“Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité” (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity) was the motto of the French Revolution. However, Jean Jacques Rousseau, believed to be the ideological father of the French Revolution had warned against the horrors of the end of unfettered populism.

Populism continues to be an effective political strategy since the Romans. From showering gold coins on public gatherings to colosseums drenched in gladiators’ blood, populism has served as a means to a sneaky political end. However, with razor-sharp narratives propelled through unregimented and free-for-all social media platforms, modern populism is cutting through social order, political stability, institutional authority, and the constitutional and legal framework of states, and threatening to replace the status-quo with anarchy.

Before we delve into discussing the political and social causes behind the success of modern populism. Why is populism perceived as a threat to democracy and social order? How to counter populism? It is important to recognize and understand the phenomena of modern populism, first.

Populism is primarily constructed on these elements, division of society between “us” the pious, and “them” the wicked, rejection of pluralism, construction of sympathetic narratives galvanizing economic anxieties of the people, affixation of blame on elites, discreditation of state institutions and establishment, exploitation on erosion of national identity/integrity, and articulation of empathy towards disparaged segments in a society. The rise of populism across America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia is an emerging phenomenon. Populist movements are challenging established political and social norms and reshaping global politics. The problem with modern populism is that it asks all the right questions but fails to provide answers.

Populism could be split into two types, Left-wing and Right-wing Populism. Left-wing populism can be categorized as socialist populism. It is primarily focused on economic disparity between “us” most of the population and “them” a handful of rich elites. Left-wing populists accuse the affluent and wealthy elites of economic mistreatment of common people. The rich elites are characterized as cunning, corrupt, morally bankrupt, and loathsome. Right-wing populism targets the government, politicians and political parties, state institutions, and establishment for social, political, and economic marginalization of general population. Interestingly, by weaving its populist agenda around a charismatic leader in Pakistan, a populist political party has exemplified the morphing of modern populism into cult populism. Embodying a unique fusion of both left-wing and right-wing populism, this populist party has succeeded in penetrating state institutions and elite circles, alike. Charismatic populist leaders around the world cunningly package and broadcast their political agenda as the true will of the people entwined with a self-proclaimed mantle of the public.

The most subtle nuance of populism is that it conveniently flourishes under the veil of democracy and is widely misunderstood as democratic. In fact, populism starkly contradicts the entire ethos of liberal democracy. While tolerance for pluralism (diversity in opinions, beliefs, and ideologies), freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and separation of powers are essential elements of liberal democracy. Populists begin by dividing society into “us” versus “them” and follow it up with crushing pluralism on a morality-based narrative of “us” the fair, honest, and virtuous, and “them” the vicious, corrupt, and sinister. The populists further augment their political schema by concocting conspiracy theories, bombarding fake news, curtailing media and press freedom, vandalizing divergent views, and competing ideologies. By identifying themselves as embodying the will of the people, assertive modern populists place the interests of the people above the very institutions that protect individual and social rights. Riding the trojan of public interest modern populism not only justifies compromising democracy but also validates its ethical entitlement to subvert Constitution, violate the law, and undermine state institutions.

While disagreements are normal process of a liberal democracy, conflicts are settled through reasoning, arguments, evidence, and finding minimum common grounds. Populism’s response to disagreements is pejorative, rhetoric, hateful, labels sticking, and knockback of engagement through dialogue. While liberal democracy detests tyranny of the majority as a contradiction of the spirit of democracy. Populism callously dismisses the minority with a false proclamation of the unanimous support of the people in entirety. While liberal democracy tirelessly explores peaceful means for conflict resolution and conflict mitigation. Populists maneuver to escalate conflicts and use threats of violence to subjugate opposition. While liberal democracy protects state institutions and works to improve their functioning through legislation adopted by consensus. Populists either conspire along or attack institutions with threats, rhetoric, and violent protests to force institutions into submission. While liberal democracy evades authoritarianism by adhering to the principle of separation of powers. Populists seek concentration of powers for a totalitarian rule. While democracy deliberates to win through vote. Populism contemplates winning through revolt. While liberal democracy advocates evolution. Populism passionately expounds revolution. While democracy moralizes tolerance and coexistence. Populism promotes intolerance and domination. Democracy and populism therefore should not be confused as one. Rather than tagging democracy and populism as competing democratic ideologies, these should be understood as two conflicting democratic and totalitarian ideologies respectively.

Sardar Fida Hussain
The writer is the former Secretary General of Tehreek Suba Hazara.