Who does one think of when talking about populism and authoritarianism? The common names that come to mind are those of Hitler, Hugo Chavez, Juan Perón, Alberto Fujimori, and others. However, there are names of leaders from the last ten years that fall into the same category as populist leaders. Today, existing leaders such as Nicolas Maduro, Jair Bolsonaro, Donald Trump, and others have displayed what populism looks like in the past decade. The dangerous outlooks and beliefs of these leaders have led to democratic backsliding and a rise in violence in their nations predominantly through holding their elections hostage via fraud and/or election denial.
The classical definition of democracy by authors like Schumpeter expresses that this type of government guarantees free elections and allows citizens to freely participate in making a government decision. However, in the discussion of uncovering the realities of populist leaders, one must take into consideration the democracy definition Robert Dahl provides of these governments better defined as a polyarchy. Via this definition, democracy is not only based on free and fair elections and proper representation but also observes the inclusiveness and public contestation (liberalization) of their nation. Through this outlook on democracy, it becomes easier to uncover the authoritarian features within a “democratic” government and leader.
Over the past couple of years, data shows that democracy around the world has been declining. Statistics from the Regimes of the World Classification display a decline in democracies from 96 electoral democracies in 2016 to 90 in 2022. Democratic backsliding is alive in the world today, especially for nations that have a democratic system in place, but their main leader overrides the constitutional standards. In the case of Venezuela’s current leader, Nicolas Maduro, he uses his executive power as the ultimate power in the government to override the decisions of other leaders and of the government institutions in place. Despite Venezuela’s democratic backsliding initiated during the period of Hugo Chavez, Nicolas Maduro continues to fuel it further by his actions of using the judiciary in his favor. As Levitsky details in How Democracies Die, Nicolas Maduro turned to the Supreme Court to pass his personal legislation and strike down the Congress controlled by his opposition parties. Concerns are on the rise about Maduro’s further actions in the coming elections in 2024. Even with the existence of the democratic practice of elections in Venezuela, Maduro has been able to maintain power over the years through fraudulent elections and government oversteps into the other branches of power. In recent years, elections appear to be the main tool populist leaders utilize to rise to power and attempt to maintain it; demonstrating that this aspect of a democracy is currently the most vulnerable to falling into the hands of authoritarians.
Nevertheless, populism has no ideological boundaries as it is present in left-wing and right-wing government ideals as explained by Muller in “What is populism?”. Right-wing populism, however, is on the rise in the United States and in countries like Brazil over the past decade. Yet, a similarity stands among these forms of populism across political ideologies, being that their control stems from weaponizing elections. Since the election of Trump in 2016, the legitimacy of the electoral system in the U.S. has further been questioned and doubted by its citizens. Lieberman emphasizes that Trump, “Campaigned against many of the foundational policy and political commitments of the global liberal order… encouraged voter suppression, selectively attacking the electoral college, and threatening to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power” (Trumpism and American Democracy). Early on, Trump was already building a seed of doubt on the validity of elections and the legitimacy of the democratic institutions of the U.S. that were further fueled by his supporters. Trump’s actions in undermining the democratic institutions and encouraging greater polarization among his supporters and Democrats are signs of an autocratic populist leader (Lieberman). However, similarly to Maduro but in a different context, Trump used his re-election to try to maintain his power. Beginning with his undemocratic attempt to have Georgia’s Secretary of State “find 11,780 votes” to win over Georgia; thus displaying how Trump attempted to continue to use the election as a tool to stay in power. Failing in these attempts is what soon led him to use the elections via a propaganda-like tool. After Joe Biden was announced as the official president of the United States, Trump’s rhetoric focused on stating that the election was fraudulent and he encouraged his supporters to protest this. This led to the January 6th insurrection in 2021 on the Capitol, where Trump’s supporters seized the capitol due to genuinely believing the election was rigged from his constant messaging that it was. Similarly, right-wing leader, Jair Bolsonaro, led his supporters to storm Brazil’s Supreme Court on January 8, 2023, based on his own messaging that Lula Da Silva won Brazil’s 2022 election due to “fraud”. Bolsonaro has used similar propaganda and messaging as that of Trump stating that the electoral process in Brazil was rigged and “that the electronic voting machines can’t be trusted”. For both Trump and Bolsonaro, their push to delegitimize the elections they lost displayed their populist characteristics that are leading the U.S. and Brazil to experience democratic backsliding.
Overall, despite the various components that are attached to populism and authoritarianism, through the observance of these current events from recent years, elections appear to be the main gateway for these leaders to seek out power. Specifically, the election rhetoric that fuels the campaigns, re-elections, and agenda of these populist leaders. The United States and Brazil remain at risk of further democratic backsliding (even without the current leadership of Trump and Bolsonaro); which can become more extreme as the years go by like occurring in Venezuela today. Populism is showing itself to appear on either side of the aisle of political ideologies with a common use of the weaponization of elections to rise to power.
Classroom Sources:
Levitsky, Steven, and Daniel Ziblatt. “Chapter 1, 5 & 6.” How Democracies Die, Viking,
an Imprint of Penguin Books, London, 2018.
Liberman, Robert C. et. al. “Trumpism and American Democracy: History, Comparison, and
the Predicament of Liberal Democracy in the United States.” SSRN, 29 August 2017.
Mueller, Jan-Werner. What is Populism? University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 2016.
External Sources:
Bond, Shannon. “Brazilians Are about to Vote. and They’re Dealing with Familiar Viral Election
Lies.” NPR, NPR, 27 Sept. 2022, www.npr.org/2022/09/27/1124835910/2022-brazil-election-presidential-disinformation.
Herre, Bastian, and Max Roser. “The World Has Recently Become Less Democratic.” Our World
in Data, 8 Sept. 2023, ourworldindata.org/less-democratic.
Jalonick, Mary Clare, et al. “Jan. 6 Report: Trump ‘lit That Fire’ of Capitol Insurrection.” AP
News, AP News, 21 Sept. 2023, apnews.com/article/jan-6-committee-final-report-trump-bcfea6162fe9cfa0d120e86d069af0e4.
Otis, John. “Venezuela’s Opposition Is Preparing for next Year’s General Election.” NPR, NPR,
23 July 2023, www.npr.org/2023/07/23/1189659868/venezuelas-opposition-is-preparing-for-next-years-general-election.
Treisman, Rachel. “Georgia Officials Fact-Check an Infamous Trump Phone Call in Real Time.”
NPR, NPR, 21 June 2022, www.npr.org/2022/06/21/1106472863/georgia-officials-fact-check-infamous-trump-phone-call-in-real-time.
It’s interesting that ‘free and fair’ elections, an institution fundamental to our democracy and integral in the continuation of our cyclical governments, would be such a key avenue for populist leaders to take power.
I didn’t realize prior to reading this article, how two recent examples of both Bolsonaro and Trump, in Brazil and the U.S. respectively, followed the same plan of disrupting democratic norms. Both Trump and Bolsonaro used their re-elections in an attempt to maintain their authority. Both men lost those re-elections, and thus, used anti-democratic and accusatory rhetoric to denounce the integrity of the election system; wildly declaring the elections to be ‘rigged’ or ‘unjust’. Ultimately, both men used similar propaganda to incite violence among their supporters that culminated in the form of protest and ‘storming’ of government buildings. These examples demonstrate how more leaders in recent times are using their extremism to isolate their political platforms, deepen political divides, and rally a fan base of loyalists rather than party followers.
Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, is a similar example of this kind of leader. He declares any government official against him as against his cause or the people following his cause. He denounces institutions or regulations that hinder his ability to perform and exercise his authority. But most similarly, Netanyahu is guilty of declaring false accusations to serve his agenda, akin to Trump and Bolsonaro. Is it really a coincidence that all these past and present populist leaders have gotten away with making wildly false claims that benefit the narrative they’re spinning?
All three leaders have weaponized election systems in their rise to power. It may be time to make consequent changes to our individual electoral systems to halt the rise of such populist leaders ascending to executive office. This trend should not continue further along than it already has.
Elections are fundamental to the well-being of any democracy and unfortunately, they are increasingly being attacked in countries that were considered to have a safe, stable democracy. It’s uncanny for a populist leader to attack free and fair elections outwardly and explicitly like Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro have done. I think it’s important for recent populist leaders to be studied, so we can have a better understanding of what is causing this modern rise in populism and authoritarian ideals. For someone like Donald Trump to come to power and completely rock the system that was once considered so stable is alarming. You mentioned in your post that he questioned the validity of elections early on in his political career and this helped him create further doubt as the 2020 election neared. I think it would be interesting for figures like Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro to be studied alongside their support bases. Obviously if they came to power through elections citizens saw themselves represented by these figures and believed they could create a better future, whatever they want that to look like. What could the current institutions be lacking that allows so many citizens to see themselves represented by leaders with populist and authoritarian ideals? I think the answer may be a combination of lack of proper representation and an economic system that is not working for a country’s majority. Promising to bring better economic opportunities and being the one to represent a group that has been ignored can help create strong support for these populist and authoritarian leaders.
One of the key aspects of a great democracy is the enforcement of free and fair elections. However, as detailed in your post, many democracies have been backsliding specifically on the point of these elections such as Venezuela and the infamous US democracy. Far-right populism has been since to be blamed as both Trump and Bolsonaro denounced the political institutions that facilitate elections due to their loss. With such a diehard following due to their appeal as a populist leader, they are able to make a fool of political institutions that are supposed to keep democracy in place. It is interesting as I would like to think about what would happen if their will was successful and they continue to be populist leaders leading the fall of democracy in such countries especially the United States with how much they pride themselves on freedom.