Populism Explained in 10 Minutes!

Populism is a term often heard in politics.  It's frequently used to describe politicians and movements, especially in recent times. But  beyond being a label for attacking opponents, what does populism truly entail? Where does it  originate, and how does it manifest? In this video, we aim to explore these questions. Stay tuned! It can be said that populism is one  of the most ambiguous concepts in political science. This term, which is  sometimes synonymous with demagoguery, is derived from the

Latin word "populus, "meaning  people. Although nowadays populism is mostly used as a slur and a tool to criticize opponents rather  than being embraced by a party or an individual, the formation of this word was initiated  by the People's Party in the United States in the late 19th century, which identified  itself as populist. This party was formed to support farmers who had been marginalized  due to the industrialization of America and aimed to operate as a third party  against both Democrat

s and Republicans, although its lifespan was not particularly  long, and it eventually faded into history. Although the term populism was coined by the  People's Party, intellectuals in the field of politics gave a fresh perspective to this  idea from the mid-20th century onwards, and the concept of populism took on its contemporary  form. As the literal meaning suggests, the key concept in populism is "the people." However, the  notion of "the people" is relatively ambiguous, and this ambiguity

is the main reason for the  uncertainty in defining populism. In populism, the people are perceived as a unified and  homogeneous group with shared interests and desires. Furthermore, these people are defined  in contrast to a small group, often portrayed as powerful, whose interests conflict with those  of the people. The second ambiguity in populism arises from the unclear definition of this small  group. For instance, this minority group may refer to a specific class such as capitalists,  or

it may be defined as corrupt politicians, or even intellectuals who look down upon ordinary  people. Therefore, the nature of populism depends on the definition of "the people" and the  powerful small group, often referred to as elites in many cases. Overall, populism is  not a coherent ideology like liberalism or socialism but rather represents a worldview  and a mode of operation. This is why both right-wing populism and left-wing populism exist.  In some cases, there are also moderate populi

sts. However, in all forms of populism, society  is divided into two groups with conflicting interests: the people and the elites. Now, one  might wonder, what is wrong with this perspective that advocates for the majority against the  minority, making populism a term of disdain? The most important issue here is that in  most cases, populism becomes synonymous with the concept of demagoguery. The meaning of  demagoguery is the exploitation of the emotions of dissatisfied individuals to gain powe

r. In this  case, demagogic politicians, with the reductionism inherent in populism, simplify complex social  issues and present solutions that appear simple, not through logic and reasoning, but by appealing  to the emotions of their audience. In this extreme simplification, large portions of reality are  overlooked, and the proposed solutions are often ineffective and unhelpful. Such as reducing  complex cultural and economic issues to the issue of immigration and then suggesting building a wa

ll  to prevent it. Another issue with demagoguery is the deception and hypocrisy of its leaders.  While demagogic leaders, within the populist atmosphere they create, divide society into  the disadvantaged people and the privileged and powerful elites and try to present themselves  as champions and supporters of the people, in most cases, these political leaders are part  of the same privileged elites. For this reason, by distorting the truth, these leaders  practically guide certain segments of

society toward meeting the interests of the  elites rather than the public interest. Like inciting lower classes of society in favor of tax  reduction policies, whose primary beneficiaries are capitalists and large corporations. One of  the tools that populist leaders and movements use to disseminate their ideas is relying  on conspiracy theories. Linking all issues to behind-the-scenes relations and ambiguities  helps simplify complex issues and can evoke more emotions. That's why populism oft

en comes hand  in hand with conspiracy theories and fake news. Another problem that populism often creates is  its opposition to the existing establishment. As we mentioned, populists are against the  established order and present it as being in favor of the privileged elites. One of the  actions they take after coming to power is to weaken and sometimes destroy official and legal  institutions, citing the inefficiency of the system. Although existing institutions may have  played a role in crea

ting unfavorable conditions, they are tools that governments can use to address  issues. The destruction of these institutions not only does not eliminate the inefficiency of  the system but also exacerbates it further. In defining populism, we mentioned that in this  idea, the people are perceived as a unified and homogeneous whole with common interests. However,  this is not the case in reality, and the next criticism of populism is exactly here. Human  societies are very complex, and the desi

res and interests of different parts of society not  only differ but in some cases conflict with each other. There are indeed things that fulfill  the interests of larger segments of society, but populists, with their constant emphasis on  ambiguous concepts such as the general will, treat it in a way that only the interests they claim to  represent have authenticity and significance. This perspective leads to the neglect of disadvantaged  minorities and their exclusion from society. Thus, popul

ists minimize the possibility of dialogue  in society through dichotomizing, exaggerating, and black-and-white representation,  continuously fueling anger and hatred. Now that we have a general understanding  of what populism is, it is worth examining the conditions in which the emergence of  populist movements and leaders is more likely. The most fertile ground for the growth of  populism is the inefficiency of governments and their inability to fulfill the desires  and needs of their citizens.

Therefore, in situations where governments fail to fulfill  their duties or fulfill the promises they make, public dissatisfaction increases. This issue  provides an appropriate platform for individuals or groups to ride the wave of dissatisfaction  and, by creating a dichotomy between disadvantaged people and privileged elites, gather  supporters for themselves and seek power. Another condition that fosters the growth of  populism is rapid changes in society. These rapid changes can take vario

us forms. The common feature  of all rapid changes is that a segment of society feels a sense of stagnation and marginalization.  For example, these rapid changes may involve the industrialization of a country, resulting in  a significant portion of the workforce facing challenges because some jobs lose their importance  and new occupations require acquiring new skills. When changes occur very rapidly, society may  not be able to adapt to the new situation, and therefore, some segments of societ

y  feel the loss and are mentally prepared to accept a dichotomy in which some groups  constantly infringe on their rights. However, rapid changes are not necessarily materialistic.  For example, if for any reason, such as increased communication or changes in global ideological  patterns, the value system of a society and especially its elites undergoes a transformation,  parts of society that have not experienced these changes or even consider them in conflict with  their value system are prep

ared to confront them and are susceptible to the representation  that the fundamental values of society or the people are threatened by corrupt elites. In addition to the above conditions, generally, presidential systems are more susceptible to  populism. In presidential systems, ultimately, an individual enters the electoral process, and  since populist movements are largely influenced by the charisma of their leaders, naturally, the  possibility of the growth and success of populism is higher

compared to parliamentary  systems where parties take the lead. The reality is that populist movements manifest in  various forms across almost all political systems and are not confined to the conditions mentioned.  It could even be argued that populism is inherent to some extent in all political movements  worldwide. However, movements that are identified as populist rarely last long, even if they gain  power in certain places and periods. On one hand, while populists are in power, the dichoto

my  they create between the powerless populace and powerful elites becomes paradoxical. On  the other hand, as discussed earlier, their tendency towards reductionism often hinders their  effectiveness and leads to disillusionment among their supporters. Nonetheless, the effects of  populism, such as weakening official institutions or causing increased tension in society, tend  to linger for years and are not easily fixed. This was a brief overview of populism.  If you found this content informat

ive, please like it and subscribe to our  channel. we'd love to hear from you, so feel free to share your thoughts, comments, and  ideas for future topics in the comments section. Thank you for joining, and we look  forward to seeing you in the next video.