Setho ka Gaon

The populist political arrangement is a derived form of Majoritarianism and is often regarded as Populist Majoritarianism. Populists democratically undertake power contesting against “the elite”, placing the interest of the majority over others, in the socio-economic and political front. Populists have been associated with left-right ideologies, authoritarian and libertarian, pluralist, and anti-pluralist, as well as with homonationalism, xenophobia, and ethnonationalism. The left-right dichotomy for populists is an assessment of its nebulous definition, single dimensionally. 

 

In recent years, populism has risen across the globe. Their economic policies show general intolerance to foreigners and other socio-ethnic groups (the minorities). Initially, the economists believed that populist policies were all right-wing. It was also evident that most of the economic policy decisions taken by influential leaders in these economies were for vote-seeking. The policies aimed towards neoliberalism and nationalism which used the concept of laissez-faire. 

 

The major components of the policies were a reduction in the redistribution of income, social welfare expenditure, and lowering taxations. There is also a general trend seen of reduction in the state’s monopoly over-regulated establishments. The state’s expenditure shows an increase in the social programs, meeting the cultural identity and concerns of the supporters of these parties. For example, the issue of immigration is prioritized over access to health insurance, implying how an issue faced by supporters is put forward than a general issue of all citizens. The political, social, and economic divides all head in the same direction in the long run in this political arrangement. 

 

. . .

​

These RPPs (Right-wing Populist Parties) also try to polarise the majority in the economic sphere i.e., the working class rather than the traditional right-wing parties, whose major support was the capitalists. The empirical results as shown by Röth, L., Afonso, A., & Spies, D. (2018) for western Europe, radical RPPs parties tend to support deregulatory policies but do not prefer the retrenchment of welfare policies, such as social insurance schemes and hence, benefiting their supporters. One of the very common examples of it, across these economies, is the pension schemes. These parties sometimes follow centrists’ policies as well, to seek the attention of the left-leaning supporters.

​

Radical right populism is closely linked to nativist-nationalist sentiments and the success or failure of a radical RPP depends on how well they incarnate the idea of the national culture of a nation in their economic and foreign policies.

 

Radical populists acclaim for diversified international partnerships and

they often look for new partners in international trade and social and cultural exchanges.

 

The recent development of foreign trade has disregarded the importance of the West and created many developing economic zones in the southern hemisphere. For example, ASEAN in South Asia, the African Union, Mercosur in Latin America. In some of the cases, it has led to high-intensity populisms which in turn leads to a rise in very powerful leaders. Such an instance can be picked from South American Nations where populism initially started in the twentieth century and the twenty-first century led to the rise of powerful populist leaders (both right and left) like Hugo Chávez, Néster Kirchner, Christina Fernández, etc.

 

This process leads to an increase in large transnational corporations and hence its impact rises in each of the populist economies that are part of it. These economies develop at faster rates and become more important in international trades. Along with this their share in global trade rises. In the long run, conservatism in the economy rises and the policymakers start favoring the local countries and then this reduces their faith and support to International Organisations. The scapegoating of the international institutions, a common phenomenon in present-day economies, is a result of populism.

 

The populists who rise against social inequality contribute to the economic inequalities and disproportionate distribution of income across social classes. The tackling of the major economic issues becomes less relevant than providing illusionary benefits to the public and along the way these parties and political groups transfer their failures to the elites and the non-populist parties. The socio-ethnic groups that do not favor populist ideologies often end up as the modernization-losers.

 

. . .

​

The solution to this political issue cannot be built within forces but has to come from international organizations. The international organizations, in the West as well as in the South should increase their influence, by bringing administrative and strategic changes in their workings. They should monitor the political developments and should have proper monitoring of the elections to maintain its fairness. These organizations should also account for the socially and economically marginalized sections of these economies. These measures may bring optimism among the popular leaders and authorities across the globe.