Lessons of populism need to be heeded

Western Daily Press, 22 October 2024, p. 17

You asked: Is it wrong to describe ‘populism’ as a right-wing political phenomenon?

In trying to answer this question, it is necessary to attempt a definition of what populism means.

Populism can be defined as a political programme or movement that champions or claims to champion the common person, by contrast with a real or perceived elite.

By that standard, in the UK, Reform UK, under Nigel Farage and Richard Tice, fit the bill, in that they have railed against the Tories and Labour as the established elite majority parties, and won votes from both, but from the Tories in particular, over their failure to deal adequately with the main issues affecting the UK population, namely immigration, race and religion.

The position taken by Reform is usually regarded as right-wing, but not exclusively so, as the economic and social issues raised over mass immigration are more left-wing in character, affecting unemployment and the provision of public services under the Welfare State.

On the left, in the 2019 General Election, the rise of Jeremy Corbyn and Momentum around the Labour movement was more left-wing in character.

A similar political movement, predominantly on the right, is taking place in Germany, France and Italy, but in France there is some growth of populism on the left under the centrist Emmanuel Macron, with the rise of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s Socialist Party in the last French elections.

The rise of populism on the left is more associated with economic and social issues, and on the right with economic and cultural issues, but I would not wish to push the distinction too far or over-simplify the issues.

What populism has in common is that it appeals to the sense that people have no real control over their lives in an increasingly globalised economy and society, and that politically the populist leaders assume that there are no differences in a predominantly nation-state society and they seek unity of the electoral population on that basis.

From a European perspective, since the re-building of European states after World War Two, the rise of populism in France under the Fourth Republic is instructive.

After 1953, a French movement led by Pierre Poujade began to mobilise the lower middle classes, shopkeepers and artisans.

By 1965, the Poujadist movement gained 5.2% of the vote in the first round of the presidential elections in the Fifth Republic. Charles De Gaulle, of the centre-right RPR, won the election with 55.2% of the vote ahead of the socialist candidate François Mitterand, who gained 44.8% for the other of the two established parties.

The populists were led by a French Vichy lawyer, Jean-Louise Tixier-Vignacour, whose Poujadist populist support came mainly from the south-west of France. His support switched to Mitterand in the second round of the election, but was not sufficient to defeat De Gaulle.

The Gaullist Party, which was so dominant in the 1960s and 1970s, is now a shadow of its former self, and a lot of former Gaullists and Poujadists have graduated to Marie Le Pen’s National Front.

The issues raised by the Poujadists have not gone away, and have found a new home in the National Front, which could well make a breakthrough to gaining power in the next set of elections.

The major parties in both France and the UK have been warned, and the main issues raised by the populist movements throughout recent political history will have to be taken fully on board by elected governments if the ‘common person’ is not to lose faith in liberal democracy.

Jeremy Comerford

Chippenham, Wiltshire