The Rise of Modern Populism

The rise of modern populism
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMNwUh0X5eI
Transcript:
In the mid-1970s, after decades of political turmoil, Greece finally seemed to be on the path to
stability. With the introduction of a new constitution and negotiations underway to enter European
institutions, many analysts expected Greek politics to follow the pattern of the larger Western world.
Then in 1981, a political party called PASOK came to power. Its charismatic leader Andreas
Papandreou railed against the new constitution, and accused those in power of “national betrayal.”
Opposing Greece’s membership in NATO and the European Economic Community, Papandreou
promised to govern for the betterment of the “common people" above all else. He famously
declared, “there are no institutions, only the people exist.” Papandreou’s rise to power isn’t a unique
story. In many democratic countries around the world, charismatic leaders vilify political opponents,
disparage institutions, and claim the mantle of the people. Some critics label this approach as
authoritarian or fascist, and many argue that these leaders are using emotions to manipulate and
deceive voters. But whether or not this style of politics is ethical, it's certainly democratic, and it
goes by the name of populism. The term populism has been around since Ancient Rome, and has its
roots in the Latin word “populus” meaning “the people." But since then populism has been used to
describe dozens of political movements, often with counterintuitive and sometimes contradictory
goals. Populist movements have rebelled against monarchies, monopolies, and a wide variety of
powerful institutions. It’s not possible to cover the full history of this term here. Instead, we’re
focusing on one specific type of populism - the kind that describes Papandreou’s administration and
numerous other governments over the last 70 years: modern populism. But to understand how
political theorists define this phenomenon we first need to explore what it’s responding to. In the
aftermath of World War Two, many countries wanted to move away from totalitarian ideologies.
They sought a new political system that prioritized individual and social rights, aimed at political
consensus, and respected the rule of law. As a result, most Western nations adopted a longstanding
form of government called liberal democracy. In this context, “liberal” doesn’t refer to any political
party, but rather a type of democracy that has three essential components. First, liberal democracies
accept that society is full of many, often crosscutting divisions that generate conflict. Second, it
requires that society’s many factions seek common ground across those divisions. Finally, liberal
democracies rely on the rule of law and the protection of minority rights, as specified in
constitutions and legal statutes. Taken together, these ideals propose that tolerance and institutions
that protect us from intolerance, are the bedrock of a functional and diverse democratic society.
Liberal democracies helped bring stability to the nations that adopted them. But like any system of
government, they didn’t solve everything. Among other issues, an ever-increasing wealth gap led to
underserved communities who distrusted both their wealthy neighbors and their political leaders. In
some cases, political corruption further damaged the public's trust. Growing suspicion and
resentment around these politicians primed citizens to look for a new kind of leader who would
challenge established institutions and put the needs of the people first. In many ways, this reaction
highlights democracy in action: if the majority of a population feels their interests are
underrepresented, they can elect leaders to change that using existing democratic systems. But this
is where assertive, modern populist candidates can subvert democracy. Modern populists identify
themselves as embodying the "will of the people," and they place those interests above the
institutions that protect individual and social rights. Modern populists argue these institutions are
run by a self-serving ruling minority, who seek to control the vast majority of virtuous common
people. As a result, politics is no longer about seeking compromise and consensus see as a broken
system. This means that where a liberal democracy has the utmost respect for institutions like
courtrooms, free press, and national constitutions, modern populists disparage any establishment
that disagrees with the so-called “common will." Modern populist parties have arisen in many
places, but the leaders of these movements are remarkably similar. They’re often charismatic
individuals who identify themselves as embodying the “will of the people." They make exorbitant
promises to their supporters, while casting their opponents as traitors actively undermining the
country. But whether these politicians are sincere believers or manipulative opportunists, the
dynamics they unleash can be profoundly destabilizing for liberal democracy. Even when modern
populist leaders don’t follow through with their most extreme promises, their impact on political
discourse, the rule of law, and public trust can long outlast their time in office.
Design:
In many democratic countries, (1) ____________________ leaders will (2) ____________ political
opponents, (3) ________________ institutions, and claim the mantle of the people.
Some critics label this approach as (4) ________________________ or authoritarian.
In the aftermath of World War Two, many countries wanted to move away from (5)
____________________________.
Finally, liberal democracies rely on the rule of law and the protection of minority rights, as specified
in constitutions and (6) ____________________________.
But this is where assertive, (7) ____________________________ can subvert democracy.
Modern populists argue these institutions are run by a (8) __________________________ minority,
who seek to control the vast majority of virtuous common people.
They make exorbitant promises to their supporters, while casting their opponents as (9)
___________________________ actively undermining the country.
Even when modern populist leaders don’t follow through with their most extreme promises, their
impact on (10) ___________________________, the rule of law, and public trust can long outlast
their time in office.

The Rise of Modern Populism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Rise of Modern Populism

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Rise of Modern Populism

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The rise of modern populism

Some critics label this approach as (4) ________________________ or authoritarian.

But this is where assertive, (7) ____________________________ can subvert democracy.

You might also like