Just as a carpenter has a standard set of tools, so does the politician. Both have the ability to build up or break down their respective mediums, that is, wood and people. With the use of these tools they may achieve their aims. In both cases, the tools are arguably as old as the trade itself, however, while the carpenter must use his tools where required, a politician may pick favourites. This is the current case with populism, a tactic spreading over Europe.
The concept is simple. The candidate chooses a few sectors of the population that make up the voting pool and attempt to please all their demands. Fast. While this sounds like standard politics to a degree, it is not. Traditional politics aims to please as many people as possible but with limitations.
In this case, only a strategically select few, which in truth make up a large portion of the voting pool, are given attention and not others. The candidate asserts that the chosen people are the only people that are well-wishing voters in the best interest of the country; the good citizens. The people.
All other people are an irrelevant, common enemy. They have many names such as the elite, traitors, the indifferent, etc. Putting it plainly an antagonism is created, a ‘them’ and ‘us’: “If they are not with us they are against us.”
This is not truthful. It assumes a common political will which cannot exist due to the differences and basic human complexity of the ostracised people.
All those who oppose the candidate cannot have a qualm with all their proposals, there is sympathy.
I have recreated this populistic effect on a small yet personal scale in the title of this piece. One is compelled to read to be included in the umbrella of ‘good people’ while those who have not read it are automatically ‘bad people’. Obviously you may see it is untrue yet it serves as proof of the power of populism.
This has two serious consequences. Firstly, it may leave whole sectors of people unrepresented, large sectors if the candidate is clumsy. Secondly, it may direct the spotlight away from true trouble-making sectors, true enemies of the people, thereby leaving the population in the dark or at best with a skewed view regarding their actions. Such a sector may even be favoured by the candidate, if he is wise enough, thereby avoiding them troubling him.
Another element of populism are the quick-fix promises, by which the candidate promises easy solutions to problems in the country. These often require a great deal of responsible planning, hard work and sheer patience for a sustainable success.
Does populism create a vicious cycle of shoddy work?
Yet the candidate proposes an often irresponsible redistribution of wealth to solve them fast. This naturally creates the problem of lack of resources in other areas thereby creating more, new problems. Is it not possible that these problems are targeted by a future populist candidate for another quick fix? Which brings about the question: does populism create a vicious cycle of shoddy work?
Internationally, populistic tactics were quite clear in previous European electoral campaigns from Italy by Berlusconi to Turkey by Erdogan. However, no case was as textbook as the previous French presidential election by Marine Le Pen. Most notably in her speech following her victory as an electoral finalist.
Le Pen addresses her crowd as fellow “compatriots” or “patriots”, thereby implying that all those who voted against her are not patriots, leading to the nasty implication that they do not wish the best for their country. An interesting use of guilt as a political instrument.
These “patriots”, Le Pen’s chosen sectors, opposed the old system of Francois Hollande which they categorised as the “elite”, in which few benefitted and most suffered, for the benefit of the candidate.
Le Pen’s other chosen sector was the sizeable number that opposed the brand of globalisation offered by the EU, that is of no borders, rife immigration and thus a general lack of national safety. This was proven by the many acts of terror that occurred in France in the previous years.
Thus we may see another characteristic of populism, the preying on the people’s passions and fears for the benefit of the candidate. That is the theory. In practise, this is done by campaigning for values that are shared by the chosen sectors. Voters are ideologically cemented to the candidate.
Le Pen’s ‘quick fix’ was notably that of leaving the EU, thus solving all her voters’ problems. However she framed this as a glorious removal of a wart rather than the realistic amputation of a limb, requiring massive redistribution of wealth to prevent the country from imploding economically.
On the local level, populism was used to great effect in the previous election by the Labour Party. Among other promises such as the lowering of taxes and decreasing unemployment, already capturing a good sector of the voting pool, they cleverly gained the support of the LGBT+ community by promising a quick fix that required little redistribution of wealth and was mainly legislative. That of marriage equality.
Here we may observe the effectivity of alignment of the values of the candidate and the people. The Nationalist Party used older tactics to lesser effect, however in the recent race for party leadership, Adrian Delia was observed to be potentially sowing the seeds of populism with his slogan “A New Way”. It raised the question: “Will he gain new voters by aligning the party with new values?” Only time will tell.
Beyond doubt, populism is among us and here to stay. Thus we live in a dangerous world of the unsaid and half truths. We are the real people, the old, young and all those in between. It is critical we remember this definition of people lest some of us are left ignored. We must see that populism is a ladder to power, a means to an end. But at what cost?
Will the satisfaction of lesser goods lead to an ultimately greater good? What must be done is not always what the people want. In a time of sickness, it is always better to swallow one bitter pill of medicine than three lumps of sugar.
Andrea Caruana is a university student.