It’s become very common, and for very obvious reasons, for there to be an association between populism and conservatism. However, the truth is there is not a single underlying philosophical connection between the two. The separate political philosophies are only linked modernly by one person: Donald Trump.
What we tend to overlook is the fact that populism exists on both sides of the spectrum, which is why we have “left-wing populism” and “right-wing populism.” The discrepancy between the two types does not make one more favorable than the other. Regardless, any type of populism poses a major threat to our modern society.
Populism occurs when the public basically demands something that just is not possible given the current political resources. Of course, the fact that their government can not help them aggravates the people and eventually a “them vs us” dynamic and mindset begins to develop. “Common people” begin to feel disenfranchised and as if the “elites” are working against them. In terms of the 2016 election, I’m sure that anyone who saw 30 seconds of the news here or there can pull out distinct examples of how Donald Trump facilitated this.
Basically, in Trump’s case, he pitted the average white working-class families against “others” or anyone who was different, especially immigrants and people of color. Furthermore, he painted the establishment as an elite class that was hindering the common people and only aiding those “others.” He was able to tap into this narrative by recognizing that the current political state was not addressing these people’s concern (mostly because there was nothing that the political state could truly do). Trump noticed that working-class families were losing their work to globalization and technology.
Any established politician knew that these things were not going away and while there were incremental changes that could be made to help ease the transition it is impossible to completely overhaul the system and restore things to how they were before. This is where Trump managed to reach another point of populism: restorative nostalgia. Plastered all over his campaign was the phrase “Make America Great Again.”
More rational Republican candidates such as Rand Paul and John Kasich recognized the truth of the situation by ensuring constituents that the solution was more incremental in change. For them, it was more important to see the jobs and economy shift than trying to create a climate of clinging on to jobs that just did not exist. However, this is not what the public wanted to hear.
However, Trump is not the only one who held a populist stance in the 2016 election. As hard as it is for some people to accept or even consider, Bernie Sanders was a second populist candidate in this past presidential election. The only difference between the two candidates was, in reality, what type of populism they chose to invoke. Bernie's populism was, obviously, a prime example of “left-wing populism.”
Bernie embodied similar concerns as Trump, but he addressed them in a different light. Economic inequality and wage gaps came to the center of his platform. However, he did not point fingers at immigrants, people of color, etc. Instead, he created a division between the 99% and the elite 1%. While the fault was, again, with globalization and technology and not with any “elite” group, Bernie was able to channel the frustration of youth voters and college degree earners who felt disenfranchised. He latched on to residual anger from the Occupy Wall Street movement. The grievance of the people was a lack of well-paying jobs in the market, but establishment politicians knew that this was heavily due to technology and that we were not going to be able to resort to a time before this. The nostalgia that people latched on to was a simpler time when a college degree guaranteed a well-paying job and a minimum wage job was enough to get by. However, with 4-year college degrees becoming the new norm and inflation rapidly increasing the cost of living, these two things were just not feasible.
Politicians knew that there was no way to suddenly make a college degree more valuable again and certainly no way to simultaneously raise the minimum wage without increasing the technological influence or raise inflation, which would just bring us back to square one. So, when the establishment presented this harsh reality to the “99%” many people refused to accept it. They became adamant that there was a way to restore our society back to the past. Politicians on the left were willing to work toward incremental solutions to make the transition easier, but that just wasn’t enough for many people and that’s where Bernie Sanders gained support.
Whether or not you support Bernie Sanders, it is important to recognize that he did use populist tactics during his campaign, and populism is a major issue… regardless of if it is present in the left or right.
Populism makes massive promises that are enticing in concept, but not very practical. Trump made promises to restore old jobs by restricting immigrants and punishing businesses that chose to leave the United States while Bernie made promises to guarantee higher wages for everyone, even if that is incredibly unlikely and impossible. They both tapped into grievances and groups of people that felt unheard. That is how populism grows. Much of the time, the people feel unheard, but that is also not the case. The truth is: they’re given answers they don’t like. They’re told that their jobs are unavailable because that industry is not sustainable, so they will need training in another area, but they don’t want to hear that. They want to hear that someone will come in and rescue their industry. Or, on the other side of the spectrum, they want to be told that more people will have college degrees and the value of the degree will increase, but the truth is basic supply and demand dictate otherwise. No one is able to overthrow market pressures; no one is magic.
And the problem is that so many people on both sides of the aisle have bought into these myths. They believe in the impractical because it is what they want to believe in.
Populism, no matter the political alignment, will not feasibly change anything and leaves the people in an even worse, more stagnant position than before.
If you want to destroy Donald Trump’s populism, you must also destroy Bernie Sanders’s populism. It’s as simple as that. We need to stop letting ourselves become disillusioned and follow behind statements that sound good in concept but don’t work in reality. You can not combat one type of populism with another.
The number of friends I have who openly admitted that much of Sanders’s positions were not realistic, but were still adamant in supporting him worried me. For many in our generation, politics has become a distant concept where we can vote in maybe’s and someday’s.
Unless we start making real change right now, we will not improve the conditions for anyone.
Worried about the price of tuition? Let’s start challenging the status-quo that every person needs to go to college to live a good life, and thus lowering the demand for and price of college. That’s a real change that can be made.
Worried about factory workers losing their jobs? Volunteer at programs that help working-class people gain new skills that can be used in another field of work. That’s a real change that can be made.
Upset that businesses are moving overseas? Lower taxes on businesses to increase American companies and job opportunities for our people and thus creating more wealth within America. That’s a real change that can be made.
Let’s make some real change next time. If we want to stop the Trump regime because we know his ideas are unachievable, we need to admit that Bernie’s ideas weren’t exactly attainable either. This polarization in this past election is what paved the way for Trump’s victory. Become the reasonable voice. Work out of logic, not emotion. Do not allow a home for populism.