William Paul Wanker, Ph.d.
11
Populism gained prominence around the globe throughout the 2010s. Some of these movements were formed around socio-economic disparities that pitted the rich against the poor, others found footing through cultural challenges involving immigration and race, still others gained prominence through an “anti-establishment” agenda that rejected political elites and their parties, and yet others found solid ground in a mix of one or more approaches. Examples are numerous: Trump’s drive to “Make America Great Again,” Johnson’s drive for Brexit, Bolsonaro’s drive against corruption in Brazil, and Viktor Orban’s drive to assert control over the opposition in Hungary all come to mind.
Some might claim these were exceptions rather than the rule; but, in all actuality, some 20 countries had embraced one form or another by 2018. In fact, a recent study analyzing the “state of democracy” suggests the “third wave of autocratization" is accelerating and deepening. The study found that, for the first time since 2001, the number of authoritarian states is now larger than the number of democratic states: “almost 35% of the world’s population now lives in autocratizing nations–2.6 billion people–while only 8% live under regimes that are becoming more democratic.”1
However irrational the arguments presented in defense of this retreat, people should not uderestimate how real conditions inside these countries drove the alienation, frustration, and despair which gave legitimacy to leaders playing off such emotions in their bid for power. Moreover, this retreat once again into nationalism demonstrates not only how removed representatives are from the needs of their constituents but how bankrupt our theories and practices of governing have become.