JPI Spring 2018

Poland and the United States:
Populism’s New Targets
Catherine Spangenberg
A major issue within elections is populism and its misdirection of voters through the use of
“social topic voting,” 1 , leading to the trivialization of current political issues. While this common
strategy is utilized by many, different populist ideologies must be distinguished from one another in
order to better understand their respective impacts. There are two broad populist ideologies examined
herein: soft populism and hard populism. Soft-populists market their ideas to a wide audience by
targeting the average voter, therefore relying on application of Median-Voter Theorem. 2 Since most
voters feel relatively centrist in their political beliefs, soft-populists can theoretically appeal to the vast
majority of voters and win elections. Hard populists, on the other hand, also apply Median-Voter
Theorem to their advantage. They differ, however, by relying on social topic voting and by taking
hardline stances against deviations from their ideal norm. In other words, hard populists embody the
voice of radical extremes, whether this is in support of the far-left, or more commonly, the far-right.
There are four branches, or strategies, of applied populism in elections: empty populism and
anti-elitist populism (utilized mainly by soft-populists) and exclusionary populism and complete
populism (utilized mainly by ‘hard populists’). The combinations of these ideological branches are
what motivate voters to participate in populist party rallies and to spread the populist agenda. Empty
populism references “the people” in a grandiose, unifying way. Exclusionary populism references “the
in-group”—meaning citizens who pertain to a certain race or belief system—and focuses on excluding
“out-groups” of individuals who do not reflect the ideals of the exclusionary populist’s vision. Outgroups
most often reference religious minorities, ethnicities and races but economic and social status’
are also segregatory devices used by exclusionary populists. Populists who blame outside sources for
social and economic strife can be defined as anti-elite populists. Lastly, complete populism is a
combination of empty populism, exclusionary populism, and anti-elitist populism. Complete populism
rarely occurs except in extreme cases of authoritarian rule or dictatorship.
Voters need to be aware when either a politician or party (or both) become populist because,
according to social topic voting 3 , information can easily be misconstrued or represented in a biased
fashion 4 . This is a primary reason why populism in Europe is so dangerous. Because of multiparty
governments, coalitions are often relied on to create representation for small populist groups.
Additionally, coalition governments tend to be more conservative because of greater transaction costs
brought about by efforts to unify the coalition. Counterproductively, however, this leads to decreased
efficiency.
Studies such as “How Populist are the People?” (Akkerman, 2013) have engaged the issue of
populism by investigating its classification on an individual level 5 which demonstrates how populism
1
Albertazzi, Daniele., and McDonnell, Duncan. Twenty-First Century Populism: the Spectre of Western European Democracy, Basingstoke, England; New York,
Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Print. Chapter 1.
2
Brams, Steven J. Rational Politics: Decisions, Games, and Strategy. Washington, D.C: CQ Press, 1985. Print. Ch. 4.
3
Albertazzi, Daniele., and McDonnell, Duncan. Twenty-First Century Populism: the Spectre of Western European Democracy, Basingstoke, England; New York,
Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Print. Chapter 1.
4
Mudde, Cas (2007). Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511492037
5
Akkerman et. al., “How Populist Are the People? Measuring Populist Attitudes in Voters.” Comparative Political Studies, vol. 47, no. 9, 2013, pp.
1324–1353.
JPI Fall 2017, pg. 17