What Is Populism?

1. Populism is not just anti-establishment; it's anti-pluralist.

In addition to being antielitist, populists are always antipluralist: populists claim that they, and they alone, represent the people.

Beyond anti-elite. While criticizing elites is a necessary condition for populism, it is not sufficient. Many legitimate political movements and figures criticize the status quo and those in power without being populist. The defining feature is the rejection of pluralism.

Rejecting diversity. Populists do not simply oppose specific policies or elites; they fundamentally deny the legitimacy of political opposition and the inherent diversity of a democratic society. They present a vision of a single, unified, morally pure "people" that they alone embody and represent.

Moral exclusion. This anti-pluralism is moralistic. Opponents are not just wrong; they are portrayed as corrupt, immoral, or not truly part of the "real people." This sets populism apart from other forms of political criticism or even authoritarianism, as it uses a moral claim to justify exclusion.

2. Populists claim exclusive moral representation of "the people."

The claim to exclusive representation is not an empirical one; it is always distinctly moral.

Sole voice of people. Populists assert that they, and only they, speak for the authentic, morally pure "people." This claim is not based on empirical evidence like election results or opinion polls, but on a moral assertion about who the "real" people are and what they inherently want.

Defining the 'real'. This moral claim implies that those who do not support the populist party or leader are somehow less than real, or not proper members of the political community. Examples include Nigel Farage calling Brexit voters "real people" or Donald Trump stating "the other people don’t mean anything."

Identity politics. Populism is inherently a form of identity politics, but one that seeks to define the entire political community's identity in a singular, exclusive way. It aims to "extract" a pure people from the messy reality of diverse citizens, dismissing any remainder as illegitimate.

3. Populists rely on a symbolic, not empirical, idea of the people.

For them, “the people themselves” is a fictional entity outside existing democratic procedures, a homogeneous and morally unified body whose alleged will can be played off against actual election results in democracies.

People as fiction. Populists invoke a mythical, homogeneous "people" that exists outside of actual democratic institutions and processes. This allows them to claim that their view represents the true popular will, even when empirical results like election outcomes contradict them.

Ignoring procedures. When populists lose elections or face institutional checks, they don't question their claim to represent the people; instead, they question the legitimacy of the institutions or procedures that produced the unfavorable outcome. This leads to charges of systems being "rigged" or parliaments being "fake."

Symbolic substance. Representation for populists is about embodying a symbolic "substance" or "spirit" of the people, rather than aggregating empirical interests or wills through democratic mechanisms. This symbolic connection is often channeled through a leader who claims direct insight into the people's true desires.

4. Populism in power colonizes the state and practices clientelism.

Populist governance exhibits three features: attempts to hijack the state apparatus, corruption and “mass clientelism” (trading material benefits or bureaucratic favors for political support by citizens who become the populists’ “clients”), and efforts systematically to suppress civil society.

State capture. Once in power, populists seek to control state institutions, including the civil service, judiciary, and media authorities, by installing loyalists. They justify this by claiming the state rightfully belongs to "the people" and should be wielded by their only legitimate representatives.

Rewarding loyalty. Mass clientelism is a key governing technique, openly exchanging state resources or favors for political support. This is justified by the populist logic that only the "real people" (their supporters) deserve the state's benefits, while opponents are excluded.

Open corruption. Populist leaders are often surprisingly resilient to corruption scandals. Their supporters may view corrupt acts not as self-enrichment but as actions taken "for us," the authentic people, against the illegitimate "them," reinforcing the moralistic us-vs-them framing.

5. Populists suppress civil society and use discriminatory legalism.

For them, opposition from within civil society creates a particular moral and symbolic problem: it potentially undermines their claim to exclusive moral representation of the people.

Silencing dissent. Populists in power view critical civil society organizations (NGOs, independent media) as threats to their claim of exclusive representation. They often try to discredit these groups by labeling them "foreign agents" or tools of the old, corrupt elite.

Targeting opponents. "Discriminatory legalism" is employed, meaning laws and state power are used to benefit friends and punish enemies. Those deemed not part of the "real people" or actively working against them face harsher treatment under the law.

Creating a compliant society. By suppressing independent voices and rewarding loyalists, populists attempt to shape society itself to match their image of a homogeneous, supportive "people." This can involve creating government-friendly proxy organizations to replace genuine civil society.

6. Populist constitutions aim to perpetuate partisan power.

Populists will seek to perpetuate what they regard as the proper image of the morally pure people (the proper constitutional identity, if you will) and then constitutionalize policies that supposedly conform to their image of the people.

Constitutional capture. Populists with sufficient power may rewrite constitutions not to establish neutral rules, but to entrench their partisan vision and secure their long-term hold on power. These are "exclusive constitutions" designed to disable pluralism and constrain future non-populist governments.

Moral identity enshrined. New constitutions under populist regimes often enshrine a specific, moralized image of the nation or people, as seen in Hungary's "National Creed." This justifies policies and institutional changes that favor the group identified as the "real people."

Disabling opposition. These constitutions weaken checks and balances, reduce the power of the judiciary, and make it harder for opposition parties to compete effectively or reverse populist policies, even if they win future elections. The goal is to make the populist vision permanent.

7. "Illiberal democracy" is a misleading term for populist rule.

Populists damage democracy as such, and the fact that they have won elections does not give their projects automatic democratic legitimacy (especially because they usually haven’t mentioned far-reaching constitutional changes in the campaigns that brought them to power).

Democracy itself is harmed. Labeling populist regimes as "illiberal democracies" is inaccurate and harmful. It suggests they are still democracies, just lacking liberal elements, when in fact they undermine the core principles of democracy itself, such as pluralism, minority rights, and accountability.

Political rights are democratic. Freedoms of speech, assembly, media pluralism, and protection of minorities are not merely "liberal" values; they are essential for a functioning democracy where citizens can be informed and hold power accountable. Attacking these attacks democracy.

Legitimizing authoritarians. The term allows leaders like Orbán and Kaczyński to claim they are still democrats, just non-liberal ones, while framing opposition as defending an alien, liberal agenda. This obscures the fact that they are rigging the democratic game in their favor.

8. Populism exploits democracy's unfulfilled promises and boundary problem.

The crucial promise, simply put, is that the people can rule.

Exploiting disillusionment. Populism thrives on the gap between democracy's ideal promise of popular rule and the complex reality where the "people" cannot rule directly and representation is always imperfect. Populists claim to fulfill this promise by embodying the people's will.

The boundary question. Populism exploits the fundamental "boundary problem" of democracy: who constitutes "the people" in the first place? By defining a morally pure "real people" and excluding others, populists offer a seemingly decisive, albeit undemocratic, answer to this complex question.

Crisis of representation. The rise of populism is linked to a perceived crisis of representation, where many citizens feel their interests and identities are not adequately reflected by traditional parties. Populists step into this void, claiming to be the only authentic voice.

9. Weak party systems and technocracy fuel populism.

Where previously coherent and entrenched party systems broke down, chances for populists clearly increased.

Parties as mediators. Traditional political parties historically mediated between diverse societal interests and the state, providing a framework for legitimate opposition and unity. The decline and weakening of party systems create space for populists who reject this mediation and claim direct connection to the people.

Technocracy's parallel. Technocracy, which claims there is only one correct policy solution based on expert knowledge, mirrors populism's claim of a single, authentic popular will. Both deny the need for democratic debate and can pave the way for each other by suggesting politics is not about disagreement but about finding a singular truth.

Convergence and void. When mainstream parties converge on similar policies (e.g., neoliberalism) and technocrats claim decision-making authority, it can create a void where citizens feel they have "elections without choice." Populists capitalize on this by offering a seemingly radical alternative and claiming to restore popular sovereignty.

10. Engaging populists requires addressing underlying representation failures.

One can take their political claims seriously without taking them at face value.

Don't just exclude. While populism is dangerous, simply excluding populists from debate or political life can backfire, reinforcing their narrative of being opposed by a corrupt elite cartel. Engagement is necessary, but it must be strategic.

Challenge the framing. Instead of accepting the populist framing of issues (e.g., immigrants stealing jobs), opponents should challenge these narratives with evidence and alternative explanations. This requires engaging with the substance of the problems populists raise, even while rejecting their solutions and rhetoric.

Address root causes. Effectively countering populism requires addressing the genuine failures of representation and inclusion that fuel it. This means grappling with economic inequality, cultural anxieties, and the feeling among some citizens that they are not seen or heard by the political system. It requires demonstrating that democracy can work for all the people, not just a select few.

Last updated: May 10, 2025