Democracy is built on the foundations of effective representation, where political leaders are proactive and responsive, keen on developing policy solutions for the societies they live in. Despite this, the traditional political parties are often unable to handle the challenges and crises that a rapidly evolving and globalizing society is throwing at them. Unfortunately, this has led to a significant decrease in both trust and sympathy among voters and has triggered ideological extremism across political movements and the parties that form out of them. Traditional political leadership increasingly finds itself caught between centralization of policy decisions and the disaffection of voters, and the results of this can be seen in recent elections
…show more content…
This is because populism corresponds to a very niche political agenda which calls for kicking out the incumbent political establishment but does not specifically suggest a replacement. Instead, what it does is orient itself to the need of the hour, as is felt by a general population. For instance, the rise of populism in the U.S. corresponds to a nationalist sentiment that has been leveraged by President Trump, despite steady opposition from his own Republican party. Populism, as demonstrated by the politics endorsed by President Trump, banks on the inability of the existing political establishment to meet the needs and demands of the overwhelming majority of the country’s population. Trump endears himself to his supporters by using their lexicon, and while the political pundits, savants and commentators may fume over his apparent mauling, his use of colloquial words, such as the “fire and fury” he promises to North Korea, or the “beautiful” wall he desires to build at the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, this makes him extremely relatable to his primary constituencies and thus grants him political …show more content…
As Algan et al. suggest, events across the globe often uncover the shortcomings of the economic and political institutions, and no matter how much political commentators may disapprove of populist parties or candidates, the fact is that populism almost always only rises when people are dissatisfied with their local institutions and politicians. Political extremism appears to be the answer to the distrust that fuels and is reinforced by the state of political parties at the time. Algan et al. also point out that apart from the status of political institutions, the economic insecurities that stem from both globalization and technological processes across the world are also responsible for the rise of populism – especially since these processes are invariably seen as the outcomes of political failures. Populism, therefore, emerges as the only alternative to changing the status quo in the minds of people, and signifies two important things for political parties. First, the rise of populism indicates that the prevailing political structures and their participants are not meeting the expectations and the needs of the people; and second that there needs to be a radical shift in the way political parties and institutions work or develop their ideologies, so that they can better meet the expectations of the people. Since the populist parties fill the void immediately, they are almost always given a precedence over
This is because populism corresponds to a very niche political agenda which calls for kicking out the incumbent political establishment but does not specifically suggest a replacement. Instead, what it does is orient itself to the need of the hour, as is felt by a general population. For instance, the rise of populism in the U.S. corresponds to a nationalist sentiment that has been leveraged by President Trump, despite steady opposition from his own Republican party. Populism, as demonstrated by the politics endorsed by President Trump, banks on the inability of the existing political establishment to meet the needs and demands of the overwhelming majority of the country’s population. Trump endears himself to his supporters by using their lexicon, and while the political pundits, savants and commentators may fume over his apparent mauling, his use of colloquial words, such as the “fire and fury” he promises to North Korea, or the “beautiful” wall he desires to build at the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, this makes him extremely relatable to his primary constituencies and thus grants him political …show more content…
As Algan et al. suggest, events across the globe often uncover the shortcomings of the economic and political institutions, and no matter how much political commentators may disapprove of populist parties or candidates, the fact is that populism almost always only rises when people are dissatisfied with their local institutions and politicians. Political extremism appears to be the answer to the distrust that fuels and is reinforced by the state of political parties at the time. Algan et al. also point out that apart from the status of political institutions, the economic insecurities that stem from both globalization and technological processes across the world are also responsible for the rise of populism – especially since these processes are invariably seen as the outcomes of political failures. Populism, therefore, emerges as the only alternative to changing the status quo in the minds of people, and signifies two important things for political parties. First, the rise of populism indicates that the prevailing political structures and their participants are not meeting the expectations and the needs of the people; and second that there needs to be a radical shift in the way political parties and institutions work or develop their ideologies, so that they can better meet the expectations of the people. Since the populist parties fill the void immediately, they are almost always given a precedence over