0
Features
5 February 2017 2.00 h

maria mut bosque

'The danger is when populism becomes radical'

What should we understand by populism?
We often understand it as an ideology and a political trend looking to satisfy the interests and desires of the masses. I'd say it is now a changeable term –which can be more or less extreme– that is often used with a strong pejorative meaning. Even if it's not the same, populism is often identified with demagogy, and we need to be aware of this use and its pejorative effect.
Is there a right and left wing of populism?
The main element of populism is populism itself. It sees little difference between right or left; it is just populism. Yet, both forms of populism have a lot in common, and a few differences. It is often difficult to differentiate between them and they end up becoming mixed, which means they include typical features of the right and the left.
What are the differences between them?
The basic common points are: a charismatic leader, an ability to mobilise masses, a rhetorical discourse and anti-elitist feeling, opposition to the system and support of the aspirations of the lower classes. There are two main aspects to the differences: one is that the elements or institutions they wish to reform vary, and the other is they use a different focus or political strategy to combat or transform the system. Yet, we need to be aware that the final aim of both the right and left wings are the same, which is satisfying popular demands. This was seen in the UK referendum.
What different strategies do they use?
The danger of these movements becoming stronger is that they can also become xenophobic, totalitarian or radical. Demagogic political parties appeal to irrational emotion and make general utopian promises for which no plan can be formulated to realise them. They are not realistic proposals and from the point of view of the results achieve low levels of accomplishment. It is cheating and lying disguised by a pompous and highly emotionally charged discourse. Another danger is that the demagogic-populist movements tend to seek out enemies to fight against, and then make them the scapegoats for all of society's problems. They promise the public that once all those identified as enemies disappear, then their problems will also disappear. These enemies could be either migrants or financial institutions, it really all depends on the kind of populism that is being peddled, left wing or right wing.
What about the threat to the democratic system?
Their simplistic vision obviously comes with risks for democracy, security and the protection of all of us as part of a democratic society. There's no shortage of examples in history. It is now also true that a well-moderated, non-demagogic populism could even have positive consequences if it is correctly conducted. It could be useful for identifying problems that affect the public, correct inefficient institutions and break down unmoving attitudes. The problem is that the line between moderate populism and the more radical kind is a fine line that is very easily crossed. After all, the whole danger for the democratic system is that populism might easily become extremist and radical.
Sign in. Sign in if you are already a verified reader. I want to become verified reader. To leave comments on the website you must be a verified reader.
Note: To leave comments on the website you must be a verified reader and accept the conditions of use.

Published on

Most Viewed