There is a term for Trump’s political style: authoritarian populism

An Austrian electoral victory by a party with Nazi roots. The “anti-terrorists” pursuit by an Indian writer for his decade-old criticism of the ruling Hindu nationalist party. MAGA.

Reading the global political headlines of the past decade, Míriam Juan-Torres González and her colleagues at UC Berkeley Institute of Otherness and Belonging (OBI) saw a trend. Around the world, politicians have spread fear, scapegoating marginalized groups for a host of societal problems and thereby eroding democratic norms, such as by persecuting journalists. Internally, researchers at the OBI’s Democracy and Belonging Forum have begun trying to qualify this phenomenon so that they can understand how these leaders operate and, potentially, figure out how to prevent their consolidation of power.

This model coalesced into a hybrid political style that they called “authoritarian populism.” This didn’t fit neatly into pre-existing academic frameworks – authoritarian practices occurred in predominantly democratic states, for example – so Juan-Torres set out to describe common strategies and motivations among this increasingly popular breed of world leaders , who use populism. rhetoric while stoking nativism and aggrandizing their own power.

THE resulting paper by OBI, published in late 2024, helps define “authoritarian populism” so readers can see it at work on the global stage. This is important, Juan-Torres said, because “words and ideas have power; they can shape our understanding of what is and what should be done.

Defining authoritarianism

In academic literature, Juan-Torres said that pure authoritarianism often refers to a type of diet; he describes the way leaders govern. Authoritarians consolidate power so that they, as the executive branch, have considerable authority. They often suppress political opposition, spread disinformation, fuel political violence, and transform historically independent institutions into political actors that will help them achieve their agenda. They generally resort to coercion to achieve these goals rather than mobilizing popular support. Often, authoritarians like Vladimir Putin justify their hold on power by fanning the flames of emotionally charged issues and scapegoating marginalized groups. (Russia discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community is an example.)

One of the differences between an authoritarian government and a fascist or totalitarian government, the newspaper explains, is that an authoritarian government does not require rabid citizen participation – a radical example would be the Hitler Youth programs in Nazi Germany – and instead leaves room for a certain privacy. which is not controlled by the government.

The problem with applying the authoritarian label willy-nilly today, Juan-Torres said, is that authoritarian practices like torture or mass surveillance have long occurred in otherwise democratic states. , with relatively free and fair elections. This discrepancy adds to the OBI team’s desire to find a new way to describe modern political trends.

Populism, on the other hand, occurs when leaders rhetorically divide the population into two groups: the majority versus the elites. These leaders position themselves as the true representatives of the majority group. This anti-establishment “us versus them” struggle is at the center of populist rhetoric, the researchers conclude.

But most scholars agree that populism has no core beliefs; Examples of populism can be found in both left and right circles. On the left, Spain’s Podemos party and US Senator Bernie Sanders are examples, while right-wing populists like Geert Wilders, the fiercely anti-Islam leader of the dominant Netherlands Freedom Party, attack elites.

Authoritarian populism, definition

When you combine characteristics of authoritarianism and populism, like mixing primary colors, you get a unique political style called authoritarian populism.

Juan-Torres described the authoritarian populist worldview “almost as if they were like twins.” From one perspective, she says, there is the threat of an identity-based out-group. On the other side, there is a deep struggle between the people and the elites. The sense of fear and antagonism that these lenses arouse leads people to accept authoritarian measures to protect themselves and their group. “Taking these extreme and undemocratic measures (is) justified due to the enormity of the threat,” she explained.

The term “authoritarian populism” was first coined by a theorist Stuart Room in a 1979 article describing Margaret Thatcher’s alarmist comments regarding crime and aggressive law enforcement policies. OBI researchers said that modern authoritarian populist leaders focus on nativism (preferential treatment given to “native” inhabitants of a region over immigrants) and oppose pluralism (working toward a more universal society instead of a multicultural society).

Unlike pure authoritarians like Putin, who maintain close ties to elites and seek to maintain the status quo, authoritarian populists often denounce elites and blame them for citizens’ problems. (Behind closed doors, however, they are known to have ties to elites. Juan-Torres pointed out that recent ties between tech executives and MAGA politicians show how quickly this facade of “anti-elite » may dissipate.)

According to the OBI newspaper, leaders who embody authoritarian populism include US President Donald Trump, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, French presidential candidate Marine LePen, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

Strategies of authoritarian populists

Juan-Torres also highlighted some key strategies she sees in the actions of authoritarian populists. We see the world as a struggle between two groups characterized in a simplistic way. There would be the virtuous group and the downright evil outgroup. This outgroup would then be the scapegoat for societal problems.

Like pure authoritarians, authoritarian populists also fuel moral panic, she said, using the excuse of a perceived existential threat to justify draconian measures. We could spot this trend in the Trump campaign. attacks on transgender rightswhich portrayed a small number of trans athletes as a fundamental threat to societal norms around gender and, instead of making space for diverse types of gender identity and expression, proposed strict government regulation of transgender participation. trans people to these and other aspects of public life.

Although authoritarian populists are likely to push the boundaries of democratic norms, they also try to preserve at least the appearance of representing the majority of citizens, she said. This could be achieved by participating in elections (think “Stop the Steal”), urging die-hard supporters to vote, or adopting policies that will ultimately disenfranchise people they view as hostile to their cause (for example, by adopting strict policies). voter ID laws enacted following the 2020 US elections).

Juan-Torres highlighted the recent criminalization NGOs rescuing migrants in the Mediterranean as a clear example of authoritarian populism. Another example comes from the Meloni administration: in 2023, Italy arrested the mayor of Milan to issue birth certificates mentioning two mothers, an administrative decision discriminatory against LGBTQ+ couples. This year, his Brothers of Italy party managed to push a ban on international surrogacy, another choice that draws on the authoritarian populist model of further marginalizing a group excluded from society.

Is authoritarian populism linked to one party or another?

Not exactly. Although this political style is found “primarily in movements that describe themselves as right-wing or far-right,” Juan-Torres said, they don’t always fit neatly onto a simple right or left spectrum.

The Dutch Party for Freedom, for example, includes LGBTQ+ citizens (often marginalized by right-wing politicians) in the group that needs to be protected against the perceived threat of Islam. And the anti-migrant BSW party in Germany, which supports expanded social protection, split from the far-left group Die Linke.

The ideological elusiveness of these movements also comes from the fact that they are particularly adaptable, Juan-Torres explained. His article found “significant ideological flexibility both over time and within the movements themselves.” Having central principles that are constantly evolving can help authoritarian populists build grand coalitions.

By understanding how this style of politics works, Juan-Torres said she hopes citizens can learn how to counteract it.

“I think authoritarian populists have really succeeded in providing a lens through which to interpret social and political reality in a time of great uncertainty,” she said. They recognize the problems people face and give them an explanation and a group to blame.

Other political groups should consider how they can offer a counter-narrative. The big question, she says, is: “How can we provide space…for grievances and losses, but (that) is also positive about what we can build?”