populism definition us history

populism definition us history

The Evolution of Populism in US History: A Comprehensive Analysis

1. Introduction to Populism in US History

Populism in the US is unique due to the sociopolitical and cultural conditions built upon national laws and the system of checks and balances that guarantee popular sovereignty and formal democracy, established on the so-called Madisonian democracy. The longstanding history of civil society and of written founding principles set out an environment of recognized stability, particularly after the institutionalization of formal democracy after the Civil War. The evolution of populism based on US society is, nevertheless, linked to three fundamental historical phases that have left an indelible mark. This study will describe: (i) the proposed reform movement of the late 19th century, connected to the reaction of the traditional agriculture-based society to the structural changes in society. This bicentric society not only figured rural bourgeoisie but also the new industrial proletariat; (ii) the New Left of the 1960s, a movement coming from the postwar generation that was critical of essential values inherent in democracy/ecological values with wide representation in the institutional system and with consequences for the form of political representation, and (iii) the Tea Party and Donald Trump’s movement and other more recent experiences that seem to represent the same sociopolitical tensions accompanying the historical context.

The United States presents a very specific environment for many reasons, with its most relevant characteristics favoring the development of an original form of populism based on the democratic tradition and founding principles that the country inherited from its origin. The founding fathers established a political order upon a popularly-approved written constitution as a mechanism that ensures a society where people can check the abuses of government. The fight for the permanent evolution of US society led to the creation of many forms of populism. Some of these movements gathered broad popular approval and played an important role in US history, motivating movements around the world. This chapter analyzes the most relevant stages of the evolution of populism in the US, also highlighting the most determining ones in terms of populism as a counter-order and as a spiritual demand. There are three such stages in this process that we present in a comprehensive way here.

2. Origins and Key Characteristics of Populism

The differences among the definitions are due to the orientation taken by different interpretations to specific aspects, the supposed relationship between the different aspects, the nature of the populist actors (political or mass leaders, followers, parties, or movements), the functional independence or interdependencies of the different aspects, the aims of the actors labelled populists, and the historical and geographic context. All populisms, whether political or ideological, rely on an oppositional and Manichean narrative based on the concepts of being and conformity, sympathy, and empathy. In the case of political populism, particularly political communication, folk and populist talk is the form taken on in opposition to the institutional and authoritarian discourse/models of the institutionalized world. The model is centered on the inculcation of fear, projection, otherness, distance, and lack of understanding vis-à-vis actors of such a system. From a political viewpoint, the reactive and conservative orientation of political populists is evaluated positively.

The definition or concept of populism is very complex and not unique. Populism is a political, social, and communicative style or political ideology that seeks to resolve the apparent opposition between people (populus) and elites. According to Gid Tanner, the core elements of populism that are relevant across time and context are: (a) a form of political mobilization that is based exclusively or predominantly on noninstitutionalized and nonprogrammatic discourse; (b) the construction of a horizontal divide between the politically homogeneous and morally pure in-group and the corrupt and harmful out-group; (c) the moral distinction between the in- and out-group is grounded in a strong identification of and sympathy with the common (people) that is based on shared experience; (d) the monistic interpretation of and response to societal problems. Most contributions are based on this framework and underline that it is a process that concerns both style and ideology in a bidirectional manner.

3. Major Populist Movements in US History

This chapter’s approach toward understanding the roots and consequences of right-wing populism has more of a historical and analytic cast. It aims to both identify and discuss the general tenets of the capitalism vs. state pro-statist-populism that all such movements reflect. Going a bit farther, the chapter advances hypotheses as to why populism began, why it increases, why its trajectory changes, and with it, why it then declines. And how do populism’s altering impacts best acquired. While these propositions are advanced against the backdrop of a specific people: primarily white male workers in manual and unskilled labor positions with relatively low horizons, finding it hard to make ends meet or satisfied with succeeding, they are essentially general in nature, pertaining to state capitalism. They are to be judged by the extent to which they reflect the nature of right-wing populism.

During the course of its history, the United States has witnessed a number of movements that some social scientists have labeled “populist.” These movements have occurred at roughly thirty-year intervals beginning in the early 1890s. The most recent one, which has elicited a good deal of popular and scholarly attention, has spawned entire books devoted to the topic. These studies, which generally embrace a feel or a moral agenda characteristic of journalistic and polemical accounts, cover a variety of issues. Some of them situate the contemporary white lower class in the context of the overall capitalist system, using populist economic and political theory as a basis for their analyses. Others emphasize political protest as the genesis of this class’s feelings of disenfranchisement and point to recent conservative successes in appropriating and orchestrating such protest on behalf of the elite.

4. Impact of Populism on American Politics and Society

Most scholars will not agree with the author’s assessment of the impact of the People’s party on American society and political society. However, the author’s research supports the briefly mentioned findings. The party may have had an even greater effect than introduced earlier, but any form of a lasting organizational effect of the Populist Movement in partisan politics was absent. At the end of the 1890s, the majority of elected Populist officeholders joined the Democratic party or the Republican party or formed a new party. Most Populists in electoral politics had left the party by the presidential election of 1900. A small grassroots rural South held on. But certainly, if a third party emerges in the twentieth century, the People’s party’s principles and the party leaders are referred to often for guidance.

The success of the Populist Movement was its ability to move outside the traditional two-party-dominated political institutions in the United States. In doing so, the People’s party made major democratic reforms happen. The direct primary for the nomination of state candidates was introduced in 1899. In addition, those members of the Populist party who were later elected to office most often served the majority of the people of all classes and races in their constituencies. The membership truly came from and represented the grassroots of American society. However, in addition to the above-mentioned achievements of the Populist Movement, there was no lasting structural effect on the political society.

5. Conclusion: Lessons Learned and Future Implications

Throughout American history, from the American Revolution to the Civil War, to the populist and labor movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and to the 1960s civil rights movements and so on, these movements have always sought and received the support of the people, the common people – without them these movements cannot grow and inevitably decline. The significance of the populist movement as a model for understanding the current phenomenon is that, like many populist movements of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, these movements today are fundamentally a reaction of the working class to the way people have been affected by economic inequality.

In conclusion, this chapter offers a unique analysis of the populist movement and the factors that gave rise to this powerful political force in the late 19th century. Although the relationship between those who had economic power, such as owners of large corporations and banks, and the working class was extremely unequal, the organization of the working class and the voice of the discontented were vital to the struggle against great economic power. Prohibited from participating in the political process, UN organizations often resorted to the political speech of social change and the appeal of popular movements.