Those who cherish liberal democracy are appropriately preoccupied in this election season with the growth of an unbridled and negative form of populism. This peculiar iteration of citizen uprising targets electoral systems, judicial institutions, elected officials and the rule of law while promoting a virulent nationalism.
Unlike past people-power revolutions, this one seems intent on tearing down institutions rather than making them more inclusive.
Some on the right have sought to rationalize the populist wave as solely a reaction to economic factors. “Globalization,” it is said, has undermined the middle class and disaffected the masses.
It is certainly true that some manifestations of globalization, such as disrupted global supply chains, the impact of the war in Ukraine and the COVID pandemic, have conspired to place real strains on the middle class. However, the messaging that inspires today’s populists has little to do with economics. It is replete with appeals to fear of the other.
The culture wars, anti-immigration taunts and blatantly white supremacist war chants of the populists are hardly a civic action agenda for reform of the global economic system.
Populism wasn’t always the destructive force it is today. There was a time when it took on the character of civic action to right wrongs. As political philosopher Harry Boyte has written, “Civic populism once had wide foundations in what can be called mediating institutions connecting the civic life of communities to the larger public world.”
The Civil Rights Movement is a perfect example of positive civic populism. It was a movement that encouraged the use of nonviolent means to create “good trouble” by violating segregation laws — to redress legitimate grievances.
Likewise today, women who have suffered a loss of the right to make decisions affecting their own bodies constitute a populist movement for change. In the Dobbs v Jackson decision on abortion conservative Supreme Court justices have thrown the issue back to the states and thus into the political arena. Withdrawing a right that women have had for 50 years will certainly inspire a populist uprising.
Pointing to a complex set of factors encompassed in the single word “globalization” seems to be a way to obscure the more malign manifestations of the current populist wave. The irony here is that reactionary conservative politicians have little interest in employing public policies to fix the issues they rail against. In fact, most see little worth in government intervention of any kind.
Heaven forbid that a government might propose more progressive tax policies or relief packages for the poor. Like the recently deposed British Prime Minister, Liz Truss, most conservatives prefer supply side and trickle-down economics, or no action at all.
Today’s dissent against government is conjured by repetitive references to mysterious dark forces undermining the people’s will. Conspiracy theories abound and people embrace them. The challenge is the malign influence of disinformation flowing mostly unregulated over social media.
Some of this is generated by candidates anxious to build support. But never before in American history have we experienced the propaganda emanating from the former president who has convinced many of his followers that the 2020 election was stolen. That hardly inspires confidence in the electoral process or in our democratic system.
An additional source of disinformation comes from authoritarian governments that invest large sums in distorting public debate to undermine democracies. The resources spent by Russia alone in Western Europe and the U.S. in purveying lies and stirring dissent is deeply troubling.
In a world that has grown in population from around 2.2 billion people in 1950 to 7.7 billion today, the number of those who choose to migrate will inevitably increase proportionately. This provides fodder for the extreme nationalists who want to focus on the “other.”
The modern-day populists, without evidence, characterize these refugee families and their children as criminals and rapists. It’s sad that a nation of immigrants would come to this!
It is time to resurrect a form of civic populism that will agitate for individual rights as did Martin Luther King. In an era when the Supreme Court is eliminating some of those rights and threatening others, and when transnational issues plague the globe, it is time to recognize that civic action for social justice and international cooperation are more needed than ever.
J. Brian Atwood is a senior fellow at Brown University’s Watson Institute. He served as undersecretary of State and as administrator of USAID in the Clinton administration.
Editor’s note: This story was updated on Oct. 23 at 12:23 p.m. and on Oct. 27 at 10 a.m. to correct the spelling of a name in a Supreme Court case.