Democracy Devouring Itself: Populism Rising

• In Event: Populism, Technocracy and Crises

Abstract

Across Europe and North America, populist alternatives to liberal democratic governance are gaining popularity and political power. Some have suggested the rise of populism is a passing response to temporary circumstances such as economic recession, globalization, or increased immigration. As such it constitutes a momentary retreat (or needed correction) in the progress toward ever greater democratization. While acknowledging that economic dissatisfaction and cultural anxiety help explain surges in populist sentiment, I argue that current developments reflect a more enduring and fundamental problem, a structural weakness that makes democracies increasingly susceptible to the siren call of right-wing populism. In my view, the critical factor is the inability of individuals to meet the demands of citizenship in contemporary, multicultural democracies. Drawing on a wide range of research in political science and psychology, I argue that individuals typically do not have the cognitive or emotional capacities required. As their opportunities for democratic participation broaden and deepen, they are therefore increasingly required to address a complex political reality in terms that they cannot adequately understand. The result is confusion and alienation. Populism offers an alternative, less demanding view of politics and society, one which is more readily understood and more emotionally satisfying. Ironically as the established democracies become more truly democratic, democracy’s structural weakness becomes more consequential. The people’s support for democratic governance wanes in favor populist alternatives.

To make this argument I address three questions. First, why is democracy vulnerable to right-wing populism? To answer, I first offer a definition of populism which goes beyond the “ideational” conception of populism as a “thin” ideology distinguished by its substantive focus on the conflict between a pure people and an evil elite. I suggest that to understand populism, it is necessary to recognize its underlying logic. Describing this logic, I argue that, although it is relatively simplistic, it generates a coherent view of politics that includes an authoritarian and hierarchical view of governance, an intolerance of political opposition and debate, a dualistic morality, a homogenizing view of in-groups and an ethnocentric, racist rejection of out-groups and minorities. I then contrast this with the relatively complex logic of liberal democracy. Drawing on research in political science and psychology, I conclude that most people find the complexities of the liberal democracy vision to be incomprehensible and uncomfortable. In contrast, in its relative simplicity, populism offers beliefs and practices that can be readily understood and embraced. Therein lies the essential weakness of liberal democracy and the enduring attraction of right-wing populism.

Second, given its fragility, why has democratic governance persisted? To answer, I discuss two factors. One is the social structural forces such as capitalism, technology and globalization that have increasingly upended traditional social structures in ways that complement the liberal democratic politics. Here I draw on sociological accounts of the nature of modernity and draw out their political implications. The other factor is the exercise of power by the oligarchic elite - political, economic and cultural – that dominate most Western liberal democracies. Given their advantaged position, they are more equipped to understand the value of the protections liberal democracy confers. And of course, they are key beneficiaries of how it currently functions. Consequently, this elite uses its power to sustain democratic practices and to marginalize challenges to them.

Third given its persistence, why is democracy now vulnerable to the populist challenge? The focus here is on the success of democracy. I argue that, as political practices become increasingly democratic, the cultural hegemony and political power of the liberal oligarchy is weakened. As a result, ordinary citizens are freed to judge social and political issues in terms which make sense to them. In so doing, they naturally reject the authoritative, but ill-understood dictates of liberal democracy in favor of the no longer marginalized and more congenial vision offered by right wing populism. Thus, democracy is likely to devour itself.

To conclude, I briefly consider two paths forward: one leading to a more authoritarian populism and the other to the development of a more liberal citizenry.

Author

• Shawn W. Rosenberg