Think back to late June and early last month. The French far right was favored to win a snap parliamentary election. Judges appointed by Donald Trump were conveniently resolving the legal woes of the former US president, who seemed to be gliding to victory after US President Joe Biden’s disastrous performance in a debate.
Meanwhile, Britain was getting a Labour government, a new anti-immigration party led by the chief Brexiteer, British Member of Parliament Nigel Farage, had made unprecedented gains. Faced with it all, pundits warned that a wave of populist “anti-incumbency” rage was sweeping across the world’s democracies.
The commentariat’s bleak outlook should since have been tempered by new sources of political hope. Not only is there little evidence of a “populist wave” — a metaphor that conjures images of far-right parties inevitably rising to power in many countries — but recent experience suggests workable strategies for countering such forces.
One lesson from the past few months might sound like a truism: All parties that value democracy must unite to face down anti-democratic threats. This is what happened in France, to many pundits’ surprise. Left-wing parties formed the New Popular Front, evoking memories of the fight against fascism in the 1930s, when socialist leader Leon Blum led a coalition of communists, socialists and liberals to defend the republic.
After French President Emmanuel Macron’s surprise decision to dissolve the French National Assembly, the left got creative, while Marine le Pen’s far-right National Rally was caught flat-footed.
More to the point, the New Popular Front did not merely appeal to abstract democratic values; it also repeatedly called attention to the far right’s pro-business plans, making clear that the National Rally is not the pro-worker party that it claims to be.
A second lesson comes from the US, where few anticipated the enthusiasm and outpouring of joy that would greet the new Democratic ticket. US Vice President Kamala Harris, an incumbent, has masterfully presented herself as a representative of change, in contrast to Trump and Biden.
Her pick for vice president, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, has delighted many with his characterization of the Republican ticket, particularly Trump’s vice-presidential pick, US Senator J.D. Vance, as “weird.”
Finally, it seems, Democrats play the kind of rhetorical hardball that the right always has.
Of course, self-declared centrists preaching civil discourse are less pleased. They are reminding Democrats that former US secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton’s comments about “deplorables” came to haunt her 2016 campaign for president. Yet to condemn the “weird” label as childish name-calling misses the point. In the fight against far-right populism, this particular epithet can be especially effective.
After all, in claiming to speak for “the real people” or the “the silent majority,” far-right populists are presenting themselves as the representatives of normality. In Germany, one of the far-right party Alternative fur Deutschland’s slogans is: Deutschland, aber normal. The populists’ supposed base comprises what are always presented as “ordinary people” who are threatened by nefarious elites and dangerous “others.” That is how populists incite fear of already-vulnerable minorities, be they refugees or transgender people.
Savvy anti-populists should concentrate their rhetorical fire on populist leaders, rather than on their supporters. Vance is “weird” because he is obsessed with controlling women’s bodies and punishing the childless, and because he appears sympathetic toward monarchists and other assorted alt-right figures. The Republican Party now holds many positions that are far out of step with US political traditions; open admiration for autocrats is an obvious example. One can point all this out without suggesting that Republican voters themselves are weird. The point is to dispute the claim to normality by leaders who are anything but.
The far-right populists who claim to speak for the silent majority in fact represent a loud minority. There is nothing wrong with that as such; plenty of progressive movements started the same way.
However, movements that pretend to speak for the majority while vilifying everyone else pose a threat to democracy. It is no accident that populists who lose at the ballot box often resort to accusations of fraud.
As they supposedly represent the silent majority, an electoral loss can be attributed only to foul play, usually by “liberal elites” who supposedly somehow silenced the majority.
Anti-populists should recognize that majorities do not in fact support far-right populist forces. The new Labour government’s first few weeks in power have confirmed this salutary insight. The country has experienced its worst riots in more than a decade as disinformation has fueled racist violence. While being careful not to endorse violence directly, Farage has made it sound like the rioters have legitimate grievances shared by the silent majority.
Yet polls show that only one in three Britons support the broader anti-migration protests, whereas opposition to the riots is overwhelming.
True, the argument “We are more” — a slogan coined by anti-populist protesters in Germany — only goes so far. While the far right falsely claims a monopoly on normality, the truth is that far-right parties are becoming normalized as more center-right politicians copy their rhetoric or enter coalitions with them. A stance focused on defending democracy is necessary, but not sufficient, to counter this trend; one must offer a positive vision, too. That is what the French left and Labour did this summer.
Those canvassing for Harris will be asked on doorsteps what she truly stands for, beyond being an alternative to Trump-Vance weirdness. It is a legitimate question, and one for which anti-populists must provide a good answer.
Jan-Werner Mueller is a professor of politics at Princeton University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Would China attack Taiwan during the American lame duck period? For months, there have been worries that Beijing would seek to take advantage of an American president slowed by age and a potentially chaotic transition to make a move on Taiwan. In the wake of an American election that ended without drama, that far-fetched scenario will likely prove purely hypothetical. But there is a crisis brewing elsewhere in Asia — one with which US president-elect Donald Trump may have to deal during his first days in office. Tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea have been at
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
Historically, in Taiwan, and in present-day China, many people advocate the idea of a “great Chinese nation.” It is not worth arguing with extremists to say that the so-called “great Chinese nation” is a fabricated political myth rather than an academic term. Rather, they should read the following excerpt from Chinese writer Lin Yutang’s (林語堂) book My Country and My People: “It is also inevitable that I should offend many writers about China, especially my own countrymen and great patriots. These great patriots — I have nothing to do with them, for their god is not my god, and their patriotism is
RSS