist Nenad Stojanovic points out that appealing to the people is not populist. Indeed, while the populist leader claims to speak on behalf of a uniform people, opponents are the very proof that the demos cannot be categorized as a homogeneous entity, and so denounce populism in favor of pluralism.

People are awake, probably because the lessons of history have shown us how important it is not to allow ourselves to fall into the deep sleep of indifference. After all, according to Howard Zinn, the American political scientist and professor, the worst atrocities in human history have resulted not from disobedience, but from obedience.

Photo credit: © static.pulse.ng