A Mirror with Two Sides: Populism and Disinformation in the Arab World

• In Event: Disinformation, Misinformation and Conspiracy in the Middle East

Abstract

Understanding populism in Western theoretical debates vary according to the approach being used. Some approaches considered populism as an ideology, while other approaches dealt with it as a rationale, discourse, tactic, political strategy, or repertoire. In these debates, populism was handled in the context of thinking of democracy and the “crisis of democracy”, where populist leaders tend to use populism to split the people into “us” and “them”. However, populism was rarely studied in contexts beyond the democratic ones, which leaves gaps in explaining why the term populism is being used today in a very vulgar way to refer to demagogic, negative, or fascist thing. Such uses of populism are very superficial.
Populism is defined in this paper as the use of political rhetoric that appeals to people’s emotions and prejudices rather than their rational judgement. It can be used by authoritarian regimes to manipulate public opinion in order to maintain control over society. Populism in Arab contexts involves misleading discourse that aims to prove that there is a unified population represented by the state. It further relies on interpretations of conspiracy theory through which it accuses those who call for any change or political reform of being an agent and/or ally of external forces and an enemy of the people and the state. Even the military coup is portrayed by authoritarian regimes as a people’s revolution against a corrupt elite. From another side, authoritarian Arab populists uses misleading whatsaboutist discourses that responds to economic claims by prioritizing security demands, and responds to political freedoms’ claims by prioritizing economic demands.
Authoritarianism, populism, and disinformation can feed into each other, creating a cycle of manipulation which undermines democracy. Populist rhetoric can be used to spread disinformation for the purposes of maintaining authoritarian rule, while authoritarian regimes may use disinformation campaigns to stoke populist sentiment among the public. In Egypt, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has used populism to consolidate his power and stay in office by appealing to the public’s emotions with rhetoric that is often based on fear of outsiders or threats from within. This fear-mongering has been used to justify increasingly authoritarian measures such as restrictions on freedom of speech, press censorship, and crackdowns on political opponents. In addition, Sisi and his government have also employed disinformation campaigns in order to discredit opposition figures and manipulate public opinion. The government also uses social media sites like Facebook and Twitter to spread its message and discredit critics. Additionally, it has been reported that journalists have been arrested for reporting on any critical information related to President Sisi or his policies. In addition to these measures, the Egyptian government has implemented strict laws restricting freedom of expression which are often used as a tool for silencing dissent. The government has also increased its control over the media, making it difficult for independent journalists to report on sensitive topics. Overall, these tactics have enabled Sisi and his government to maintain a stranglehold on public discourse in Egypt, resulting in an environment of populism and disinformation that is difficult to challenge or counter. The same scenario was replicated in Tunisia by Kais Saied since 2020.
Therefore, this paper asks: what is the relationship between populist discourse and disinformation in authoritarian contexts? By dealing with populism in the Arab world from a contextualist perspective, and though, studying populism as it is and not as is used in democratic contexts, the paper proposes three arguments: (1) Populism in authoritarian regimes can not emerge without fact-free discourse, as it is based on demonetization and accusations of the political opposition as the enemies of the homeland; (2) State of emergency is the maximum reflection of populist disinformation in the Arab world; (3) Regimes that lack an ideology use disinformation in its populist discourse; (4) Fighting the (media) opposition locally and globally through media and using the latter to spread misleading news that support the regime is considered a main pillar of authoritarian populism in the Arab world to acquire legitimacy and prevent the emergence of any protest movement.
This paper tests these arguments through the cases of Egypt’s Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Tunisia’s Kais Saied, both who use an ideology-lacking disinformation in their populist discourse and address accusations to traditional elites, media, and political forces that enjoy wide grassroots.

Author

• Majd Abuamer, Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies