Populism, Personalization and Party Politics

• In Event: Candidates, Legislators, and Parties

Abstract

While much has been written on the rise of populism in western democracies, little attention has been paid to its relationship with intra party politics. This paper hypothesizes that the organization and behavior of political parties has both been influenced by the rise of populist sentiments and has in turn fueled populism in broader democratic practice. Responding to anti-elite sentiment and demands for greater grassroots participation in internal decision-making, parties are increasingly adopting plebiscitary forms of decision-making. Examples of this include a widespread movement towards universal membership votes for party leadership selection (Cross & Pilet 2015), increased use of internal policy referenda (Scarrow et al 2017), weakening of requirements for party membership and collective ‘power’ of members (Gauja 2017), and an increased focus on the individual rather than the party in both governing and campaign communications (Cross and Katz 2018).
An important result of these developments is an increase in the authority of the party leader. For example, leaders chosen through membership votes are able to claim a mandate separate from their parliamentary caucus. This undercuts the traditional premise of party leaders being responsible to, and primarily accountable to, their parliamentary colleagues. At the same time, the ‘membership’ is a diverse, fragmented and generally inactive group often lacking the tools and opportunity to hold the leader to account. This is compounded by the shifting meaning of party membership resulting in some parties (such as the governing Canadian Liberals among others) eliminating party membership in favor of enfranchising any party ‘supporter’ in internal decision-making such as candidate and leadership ‘primaries.’
The result is a weakening of the party as an organization separate from the identity of the leader and his/her close group of advisors/supporters. One important result is a personalization of the party organization, something akin to the U.S. Republican party becoming a vessel for President Trump and his supporters. A further result is an increase in attention paid to the individual rather than the party in campaign communications. While this has long been perceived as a possibility in presidential systems, it is a rather new development in parliamentary systems.
This paper uses the case of Canada to explore these relatively recent changes in party organization and behavior to consider their relationship with populist sentiments and the influence this has on the apparent rise of populist politics more generally.


William Cross is Professor and Bell Chair in Canadian Parliamentary Democracy at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada. His recent books include The Personalization of Politics and the Challenge for Political Parties (with Richard S. Katz, 2018) and The Promise and Challenge of Party Primary Elections (with Ofer Kenig, Scott Pruysers and Gideon Rahat, 2016).

Author

• Bill Cross, Carleton University