“Authoritarian populism” is a term used to describe Trump’s political style.

Austrian election victory for a party with Nazi roots. An Indian writer was charged as an “anti-terrorist” for his 10-year criticism of the ruling Hindu nationalist party. Maga.

Reading the global political headlines of the past decade, Miriam Juan Torres Gonzalez and her colleagues at the Others and Belonging Institute (OBI) at the University of California, Berkeley, noticed a pattern. Politicians around the world were stirring up fear, scapegoating marginalized groups for many social problems, and in the process, persecuting journalists and undermining democratic norms. Internally, researchers at OBI’s Democracy and Belonging Forum are working to understand how such leaders behave and ultimately find ways to prevent their consolidation of power. , began trying to put a label on this phenomenon.

This pattern has coalesced into a hybrid style of politics they call “authoritarian populism.” It didn’t fit neatly into existing academic frameworks—authoritarian practices, for example, mostly occurred in democracies—so Juan-Torres focused on this increasingly popular kind of world that exploits populists. We set out to outline strategies and motivations common to leaders in the world. They use rhetoric while stirring up xenophobia and expanding their own power.

The OBI paper, published in late 2024, helps define “authoritarian populism” and allows readers to see it at work on the world stage. “Words and ideas have power. They matter,” Juan Torres said. They can frame our understanding of what should and should be done. ”

definition of authoritarianism

In the academic literature, Juan Torres has stated that pure authoritarianism often refers to a regime type. It describes how leaders govern. Authoritarians consolidate power and have broad executive powers. They often suppress political opposition, spread disinformation, incite political violence, and transform historically independent institutions into political actors that help them achieve their own policy goals. They typically use coercive force to achieve these goals rather than rallying popular support. Authoritarians like Vladimir Putin often justify their power grabs by fanning the flames with emotionally charged topics or by scapegoating marginalized groups. (Russia’s discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community is one example.)

The paper argues that one difference between authoritarian governments and fascist or totalitarian governments is that authoritarian governments do not require enthusiastic public participation (an extreme example is Nazi Germany’s Hitler Youth Program). , he explains that instead, it’s about leaving room for a private life. It is not controlled by the government.

Juan Torres said the problem with arbitrarily applying the authoritarian label today is that authoritarianism, such as torture and mass surveillance, occurs in states that have relatively free and fair elections and are otherwise democracies. He said that this practice has been in place for a long time. This contradiction further fueled the OBI team’s desire to find new ways to explain contemporary political trends.

Populism, on the other hand, occurs when leaders rhetorically divide the population into two groups: the majority and the elite. These leaders position themselves as the true representatives of the majority group. The researchers concluded that this oppositional “us versus them” struggle is central to populist rhetoric.

However, most scholars agree that populism has no core beliefs. Examples of populism can be found on the left and right alike. On the left, examples include Spain’s Podemos party and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, while right-wing populists like Geert Wilders, the fiercely anti-Islam leader of the Netherlands’ powerful Freedom Party, blame elites.

Definition of authoritarian populism

Combining characteristics of authoritarianism and populism, such as mixing primary colors, creates a unique political style called authoritarian populism.

Juan-Torres described the worldview of authoritarian populism as “like binoculars.” When viewed through a certain lens, she said, there is an identity-based outgroup threat. Second, there is a deep-rooted conflict between the people and the elites. The sense of fear and hostility that these lenses promote leads people to accept authoritarian measures to protect themselves and their in-groups. “The enormity of the threat justifies extreme anti-democratic measures,” she explained.

The term “authoritarian populism” was first used by theorist Stuart Hall in a 1979 article stoking fears about Margaret Thatcher’s crime and aggressive law enforcement policies. OBI researchers argue that modern authoritarian populist leaders are at odds with xenophobia (giving preferential treatment to an area’s “indigenous” population over immigrants) and pluralism (preferring a cookie-cutter society rather than a multicultural one). He said that he is focusing on opposing the

Unlike pure authoritarians like Putin, who maintain close ties with elites and seek to preserve the status quo, authoritarian populists blame elites and hold them responsible for the people’s problems. There are many things. (But behind closed doors, they are known to maintain ties with elites.) Juan Torres says recent connections between tech leaders and MAGA politicians are a sign that this “anti-elite” facade is (He pointed out that it shows how quickly it can be solved.)

According to OBI, leaders who exemplify authoritarian populism include US President Donald Trump, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia.・Includes Mr. Meloni and others.

Authoritarian populist strategy

Juan Torres also outlined some key strategies seen in authoritarian populist behavior. It frames the world as a struggle between two groups characterized in a simplistic way. There will be good inner groups and completely evil outer groups. This outgroup becomes the scapegoat for social problems.

Like pure authoritarians, authoritarian populists create moral panic and use excuses of existential threat to justify draconian measures, she said. This trend may be seen in the Trump campaign’s attacks on transgender rights. The Trump campaign portrayed the small number of transgender athletes as a fundamental threat to societal norms around gender, and instead of leaving room for a wide range of gender identities and expressions, it proposed strict government regulation. On the participation of trans people in these and other aspects of public life.

Authoritarian populists are likely to push the limits of democratic norms, while at least trying to maintain the appearance of representing the majority of the population, she says. This can be done by contesting elections (think “Stop the Steal”), encouraging loyal supporters to vote, or ultimately being viewed as hostile to one’s cause. This may be achieved by enacting policies that disenfranchise people who have lost their rights (e.g., through strict voter ID laws enacted since the outcome of the 2020 American election).

Juan Torres pointed to Italy’s recent criminalization of NGOs rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean as a clear example of authoritarian populism. Another example comes from the Meloni government. In 2023, the mayor of Milan in Italy stopped issuing birth certificates that listed two mothers, an administrative measure that discriminated against LGBTQ+ couples. This year, her political party “Italian Brothers” successfully pushed for a ban on international surrogacy. This, too, is an option derived from authoritarian populism’s strategy of further marginalizing society’s outgroups.

Is authoritarian populism associated with one political party or the other?

Not exactly. This style of politics is “mainly found in movements that call themselves right-wing or alt-right,” said Juan Torres, but they don’t necessarily fit neatly into a simple right-wing or left-wing spectrum.

For example, the Dutch Freedom Party includes LGBTQ+ nationals (often marginalized by right-wing politicians) as part of an internal group perceived as a threat to Islam. Additionally, Germany’s anti-immigration party BSW, which supports expanded social welfare, has split from the far-left group Die Linke.

The ideological slipperiness of these movements also comes from the fact that they are remarkably malleable, Juan Torres explained. Her paper found “significant ideological flexibility over time and even within the movements themselves.” Having constantly evolving core principles helps authoritarian populists build large coalitions.

Juan Torres said he hopes that by understanding how this style of politics works, people will learn how to counter it.

“I think authoritarian populists are very good at providing a lens through which to interpret social and political reality in times of great uncertainty,” she said. They recognize the problems people are facing and give them a group to hold accountable and accountable.

Other political groups need to consider how they can offer a counter-narrative. The big question, she said, is “how do we provide space for frustration and a sense of loss, and (that) also be positive about what we can build?”