National Populism

1. National Populism Challenges the Liberal Mainstream

National populists prioritize the culture and interests of the nation, and promise to give voice to a people who feel that they have been neglected, even held in contempt, by distant and often corrupt elites.

Defining the movement. National populism is a political ideology that emphasizes the importance of national identity, culture, and interests, often in opposition to globalism, immigration, and established political elites. It seeks to represent the concerns and grievances of ordinary people who feel ignored or marginalized by mainstream politics. This movement is not inherently anti-democratic, but rather challenges certain aspects of liberal democracy as it has evolved in the West.

Key characteristics. National populism typically involves a rejection of cosmopolitanism and multiculturalism, a focus on border control and national sovereignty, and a critique of economic policies that are seen as benefiting global corporations and elites at the expense of national workers. It often taps into anxieties about rapid social and cultural change, as well as a sense of loss of traditional values and ways of life. Leaders often employ direct, often confrontational, rhetoric and position themselves as outsiders fighting against a corrupt establishment.

International scope. The rise of national populism is not confined to a single country or region, but is a global phenomenon with manifestations in Europe, the United States, and other parts of the world. While each national context has its own specific features, these movements share common themes and concerns, and often draw inspiration and support from one another. The election of Donald Trump, the Brexit vote, and the rise of populist parties in Europe are all examples of this broader trend.

2. Myths Obscure the Diverse Roots of National Populism

People tend to reduce highly complex movements to ‘one type’ of voter or to ‘one cause’ because they want simple and straightforward explanations.

Challenging stereotypes. Common misconceptions about national populism include the idea that it is solely driven by economic anxiety, that its supporters are primarily uneducated or low-income, and that it is a passing phenomenon fueled by recent events like the 2008 financial crisis. These stereotypes fail to capture the complexity and diversity of the movement's support base. The idea that it is merely a passing protest in response to the financial crisis that erupted in 2008, the austerity that followed, or the refugee crisis that has swept through Europe since 2014 is wrong.

Beyond economics. While economic factors play a role, national populism is also driven by cultural anxieties, concerns about national identity, and distrust of political elites. Many supporters are not necessarily poor or unemployed, but feel that their values and way of life are under threat. The median household income of a Trump voter was $72,000, compared to $61,000 for supporters of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders and $56,000 for the average person.

Diverse coalition. National populism appeals to a broad coalition of voters, including middle-class conservatives, blue-collar workers, and those who feel left behind by globalization. It is not solely a movement of "angry old white men," but also attracts support from women, young people, and even some minority groups. Brexit was supported by one in three black and ethnic-minority voters, some of whom felt that Britain’s liberal immigration policy was giving preferential treatment to immigrants from inside Europe at the expense of those from outside Europe.

3. Populist Promises: Reclaiming Democracy for the People

Contrary to hysterical claims that emerged in the aftermath of Brexit and Trump, most people in the West are actually not giving up on democracy, although many are open to more ‘direct’ forms of democracy that would give people a greater say in the decisions that affect their daily lives.

Redefining democracy. National populists often present themselves as champions of "the people" against a corrupt and unresponsive elite. They advocate for more direct forms of democracy, such as referendums and citizen initiatives, to give ordinary people a greater say in decision-making. This "direct" conception of democracy differs from the "liberal" one that has flourished across the West following the defeat of fascism and which has gradually become more elitist in character.

Challenging the elite. A central theme of national populism is the critique of established political and economic elites, who are seen as being out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people. Populist leaders often portray themselves as outsiders who are willing to challenge the status quo and fight for the interests of the "silent majority." They question the way in which elites have become more and more insulated from the lives and concerns of ordinary people.

Moral dimension. National populists often frame their agenda in moral terms, arguing that they are fighting to restore traditional values, protect national identity, and defend the interests of the "true" people. This moral framing can be a powerful tool for mobilizing support and creating a sense of shared purpose among diverse groups of voters. The People’s Party often identified the people with a ‘heartland’, a culture that is viewed as being authentic, hard-working and endowed with common sense.

4. The Nation Under Threat: Immigration and Identity

Trump appealed strongly to people who were absolutely convinced that white Americans are losing out relative to others: 90 per cent of his core supporters believed that discrimination against whites is now a major problem in America, while less than 10 per cent of Democrats shared this view.

Anxieties about change. A key driver of national populism is anxiety about the rapid pace of social and cultural change, particularly in relation to immigration and ethnic diversity. Supporters often express concerns about the erosion of national identity, the loss of traditional values, and the perceived threat to their way of life. These fears are wrapped up in a belief that culturally liberal politicians, transnational organizations and global finance are eroding the nation by encouraging further mass immigration, while ‘politically correct’ agendas seek to silence any opposition.

Cultural preservation. National populists often advocate for policies that are designed to protect national culture and identity, such as stricter immigration controls, language requirements for citizenship, and restrictions on the wearing of religious symbols. They question the capacity of Western societies to rapidly absorb rates of immigration and ‘hyper ethnic change’ that are largely unprecedented in the history of modern civilization.

Security concerns. Concerns about immigration are often linked to anxieties about security, particularly in the wake of terrorist attacks and the rise of extremist groups. National populists often argue that open borders and lax immigration policies have made it easier for terrorists and criminals to enter the country, posing a threat to public safety. In France Marine Le Pen warns that ‘the whole of France will become a gigantic no-go zone’.

5. Economic Discontent: Relative Deprivation Fuels Populism

Though many people who support national populism have jobs and live on average or above-average incomes (even if many of these jobs are insecure), the West’s economic transformation has fuelled a strong sense of ‘relative’ deprivation – a belief among certain groups that they are losing out relative to others.

Beyond objective measures. While economic hardship is a factor, national populism is also fueled by a sense of relative deprivation – the feeling that one's economic position is declining relative to others in society. This sense of loss and resentment can be particularly strong among those who feel that they have been left behind by globalization and technological change. This means they are very fearful about the future and what lies ahead for themselves and their children.

Erosion of the middle class. The decline of manufacturing industries, the rise of precarious employment, and the increasing cost of education and healthcare have contributed to a sense of economic insecurity and a shrinking middle class. This has led to a feeling that the "American Dream" or the promise of upward mobility is no longer attainable for many. Today there are millions of voters who are convinced that the past was better than the present and that the present, however bleak, is still better than the future.

Blame and resentment. Economic anxieties are often directed towards immigrants, who are seen as taking jobs and driving down wages, and towards economic elites, who are seen as benefiting from globalization at the expense of ordinary workers. This profound sense of loss is intimately entwined with the way in which people think through issues like immigration and identity.

6. De-alignment: Eroding Loyalty to Mainstream Parties

The classic era of liberal democracy was characterized by relatively stable politics, strong mainstream parties and loyal voters; we have seen it now come to an end.

Weakening bonds. Traditional political parties are losing their grip on voters, as party identification declines and more people identify as independents. This de-alignment is making political systems across the West far more volatile, fragmented and unpredictable than at any point in the history of mass democracy. Politics today feels more chaotic and less predictable than in the past because it is.

Rise of new parties. The decline of traditional parties has created opportunities for new parties and movements to emerge, often challenging the established political order and appealing to voters who feel that their concerns are not being addressed by the mainstream. This de-alignment is making political systems across the West far more volatile, fragmented and unpredictable than at any point in the history of mass democracy.

Apathy and disengagement. De-alignment can also lead to apathy and disengagement, as voters become disillusioned with the political process and feel that their participation makes little difference. This can create a vacuum that is filled by extremist or populist movements. Many people are no longer strongly aligned to the mainstream. The bonds are breaking.

7. The Future of Populism: Beyond Protest to Lasting Change

Paradoxically, if national populism fails electorally it could be because it has succeeded in broader terms.

Post-populism. The long-term impact of national populism will depend on whether these movements are able to translate their electoral success into meaningful policy changes. If they fail to deliver on their promises, they may lose support and fade away. However, even if they fail electorally, they may still have a lasting impact by shifting the Overton window and influencing the policy agendas of mainstream parties.

Mainstreaming of ideas. Even if national populists do not win elections, their ideas can still gain traction in the mainstream, as established parties adopt aspects of their platform in an attempt to win back voters. This can lead to a broader shift in the political landscape, as issues like immigration and national identity become more central to political debate. In Britain, Nigel Farage and UKIP slumped in 2017, but only after they had got what they wanted – a Brexit referendum victory and a Conservative prime minister who promised to pull Britain out of the EU and overhaul the country’s immigration system.

Long-term potential. The underlying factors that have fueled the rise of national populism are unlikely to disappear anytime soon, suggesting that these movements will remain a force to be reckoned with in the years to come. The challenge for mainstream parties is to address the legitimate concerns that underlie national populism, while also rejecting its more divisive and exclusionary aspects.

8. The Elitist Nature of Liberal Democracy Promotes Distrust

Liberal democracy always sought to minimize the participation of the masses.

Historical context. From its origins, liberal democracy has been characterized by a tension between the ideal of popular sovereignty and the practical need for elite governance. Many of the founders of liberal democracy were wary of giving too much power to the masses, fearing that it would lead to instability and tyranny. Liberal democracy always sought to minimize the participation of the masses.

Insulated elites. In recent decades, this tension has been exacerbated by the increasing distance between political elites and ordinary citizens. Politicians are often drawn from a narrow social and educational background, and may be more responsive to the interests of wealthy donors and powerful lobbying groups than to the concerns of their constituents. In recent years, politicians’ growing distance from ordinary citizens has led to a rising tide of distrust, not just of mainstream parties but also of institutions like the US Congress and the European Union, a trend clearly mapped by surveys and other data.

Consequences of distrust. This growing distrust of elites has created an opening for national populists, who promise to give voice to the "forgotten" people and challenge the established political order. By tapping into this sense of alienation and resentment, they have been able to mobilize significant support and disrupt mainstream politics. There was never a golden era when political systems represented everybody in society, and in recent years important steps have been taken to ensure that historically marginalized groups like women and ethnic minorities have a louder voice in legislatures.