Populism

There is a specter haunting electoral democracy. It is the specter of populism.

In Greece, as the economy hurtled towards a meltdown, voters in large numbers elected the far left to power. The political left ran on a platform of rejecting the EU-prescribed austerity program in exchange for new financing. Once in power, the left reconciled with economic and political reality and embraced the EU program nevertheless.

In Britain, white rural voters, threatened by migration and their own economic inadequacy, waved nationalist flags and voted to exit from the European Union. These threatened voters shocked the pollsters, who predicted an easy win for the more thinkable option of staying with Europe. The ‘Brexit’ vote threw everything in disarray and will likely push the UK into prolonged recession.

In the US last week, voters left the pollsters and the establishment baffled. The largely white rural undereducated underclass, threatened by competition and ceaseless innovation that comes with globalization, voted Donald Trump president.

Trump anchored his campaign on the fears of those marginalized in the modern economy. He preached the gospel of protectionism and stoked fear of immigrants. In what was dubbed “post-truth politics,” Trump made one outlandish claim after the other without offering evidence. He stoked bigotry and constantly demonized his opponents. He won.

Physics teaches us: for every action, there is an equal opposite reaction. Trump’s victory strengthens the thesis that globalization, which integrates economies, cultivates reactionary politics. It is the politics of those who desire to leave the European Union or build a wall on the border with Mexico.

Trump rants about cheap foreign imports, about immigrants taking American jobs, about US businesses going elsewhere. These are the consequences of being uncompetitive.

But he is silent about the areas of US economic activity that are competitive. Hollywood continues to exercise cultural hegemony over the rest of the world and the US is unmatched in the digital products it produces. Coal mines might shut down but Microsoft rises.

The sunrise sectors of the US economy attract the highest quality migrants from the rest of the world. But it is the sunset sectors that apparently decide electoral outcomes.

This is the reason why there seems to be a glaring mismatch between the more open attitude of young urban Americans and the extreme social conservatism that brought Trump to power. The highly skilled populations in the sunrise sectors see the future with confidence, finding opportunities in the evolution of a globalized economy. The lesser skilled populations in the sunset sectors prefer fear as the governing attitude.

Reactionary populism is necessarily irrational. It is driven by paranoia over the other, intolerance for multiculturalism. It finds consolation in waving the flag and in some newfangled version of white supremacy. This is the epicenter of Trump’s voting base, although its pre-modern attitudes are ill suited for modern governance. Trump, if he has any wisdom tucked in the crevices of his narcissism will have to gradually move away from campaign rhetoric to something that more closely resembles modern statesmanship.

Reactionary populism is not a constructive force. Voters threatened by modernity behave pretty much like the Taliban or the ISIS. They reject functional modern institutions and encourage nihilist behavior.  The fundamentalist militants plant bombs. Reactionary voters cast ballots simply to screw the establishment. Attitudinally, they belong to a single species.

Populist leaders thrown up the scaffolding of power by a mass of angry voters typically begin their rule by trying to entertain their base by applying impracticable policies. If they persist in doing that, they fail. In order to succeed, they must evolve towards more practicable politics.

We saw this pattern elsewhere. In Greece, the left stepped back from their scorched earth attitude towards more responsible fiscal policies. Faced with imminent economic collapse, they eventually relented. It is not the leftist demagogues but Angela Merkel who tells the Greeks what they should do.

In Britain, the constitutional court recently ruled that an act of parliament is required to activate the provision in the EU charter allowing a member-economy to secede. The politicians need to take responsibility for the rhetoric they spew.

In the US, we will surely see Trump dial down his outlandish campaign rhetoric and embrace what is practicable. Otherwise he loses support from the US Congress and mainstream Republicans, seriously threatening his ability to lead. Political contingency manages to eventually educate even the most pig-headed.

Parallelisms have been drawn between Donald Trump and Rodrigo Duterte – although limited to their equal propensity to say atrocious things. The more important similarity between these two leaders is the fact they were elevated to highest office by a mass of angry, disenfranchised voters.

Duterte, after assuming the presidency, behaved in a manner typical of the other leaders elevated to high office by an angry mass of voters. His understanding of his role was far larger than what was practicable. He used his mandate as an excuse to ignore convention. He thought he could alter our foreign relations overnight or solve the drug problem in six months. He made policy on the run.

Lately, however, sobriety seems to have taken its grip on Duterte. He has begun listening to the sage advice of his Cabinet. He has begun to read from prepared text rather the regale us his expletive-ridden, stream-of-consciousness banter. He backtracked on many of the things he previously said.

The realities of sustainable governance soon hits home. No amount of hubris could permanently blind leaders from what is practicable – whether your name is Trump or Duterte.