The Psychological Myth of Creating Different Sides in a Democratic Polity: Why the Same Methods

There has been a historical tradition in the world, from the developing to the developed states, whether it was monarchic, dictatorial or democratic or maybe tribalistic, where the rise of populism has been a special method. There exists some traces or backup of some ideological perspective among groups or individuals, which is opaquely led by the method of populism. It seems quite interesting to me because I see that populism isn’t the treasure of the right. Even the Left used it. The best feature of populism is that its methodological ethos is useful by embracing popularity as collectivism, with an opaque or blind understanding of different incidents and demands. It does not require to be political nor social. It can work anywhere — from business to government sectors.

It is conceived that there exists a circle of politics, which creates some common kinds of statehoods — which are a democracy, monarchy, aristocracy, dictatorship and oligarchy. We generally materialize political will towards the limitation of directives and solutions in our hand, which is true. When we have a situation, where people need some space, they show resistance. Resistance indeed is not bad. It exists by the need to relinquish the obstacles. However, is it not that we follow the same trend? It is true that some level of resistance is a dire need. However, I do not support the remnant systems, which do not encourage democratically relevant dissents. It is true that there exists paradoxes towards instituting and defining how liberty in different dimensions should work out. We fight for this for years and recalibrate it in many ways. The role of majoritarianism is thereby realized as very essential and delicate because an ecosystem of majoritarianism is not about dominance in democratic systems — it is about responsibility at the peril of the majority themselves. The majoritarian scope and representation itself are not always defined by numbers in democratic systems but by the weight of action and outcome. That is why — the mindful ideas which enrich the perspective of what a democracy really is being cultivated in the minds of learners something of core institutive value. I do not wish to entail into the Darwinist and Hobbesian perspective of human life, because it might be a side of reflection, while it is very meagre and incomplete.

The simple pragmatism we can seek in a record of our own observance will have a reality sought and not an idealism imposed. We tend to be idealistic and protectionist as homo sapiens, which I appraise as the constructive nature of human society. We do not build something to destroy: we create and preserve so that our anthropological purpose exists. That is the core nature of a constitution and was estimated when the idea of mandatory multilateralism was encouraged throughout the world after 1945. Nation-states were more interested into thinking about internationalising themselves and entering into some collaborative relationships. Globalization boosted that. So, if we went wrong, that is something because we believe in a circle of polity, which populism explains properly.

Populism in Globalization: Beyond Consumerism, Fake News and Misinformation & Identity Politics

The Identity politics theory by Francis Fukuyama is appreciated and essential. The idea is capable to invoke enquiry into our minds to reckon how identities react and are often misused. However, it is not just the power of identity politics in the US, UK, EU and Asia that is prevalent. Nor is just the world of fake news and misinformation despite the contamination of cyberspace and lack of strategic literacy and approaches among laymen to tackle the social media in their daily lives. Also — you can blame materialism in commerce and the rise of pro-marketing and consumerist approaches to human life. We have thus developed a newer approach of monitoring and estimating our basic entitative and operational needs of our daily life via this cluster of marketing and consumerism. That is biggest reason why Artificial Intelligence is posed as a big phenomenon via the excessive acquisition of loyalty of consumers and not literally winning them by heart via Consumer Experience. We are also optimizing ourselves too fast, which is neither bad nor good. Thus, there is at least some backdrop prepared for the operational base of the 21st-century populism across the world. Now — after the woes of identity, information politics and consumerism — what we have seen is that there exists a deemed paradox of repetition of the same oldish mechanisms of populism around the world. Let me give you a simple example. Vladimir Putin, when became the Prime Minister of Russian Federation for the first time in his life, knew — that his military action in Chechnya will impact the Russians who literally hated Boris Yeltsin in those days of Russia. His popularity ratings, which were merely near about 4% roared in the range of 40%-50%, which is surprising. There are many more examples other than Mr Putin. One of the influential examples is Prime Minister Modi from India, whose tremendous skills made him the PM in the 2014 Indian General Elections.

So, anyone could say that democracy is a mess because the majority may turn Orwellian or worse and this concept itself can be shaken by populism. However, populism has always been a communication strategy sometimes as a general course of political resistance or political activism. People think it has to do with ideology. To some extent, yes — it has relations with the ideology of conceptions. Examples include nationalist politics prominently. Then it may include any other identity-related issue — which is encouraged. Also — identity is not to be taken into a general sense, because in the case of populist approaches to any phenomenon or problem, you can make anything an identity. Like — the Indian National Congress was accused of creating identity politics under Nehru via bidding the Hindus while promoting secularism as if it is collaterally intact. Despite the accusation’s tiniest certainty, the INC government must be credited for providing avenues to a Modern India, even if they were not perfect. Barack Obama can be condemned for his half-hearted approach to globalized trade in Asia, his popularity among the immigrants and failure in Syria — but his reforms in other areas of foreign policy and public welfare have been memorable and important. But these are examples in which we see that leaders have tried to stabilize situations. Irrespective of this — let us take note at Emmanuel Macron, the French President. He is regarded as a liberal guardian of the European Union, who promotes free trade, encourages immigrants and is an open person near to Justin Trudeau of Canada. Nevertheless, we should never forget that Macron acts a catalyst to the left and the right in France — and becomes the subject of ridicule and frustration not like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson — but maybe even harder and more grilled. The French youth encourage the populist gilet jaunes not just due to the propaganda machinery reportedly under servile assistance by Russian non-state actors. There are basic concerns in France like those over Islamophobia, migrants and culture, but apart from these — economic anxiety is also taken harshly against Macron, like an identity factor. People show resistance by their populist methods and term Macron as anti-development with other woes. Justin Trudeau is suffering the wrath of populism, even if he did best to Canada, just because of his contradictory policies and falling into the politics of immigration and not adjusting a pragmatic (not ideal) perspective over climate change despite his impressive achievements in Canada over environmental protection. Let us take one more example and end this. Theresa May in her long career has been a great politician, an outspoken Conservative party leader and a great aide to David Cameroon. She was against Brexit and tried her best to get a proper deal with the EU. Still — little due to the webbed politics of leave and remain due to Nigel Farage, Jacob-Rees Mogg and Boris Johnson and the inconsistent support of the Tories, she failed. We should not ignore her failures with respect to the Deal she made — but populism garnered differently in the UK — a country of common sense, where Socialist and Conservative parties discussed under the apprehension from the British people that things must have common sense.

However, the inference from all these examples is — we create anything as an identity factor and use the communication ethos of populism to influence people. Still — the influence isn’t viable unless the ideological backup is strong enough.

Let us Think beyond selfishness & Be More Intelligent: Not Machinically But by Pragmatic & Strategic Approaches to Reality

It is okay to have emotions to show up. It is not wrong to talk about national interests and economic anxiety. It is justifiable to protest against corrupt regimes. However, at the same time, we must realize in consciousness that it is the essential nature of democracy to encourage opportunities to throw anything at any status quo. Thus, we are lucky to be democratic. Still — is it just the end of our story of democracy. I do not think so. We must not embrace machinic stamina within our ethos of capability, mentally and physically. Instead, we must focus on being multipotentialities and change the ethics of entrepreneurship, lifestyle and employment. We maybe can change the way economics works and improve globalized capitalist systems across the world to keep our economic system, social needs and political innovation calm. It can also provide a radical change to the perspectives of resistance. Think about it. There can be innovative methods to resist, so is it not that we as humans should be innovative in terms of everything — from discussing politics to anything. Remember this — and it is possible — that when we become obsessive towards materialism and not improve methods to create an ethical society, which encourages education and employment with the ethos to create multipotentialites & give ourselves some ‘calm and peaceful’ time and space to beautiful relativity of life, we can think of advancing and becoming the real progressive humans.

Let us stop restricting ourselves to petty issues. There is still a lot to be achieved.




Host, Indus Think | Founder of Think Tanks & Journals | AI-Global Law Futurist | YouTuber | Views Personal on the Indus Think Blog

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

Falling back to life

Starve Your Principles, Not Your Children — Emergent Hermit

Bored of Boredom

A New Way of Understanding Religion

‘Nice people are seldom successful and successful people are seldom nice’- how much is it true?

Top 10 Bertrand Russell Quotes on Life

Is There an Actual Meaning to Life?

Burnout: The long shadow of idealism?

“Almost Once” by Brett Whiteley

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store


Host, Indus Think | Founder of Think Tanks & Journals | AI-Global Law Futurist | YouTuber | Views Personal on the Indus Think Blog

More from Medium

Meet the ocean’s first crypto-funded research thesis

EYFS framework update: Understanding the change

aiEDU announces multi-year collaboration with Booz Allen Hamilton

Can open science communities fill the gaps in research and innovation in Africa?