What are the causes of populism and radicalism in advanced

democracies?

Populism is considered as the spectre of democracy, shadowing democracy and haunting democr
acy from which it is hard, perhaps impossible, to escape entirely in modern conditions of a consum
ption-driven society and a populist free press. (Crick, 2005: 631) and rose in modern politics due t
o the traditional parties inability to react to the progress and advancement of the world today, which
gives the chance for populism to rise with its easy and straight-foward solutions, to give the real,
ordinary citizens a voice and to act in their will and interests. The causes of the rise of populism inc
lude electorate availability, unresponsiveness of established parties and the personal charisma and
dominance of the party leader. Radicalism has similar beliefs as populism in that they both are criti
cal of the current political establishment and the cause of radicalism, both left and right, is identified
as ethnic and civic nationalism.
It is useful to first define populism before diving into a discussion of its causes. Populism is charact
erised by a personalistic, plebiscitarian style of political leadership and attack the current status q
uo as they deem the current government and political parties as insensitive and blind to the everyd
ay problems of the common people. Wilders, leader of the Dutch populist party Party for Freedom,
criticises the political system that politicians should no longer be deaf to the problems troubling
ordinary people in every-day life. Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as
an ideology which pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous
others who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of th
eir rights, values, prosperity, identity and voice.
Many scholars place populism historically in context of specific developmental stages, such as that
of the transition from traditional to modern society, the rise of mass society after the fall of the
oligarchic rule or the initial segment of import-substitution industrialisation as with the rapid develop
ment of urbanisation, education and industrialisation leads to the mass participation of citizens who
were previously uninvolved in politics due to economic or educational restraints. The introduction of
such a new group of people as well as the changes and development in society undermines the tra
ditional political authority which leads to the circumstances of the rise of populism as there are man
y of the electorate who are now open to new ideas and political parties. Kessel calls this electorate
availability. If the voters are already strongly tied with existing parties and are not easily swayed, th
en the electorate is not available to the potential populist party. However, if voters are not strongly
attached to the various established parties, then they are available. For example, in the Dutch soc
iety, after the Second World War, the society was pillarised, with the prominent religious and soci
al groups being closely aligned. However, this pilliarisation began to evaporate after the 1960s due
to the secularisation of the society. Kessel found that the structural model, based upon the tradition
al religious and social pillars, explained and justified 72% of the total votes in 1956, but in 2002, t
he correlation decreased to just 28%. Thus it is evident that more voters are now available to the p
opulist party than before, where they would have been more likely to be bound by their religious or
social identities to vote for specific parties that represented those identities. Thus, voter availability,
induced by development in various aspects of society, is an essential condition in the rise of populi
sm in democracies.
However, other than the secularisation of society such as that in the Netherlands, a key factor in th
e transition of voters being unavailable to available is dependent on the established parties. The re

What are the causes of populism and radicalism in advanced

democracies?

sponsiveness of established political parties to the development and changes in society is a key fac
tor in the availability of voters and thus is an important factor in the rise of populism. Examples of s
uch changes and development include immigration and international trade. Both examples pose po
tential threats to the citizens of the particular country as the citizens could perceive that the immigr
ants are taking up the jobs and thus are causing the unemployment and suffering of the local citize
ns. Similarly, international trade, which introduces more competitive, foreign-imported goods, could
be seen as threats to the domestic market which, not being able to compete, would suffer and thus
lead to the diminished revenue of the domestic producers while the profits are leaking overseas to t
he foreign producers. For example, according to the LPF manifesto, crowdedness in the
Netherlands caused growing societal tensions, and it was, therefore, necessary to resist
immigration of more, often unemployed and unskilled, foreigners into the country (LPF, 2002, p. 5)
If the government or parties do not respond to such worries, the voters naturally become disillusion
ed and feel that the government and the established parties do not care for their welfare, or even if
they do not feel in such a way, should the populist party point out such a problem, the voters would
be convinced that it is the case that the government and established political parties are indeed unr
esponsive to the needs of the ordinary citizens. Such an assertion provides fertile grounds for the p
roliferation of populism, which is critical of the political establishment and Kessel notes that on man
y occasions, votes for populist parties not only indicate support for the policies and ideologies of th
ose parties but also the dissatisfaction towards the political establishment. Therefore, the unrespon
siveness of the government to the development and change in the world and the subsequent new c
oncerns of the citizens is a key factor of the rise of populism.
The final factor in the rise of populism is a strong and charismatic populist leader who could convin
ce the people that he is speaking for the interests of his supporters. A dominant and charismatic le
ader is essential in the voters support of the populist party. The dominance and strong presence of
the leader in the party guarantees the personal quality of the interaction between the populist lea
der and the voters rather than having the leader perceived as a mere mascot of the party. The pers
onal engagement of the populist party leader with his voters not only contrasts with the unresponsi
veness of the established parties but also convinces his followers that he is one of the people. Es
pecially in the current society, with the burgeoning and flourishing of various media firms, media ha
s aided the populist leaders in channeling their charismatic personality. Not only does media aid th
e communication between the populist party and the electorate, the media also disseminates the di
scontent towards the political system which helps create highlight the unresponsiveness of the esta
blished parties and thus media, although it does not stimulate populism, acts as a catalyst for the in
surgence of populism.
March and Mudde draw the distinction between radicalism and extremism by characterising radicali
sm with an ideological and practical orientation towards root and branch systemic change of the
political system occupied by the radical actor and extremism with an ideological and practical
opposition to the values and practices of democracywhich may, but does not necessarily, involve
a propensity to violence. Thus it is observable that there is an overlap between populism and radic
alism, as they are both critical of the current political system. Halikiopoulou, Nanou and Vasilopoulo
u argue that nationalism is the common cause of both radical left and radical right parties. Radical l
eft parties are eurosceptic because it sees European integration as undermining the autonomy of t

What are the causes of populism and radicalism in advanced

democracies?

he nation where as the radical right are eurosceptic as it feels that integration would threaten the n
ations cultural and ethnic homogeneity. and Breuilly defines a nation as a named human
population occupying an historic territory and sharing common myths and memories, a public
culture, and common laws and customs for all members. The first two elements of the identity of a
nation are ethnic, as they refer to the ethnic origins of the nation. These are the nationalistic concer
ns of the radical right groups. The second two elements are civic elements which the radical left gr
oups are concerned with. This interesting characteristic of nationalism of being applicable to both e
nds of the political spectrum is that it the desirability of the sense of belonging is very much base
d upon sentiment and emotion, which thus gives nationalism a propensity to radicalisation. Also, si
nce nationalism only outlines the aims, but does not give solutions to achieving its aims, it become
s very easily attached to various ideologies which offer various solutions. Thus, nationalism is a key
factor in the rise of radicalism.

The three causes of populism, electorate availability, unresponsiveness of established parti

es and personal qualities of the populist leader all work together in the emergence and flou
rish of populism in democracy. The unresponsiveness of established parties are a partial c
ause of increased electorate availability, and the populist leader takes advantage of the two
aforementioned factors in appealing to the voters and gaining mass support. Radicalism in
Europe is focused on eurosceptism, and both the radical left and radical right are critical of
European integration for civic and ethnic nationalistic interests respectively.