What Is Populism?

good deal of trouble. Think Marine Lapine in France, Victor Orban in Hungary, Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, India's Prime Minister Nearndra Modi, and ys by many people's definition, Donald Trump in the United States. But what is a populist? What is populism? Answering that is notoriously difficult. A part of the difficulty arises from the fact that populists can come from all part of

the political spectrum. There are leftist populists around the world who combine various forms of socialism with their populist message. There are those on the right who push anti immigration and anti lgbt Q plus platforms in their populism. Populism in general refers to appealing to ordinary people as a political ideology or approach. It involves emphasizing the wants, needs, voices, and good qualities of the common people, and it usually does so by contrasting this idea of the good common

people with the bad elite working against them. Best case scenario, a populist leader would be honestly looking at the issues that ordinary people face and helping create solutions for them, thus making the will of the people law, and that

is what populist leaders tend to promise. Unfortunately, what tends to happen, and what political scientists have observed in the aforementioned play is, is these populist leaders bending the definitions of both the common people and the elite in order to gain power within a democratic system, and then undermining the very fabric of that democracy in order to stay in power, de emphasizing some of the crucial parts of the democratic process, such as the articulation of varied interests

and the thoughtful mediation of those interests. It can be incredibly effective for the leader and incredibly damaging for the democracy that they're distorting, and for anyone who lives within that democracy who isn't in the group that the leader has defined as the common people. So worst case scenario, populism redefines the common people as a group with narrow

interests and then insists that only their will matters. We spoke with political scientists Anna Gujmala Bussa, a professor at Stanford University and the director of the School Rules Global Populisms Project, which published a white paper in March called Global Populisms and their Challenges. It addresses the threats of

populism and identifies several possible solutions. According to the paper, populism is growing across the globe because of the failure of major political parties to address the thorny issues that ordinary people face in today's world, immigration, economic inequality, and globalism, just to name a few. This gives populist leaders a sort of foot in the door to claim that not only the elite members of those political parties are bad,

but that the whole system is bad. Populist leaders climbed to prominence by dividing society, splitting it into two not just separate but opposing factions, the people and the elite. A University of Georgia political scientists by the name of cast. Mood explained it this way in an article for Vice. Quote the key distinction between the people and the elite is not based on class or power, but on morality. It is always the pure against the corrupt. But again,

the people is often an exclusive group. But to quote the Stanford paper, populists redefine the people, often by excluding vulnerable ethnic or religious minorities, immigrants, and marginalized economic groups. The result is majority rule without minority rights. Once in power, populist leaders attack not only the rights of individuals who don't fit into the defined majority, but the very foundations

on which the country lies. That includes the papers authors wrote quote, the takeover and taming of courts and oversight institutions, and new laws that limit the freedom of the media and civil society. We've seen this in the United States, with Trump calling the press the enemy of the people, criticizing judges, resisting congressional oversight, claiming that elections are rigged, flouting laws, and claiming that a deep state of bureaucratic actors is out to get him to deny the will

of the people he represents. It happens with other populist leaders all over the world. Gamala Busa explained the mindset, saying, the opposition is the enemy of the people. Why would you listen to them? The media is the swamp. Why would you listen to them? Everything is fake, everything is suspect, and no one is to be trusted except the populace. And that populace, remember, does not include voices of the population's minorities or anyone who disagrees with the labeled majority.

Gamala Busa said, this is not about making poor people wealthy. This is not about punishing the elite and redistributing wealth. There's almost nothing in the populist program that actually makes everyday people's lives better. Populists don't do that. They simply don't. It's not the people who have suffered the most who support populist parties. It's really sort of the people who fear dropping further down in societal prestige and economic status.

Populist leaders often don't spring from the working class roots of what's thought of as being the people though. Consider Trump is a self professed billionaire real estate investor. Brazilian president Shaier Bosonar is a longtime congressman and military leader. Francis Lepine is the daughter of a career right wing politician the Philippines to Thirte spent decades as a mayor and lawyer, and India's Muody came from humble beginnings, but

he's been in politics for more than forty years. Whatever their origins, populist leaders are identifiable by their claim to understand the people, by their US versus Them rhetoric, and by their assertations that they alone are the answer to the people's problems. They often speak in brash common of

the people talk to. Despite their often highbrow educations, they're considered by many to be charismatic, and they damage democracies in other not readily apparent ways by striking down or radically altering what has become accepted over years of building a society, things like healthy debate, respect for opponents, and civil discourse. The illusion of telling it like it is draws in those looking for a change or not wanting to lose their grip on their place in society, but

the populist leaders popularity is not forever. Populists who rise to power, the Stanford Project found often are punished more heavily by voters in trying to hang onto their power

because they don't fulfill the promises they made. However, through these tactics of dividing people into good and bad, by chipping away at society's institutions, the courts, the media, the legislature, and by weakening norms of healthy debate, fair elections, and respect for one another, populists can hang on to power

and even become all powerful. The Stanford paper authors wrote, the result is a gradual slide into authoritarianism, each step justified by the need to better root out disloyal elements and better serve the people read the partisan interests of the incumbents. Populism, gamal Abusa said, doesn't help the people it purports to serve. In the end, that's just politics. She also noted that populism and populist politicians aren't all bad.

She said, I think populism in opposition of populists who don't enter government, play incredibly powerful roles in sort of shaking up the system, and above all, in reminding the existing political parties and politicians that they shouldn't be complacent. Today's episode it was written by John Donovan and produced by Tyler Clang. For more on this and lots of other topics. Visit how stuffworks dot com. Green Stuff is

a production of iHeart Radio. Or more podcasts my heart Radio visit the iHeart Radio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.