The Irony of Right-Wing Populism

Aidan Banan

Writing 150

Professor Dochterman

October 11, 2021

The Irony of Right-Wing Populism

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”

• US Constitution

This is the first sentence outlining the Constitution of the United States of America. It represents an idea where the greatest country on Earth would derive its power from the people to create a truly just society. Similarly, populism is a political movement with goals of achieving a more accurate representation of the common people. This is done by overthrowing the elites, taking money away from the top 1%, and giving power to the people. Populism is split into two sectors, left-wing and right-wing populism. Both have the same anti-elitist ideals, however populism of the left objects to power of large corporations while right-wing populism supports strong control on immigration (European Center For Populism Studies). The idea of Populism seems to encompass our founding father’s vision, right? I disagree. While Populism does help us achieve power for the people, the Constitution also preaches liberty and justice for all.

While some may argue that all populism is bad because defining the people is exclusionary in nature, I argue that only right-wing populism is bad because its primary goal of cultural homogeneity creates internal divisions through strong immigration control and opposition towards other parties.

Right-wing populist parties claim to represent the people, so for it to be effective, they must define the people first. This means “excluding vulnerable and marginalized populations, such as religious or ethnic minorities and immigrants”(Stanford News). If right-wing populism claims to be for the people, but excludes certain minorities and defines the people as culturally homogenous, it seems to contradict itself. Additionally, for populism to be successfully implemented, populist leaders must create a party of extremely devoted followers. This is often built by creating a gap between the follower and ‘the other’, and one of the ways you can draw these lines is through racism.

There are examples of exclusionary practices through right-wing populism drawn all over the world. We can look to Poland as our first example, where “the chair of the governing populist party refers to his opponents as a worse sort of Poles”(European Center For Populism Studies). Referring to other Polish citizens as a worse version because of the political ideology they align with highlights the division right-wing populism creates. It is promoting opposition toward other parties to gain political traction and following. A second example is much more local, as we can look at Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and time in office. According to Oscar Winberg, Trump broke out of political norms and used conservative media to create “politics of the little guy, anger, and insults” (Winberg). One of Trump’s political tactics was to “bully” and insult the opposing parties to create media attention around him to gain a devoted following. This led to unprecedented political divisions between Trump supporters and the rest of the country. One of Trump’s policies furthering his right-wing populist approach was the plan for his infamous wall, separating the US from Mexico. His strong, fully American campaign preached his goal to purify America and disallow any help or benefits to Mexican immigrants. Trump’s strong immigration control was used to create a predominantly “American” body of people that led to the ruin of many immigrant families.

Excluding minorities to create an ethnocentric party means another party must represent those individuals that are excluded. This leads to xenophobic opposition towards other parties, because they believe in different, wrong ideas, and they represent the people that you exclude. This logic is very similar to how Donald Trump’s presidential campaign played out. The serious divisions between Trump supporters and democrats were incredibly large because Trump portrayed Democrats as the enemy. Trump could not have a surplus of Mexican immigrants in the United States in order to fulfill a “white” America, however, the democrats preached the embracement of Mexicans in America.

The ideas that right-wing populism is built on show a clear desire to undermine the current democratic process. Democracies across the world have developed check and balance systems to protect the point of view of minorities. And this is exactly what Trump and other right-wing populist leaders intend to destroy through strong control of immigration. Democracy highlights the importance of inclusiveness and equality, which cannot be achieved through homogenizing the people and demonizing other political parties.

While right-wing populism prioritizes a sense of opposition between parties and exclusion of immigrants or other minority groups, left-wing populism is not as severe. It is more focused on anti-capitalism and the economic issues of the elites being in power. Rather than creating a culturally homogenous group of people, the main goal of left-wing populism is to take money away from the elites and the top 1% and disperse that wealth to benefit the common people. This difference in priority leads to left-wing populism being more open to “the political integration of excluded groups”(Markou). While the same opposition between parties is still preached for this ideology to be accepted, we see a larger acceptance of immigrants, showing this form of populism does not have the same exclusionary tendencies as its right-wing counterpart.

While some argue “the people” is an inclusive idea, right-wing populism defines the common person in an unfair, exclusive way. Under this ideology’s logic, the common person is someone who is racially or culturally “common”. This excludes minority groups and immigrants because they are culturally different, so they are automatically disadvantaged for personal characteristics they cannot control. Left-wing populism is a more appropriate way of identifying the people. It is essentially the top 1% versus everybody else. The uber-wealthy are exposed to so many advantages, so distributing their resources to the common people doesn’t exclude or disadvantage a minority to the extent that right-wing populism does.

In a world that is becoming more and more globalized, right-wing populism seems out of place. Its focus on strong immigration control, cultural homogeneity of the people it represents, and serious promotion of opposition towards other parties lead to serious internal divisions within society. These blatant exclusionary principles highlight the ideology’s irony, because how can it benefit “the common people” if it excludes minority groups for their cultural and national background.

Works Cited

De Witte, Melissa. “Populism Jeopardizes Democracies around the World.” Stanford News, 12 Mar. 2020, https://news.stanford.edu/2020/03/11/populism-jeopardizes-democracies-around-world/

“Exclusionary Populism.” ECPS, 26 Dec. 2020, https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/exclusionary-populism/

Grevin, Thomas. Right-Wing Populism and Authoritarian Nationalism in the U … Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, May 2017, http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/id/13395.pdf

“Inclusionary Populism.” ECPS, 27 Dec. 2020, https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/inclusionary-populism/

“Left-Wing Populism.” ECPS, 27 Dec. 2020, https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/left-wing-populism/

Winberg, Oscar. “Insult Politics: Donald Trump, Right-Wing Populism, and Incendiary …” European Journal of American Studies, European Association for American Studies, 31 July 2017, https://journals.openedition.org/ejas/12132