There is a growing global appetite for populism. Jair Bolsonaro, Narendra Modi, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping have become familiar names which dominate the international political arena. In Europe, one in four voters now votes populist. Populism has become a popular alternative to mainstream politics for disgruntled voters expressing anxiety over shifting demographics, economic inequality, and political alienation. And America has jumped on the bandwagon. In the United States’ presidential politics, a right-wing populist currently resides in office, and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is one of two remaining Democratic nominees. This political tactic is rising in popularity on both the left and the right, but not all strands of populism are created equal.
Populism targets status quo policies in favor of new policies that embody the wishes of “the people.” Yet, populism is not a political ideology in and of itself. Rather, it is a rhetorical device employed by politicians, traditionally political outsiders, seeking to gain power based upon anti-establishment appeals and direct linkages with the people. It divides society into two competing groups, “the pure people” and “the corrupt elite,” and contends that politics should embody “the general will of the people.” Yet by creating a distinction between the elite and the masses, populism entails a narrowing of “the people” to a subset of the public that is considered to be the legitimate source of political power. For right-wing populism, “the people” are differentiated along ethno-nationalist lines, with minorities and foreigners classified as the corrupt other. Meanwhile, for left-wing populism, differentiation along socio-economic lines targets the global economic elite.
While all forms of populism focus on existing policies, strands of populism differ in the extent to which they target underlying democratic institutions. Dissent in politics can materialize through two distinct avenues: ideology and methodology. That is, voters may be upset with either the content of the policies themselves or with mechanisms by which democracy is conducted. In the former, voters demand policies that better serve their interests. In the latter, voters may call for an electorate that is more representative of the current demographic makeup of the country or advocate for more experimental modes of democratic participation. These modes involve measures as far-reaching as implementing e-democracy or abolishing the electoral college.
As a result of these divergent strands, there are two different manifestations of populism: one that works within the institutional system to enact new policies (a policy populist), and one that attempts to disrupt the institutional system entirely (a process populist). One hates the players; the other hates the game.
This distinction characterizes the difference between Trump and Sanders as populist leaders. Trump calls for a radical reshaping of the methodology of politics. He has demanded a complete departure from the bureaucratic channels of legislative policy-making toward executive action, a more direct relationship with the American public through communication on social media platforms, a less independent judiciary and federal bank, and a removal of career professionals from internal decision-making. In one instance, Trump flouted democratic convention by lashing out against a federal judge in Washington state who ordered a nationwide suspension of his immigration policy. “The opinion of this so-called judge … is ridiculous and will be overturned!” he wrote on Twitter, indicating an irreverence for the democratic norms that have long defined our politics.
Meanwhile, though Sanders’ policies may indeed be radical, his methodology is not. He intends to keep in place the same institutions that have long characterized the conduct of democratic politics. That being said, Sanders still aspires to reform certain aspects of these political institutions. His platform includes proposals to reduce the role of super PACs in political campaign fundraising and to protect free and fair elections by promoting public election funding and reducing voter suppression. However, Sanders has formulated such measures in hopes of amending democratic institutions, not outright displacing them.
Many supporters are galvanized by both leaders’ charisma and the breaks they promise from politics as usual. Broadly, populism acts as a thermometer: Instances of surging populism indicate times when political elites are especially ignorant of their citizens’ desires. Still, when populism triumphs, it unleashes the danger of division with its morally reductionist terminology that pits one segment of the population against the other.
While both forms of populism pose this danger, process populism has the potential to cause more irrevocable damage. Challenging democratic norms threatens to upend many of the principles that underlie our political methodology, including separation of powers, institutional knowledge from career politicians, and an independent judiciary.
Process populism does not always have to be this way. In Europe, certain process populist parties are experimenting with new modes of direct political participation — with varying levels of success. The Five Star Movement in Italy was formed on the basis of e-democracy. Its online “Rousseau Platform” crowdsources all party decisions among its members, including electing party representatives and proposing new legislation online. Spain’s extreme left-wing party, Podemos, submitted a “participative” election manifesto written as a collaboration among party members. Such open crowdsourcing led to a result that was “original, but also impractical and [uncostly],” according to the Guardian. At a time when many individuals feel alienated by establishment politics, more direct modes of democratic participation that include “the people” in decision-making processes may be helpful in addressing their concerns. However, as enthusiasm for populism intensifies and leaders attempt to revise the current methodologies of politics, democratic norms must not be forgotten.
Image Source: SVG Silh