(Part 2/10 of the series “Why voting for Kamala Harris is only the first step to saving American democracy”)
Why Do Millions of Americans Feel Drawn to Populist Leaders Like Donald Trump?
When I was growing up, my father instilled in me a deep pride in democracy. He spoke of voting as a powerful actâan act that shaped our collective destiny. But as the years have passed, for many, that pride has turned into disillusionment. Today, millions of Americans feel disconnected, disempowered, and unheard. This deep-seated sense of alienation has given rise to populist leaders who promise to represent “the forgotten.” Why has this happened? Why do so many feel drawn to figures like Donald Trump, who claims to fight a system that feels increasingly distant and unfair?
The answer lies in a fundamental problem: our democratic institutions have failed to evolve alongside our society. As the world has become more complex and interconnected, our mechanisms for representation have stagnated. The result is a democracy that no longer resonates with the lived experiences of many of its citizens. Instead of feeling like active participants in shaping their own futures, people feel as if they are mere spectators in a drama unfolding beyond their control. Populist leaders thrive on this feeling of alienation, offering simple answers to complex problems and promising to take back control. To understand why populism has gained traction, we need to dig deeper into the root causes of this disempowerment.
The Appeal of Populism: When Control Slips Away
Populism, at its core, is about tapping into the frustrations of those who feel marginalized by the system. It is a political style that claims to speak directly for “the people” against a corrupt or out-of-touch elite. In the case of Donald Trump, his critique of the American systemâoften framed as “rigged”âresonates because it echoes a real sentiment among millions of Americans. While many of Trump’s claims about election fraud, a “deep state,” and institutional bias are unsupported by evidence, the emotional power of these messages lies in their ability to give voice to feelings that are deeply rooted and widely shared.
To understand the appeal of populism, consider the analogy of a crowded room where people are trying to speak. In the past, the room was smallerâpeople felt like they had a chance to be heard, and when they spoke, they felt their voice mattered. Today, however, that room is filled with more voices than ever before, and the microphone is often controlled by a few powerful interests. When people feel drowned out, when they sense that the decisions affecting their lives are made far away by people who do not understand them, they become desperate for someone who will speak for themâsomeone who will grab the microphone and say, “I hear you.”
Trumpâs success was not built on policies; it was built on this promise to be the one who listens when no one else will. He capitalized on the profound sense of loss that many Americans feelâpartly a loss of economic security or social status, but most of all the sense of losing control over their own destiny. As Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt point out in *How Democracies Die*, this sense of loss and alienation creates fertile ground for the rise of figures who position themselves as saviors, promising to upend the status quo and restore a sense of agency to those who feel ignored.
The System Is Failing, Not the People
Itâs important to recognize that the appeal of populism is not a sign that people have lost faith in democracy itself; rather, it is a reaction to a specific kind of democracy that no longer serves them. Being a scholar for most of my adult life, I cannot spare you one new concept. Our current political system forces people to fit into pre-defined boxesâyou vote for one candidate, one party, and hope they represent all of your complex beliefs and values. I call this “partitioning representation,” because these boxes are designed not to overlap. But people are not monolithic, and neither are their interests. The “one mark on the ballot” approach worked in a world that was simpler and more stable, but in our modern, individualized society, it simply cannot capture the nuance of peopleâs needs and desires.
This is where the disconnect begins. People do not feel accurately represented, and as a result, they do not feel in control. Political scientists call this “political efficacy”âthe belief that oneâs actions can influence political outcomes. When we lose that sense of efficacy, we become disillusioned. And this disillusionment manifests in different ways: for some, it means disengagement from politics altogether; for others, it means turning to candidates who promise to tear down the existing structures and rebuild them in a way that supposedly serves “the people” better.
Populism as a Call for Agency
The rise of populism can thus be seen as a call for agencyâa desperate demand to be heard and to have a say in the direction of the country. This isnât inherently a bad impulse. In fact, the desire for more direct influence over political outcomes is something that could strengthen democracy, if it were channeled properly. Populism, however, only offers an illusion of agency. Leaders like Trump promise to take back control from elites, but in practice, their solutions tend to concentrate power even further, eroding democratic norms rather than expanding them.
Here, the historical analogy of the Roman Republic serves as a warning. When the Roman elite became disconnected from the needs of the populace, figures like Julius Caesar emerged, promising to restore power to the people. Instead, what followed was the consolidation of power and the eventual end of the republic. Populism, without proper structural reform, risks repeating this cycleâreplacing one set of elites with another while failing to address the underlying issue of disempowerment.
Moving Beyond Populism: A Need for Systemic Change
The solution, therefore, is not simply to reject populism, but to address the legitimate grievances that give rise to it. We need a new way of doing politicsâone that allows for meaningful and continuous participation, where people can influence decisions in real time rather than once every few years. We need a system that provides citizens with the choice of how and when they want to participate in political decision-making. This means allowing individuals the flexibility to either directly involve themselves in a decision or delegate their preferences to trusted representatives, depending on the issue at hand and their own capacity.
Moreover, we need to broaden the scope of representation. People should not be limited to traditional political parties when deciding who represents their interests. Instead, they should have the freedom to trust and empower other actorsâwhether they be community leaders, experts, or civil society organizationsâwho are better positioned to reflect their specific values and needs. This openness would create a richer, more nuanced form of representation, one that recognizes the complexity of peopleâs identities and the diversity of their interests.
This rethinking of political participation and representation is what I call *Civil Democracy*. It is characterized by two core principles: *meta-decision freedom*, which allows citizens to choose how they engage with each political decision, and *actor openness*, which broadens the range of representatives beyond just political parties. By implementing these principles, we can counteract the forces that drive people toward populism and instead create a democracy that truly serves its people. Civil Democracy is about making sure that the microphone in that crowded room is passed around, giving everyone a chance to speak and to be heard.
Conclusion: Reclaiming Democracy from Populism
The rise of populism is a symptom of a deeper crisis in our democracyâa crisis of representation and efficacy. People feel disconnected, unheard, and powerless, and populist leaders exploit these feelings to gain power. But the solution is not to silence those who feel disillusioned; it is to give them real, meaningful ways to participate in shaping their own futures.
In the next post, we will explore how our current system of representation, rooted in the “one vote on the ballot” model, contributes to polarization and further alienates citizens. If we are to save democracy, we must rethink how we represent people and how we ensure that every voice truly matters.
No Comments yet!