Like every other ideology, populism necessitates for a conducive environment to sprout and flourish. Dysfunctional, illiberal and nonrepresentative democracy alongside malfunctioning state institutions, unfair accumulation of wealth in the rich elite, loss of hope in upward social and economic mobility, dynastic and franchise model of politics, individuals’ social demotion built on low-income, gender discrimination, ethnic and linguistic prejudice, religious bigotry, sectarian chauvinism, ideological arguments, opulent exhibition of VIP culture, ostensible elite capture, bureaucratic arrogance, and the selective rule of law, infuses envy, frustration, and hate among the underprivileged portions of society leaving them feeling insecure, voiceless, and insignificant. Such a dire sociopolitical environment serves as the perfect incubator for populism.
The hopelessness and frustration of the desperate population extend invitations to populist leaders. Shrewd or well-intended, populist leaders respond to such calling by announcing a gloriously romanticized script of populism. This script enunciates exactly what people want to hear and see, along with promises of immediate, messianic solutions to every problem of the people. This is the point where the crafty trap of populism succeeds and a populist leader rises to the status of a “Messiah of the desperate”.
At the same time, it would be unfair to scandalize populism altogether. Populism cannot be dismissed as entirely wicked and obnoxious. Despite its threatening nature, populist movements are efficacious in becoming a voice for the voiceless and marginalized segments of society. The presence of populist movements is nevertheless an indicator of a vibrant society. Populist movements often challenge established political norms and succeed in reshaping political landscapes, mitigating elite captures, emphasizing people’s agenda, and placing people’s rights on the priority lists of governments and their institutions.
Countering populism requires a multilayered and multidimensional response capability from the entire framework of a state. If received in the right spirit, populist movements could indeed serve as an early warning system to liberal democracies. Instead of dismissing a populist movement due to its size or location Political hierarchy and state institutions should benefit from this early warning system. A compassionate and timely response to a populist movement, while it is in its early stage and smaller in size, can stop it from becoming a monster. Hence most effective antidote for populism is a proactive, liberal, and representative democratic culture. Moreover, cultivation of a tolerant political culture, educational improvement, increase in literacy rate, meritocratic state institutions, uniform rule of law, and convenient dispensation of justice. Governments and their institutions should include well-being of low-income groups to their list of priorities. The government should invest in and support private initiatives of human development, poverty alleviation, and self-sustenance programs. Provision of an economic environment that allows opportunities for growth on merit, rewards skills, and hard work, while preserving individuals’ integrity. Active civil societies and social activists can play crucial roles in directing the attention of administration and politicians towards pressing public issues for timely redressals. Political leadership should acknowledge and respond to its all-important role in shaping societies and their future. Public leaders should therefore not choose to echo popular public perceptions and opinions for selfish gains. Leaders should instead steer informed public opinion that serves a greater common good.
Nelson Mandela, upon his release, refused to follow populist anti-white racist sentiment despite fierce opposition from the black community. Mandela resisted subscription to a populist approach for selfish political gains. Enduring immense public pressure Mandela stood his ground and did not surrender to populism. He declined to reciprocate apartheid-era racial injustices suffered by the native black population at the hands of white men. Instead, Mandela stood for the rights of whites as a matter of principle with the same vigor and enthusiasm as he did for the black population, throughout his life. Even 27 years of incarceration failed to alter Mandela’s principled stance into a vengeance-driven payback. Nelson Mandela will continue to live as quintessential of liberal, representative, and pluralistic democratic values as opposed to populism.
Sardar Fida Hussain
The writer is the former Secretary General of Tehreek Suba Hazara.