Lessons in Populism
Some erroneously regard Populism and Democracy as virtually indistinguishable. Why shouldn’t they? Populism is the political philosophy of catering to the interests of the people, (although not necessarily in the interest of the people). Populism is not good in itself – it is, however, an excellent way of keeping the people pacified and a government in power. Democracy, on the other hand, is at least in theory; rule by the people and for the people. It is good in itself because it provides the means for the people to exercise their free will in deciding how and by whom they are being governed, for better or worse. As such, Populism is central to the functioning of democracy through its influence in drawing the people. Conversely, democracy is not necessary to the functioning of populism. Were it so, the spectacular reigns of Imperial Rome and gang would never have been.
It is important to have a solid understanding of the two and how they function together, particularly for politicians, or they may be stuck learning them on the fly. In the media age, it is not a good idea to be caught floundering. This is a lesson the current government of Canada is learning. Although Prime Minister Stephen Harper was elected democratically, his popularity since then has been consistently floundering. Speculation regarding our reserved PM has ranged from frustration at his lack of warmth to claims that he may actually be a robot. In especial comparison with neighbouring, personable and wildly popular American president, Barrack Obama, Harper was looking mighty… stiff.
Needless to say, all this talk has nothing to do with political action. But it does have to do with popularity, that central tenet in democratic workings. In an effort to remedy his image, Harper donned his now infamous blue sweater. Once, and very likely never again. The media made it clear that the Canadian public is less than appreciative of politicians taking fashion risks. On another occasion Harper defended his decision to cut funding to the arts by $45 million dollars with the argument that “ordinary Canadians” do not care about the arts, with their government sponsored galas, and that his decision was based on prioritization of needs. This comment was no doubt meant to endear him to the Canadian public, a predominantly middle-class, urban population, traditionally characterized by a down-to-earth mentality. Unfortunately, Harper miscalculated by equating the arts with the glitzy-gala art world. Artists themselves generally belong to the lower and middle classes of society. In fact, artists are rarely fortunate enough for their work to become popular for posterity. Fundraisers are the necessary ‘evils’ which provide the funds that go towards operating institutions for arts and culture, institutions which artists depend on to showcase their work. As it turns out, art does matter to ordinary Canadians, as opposition leaders and the media were quick to point out, and Harper’s popularity fell more.
Populism is neither left nor right, nor centrist, but consists of playing to the tune of the people. This is not as easy as it sounds. A key point to note in populism is that there is no formula for popularity. The most popular Prime Ministers in recent memory, Pierre Trudeau and Jean Chretien, were coincidentally both Liberals, yet again, their appeal had less to do with politics than it did with shtick and charisma. Trudeau was celebrated as a media darling with his, (and his wife’s) irreverent antics, and is remembered as the pirouetting PM. Lacking in Trudeau’s performance style, Jean Chretien nevertheless endeared himself to the Canadian public with his persona of the underdog, possessing a grittiness that kept Canadians interested if not impressed. At first glance, former PM Brian Mulroney also possessed the qualities that would win him popularity. He had the legacy blue-collar background, from which he worked himself up to the upper echelons of powers in Canadian business and then government. Yet his lack of interest in courting the public, “Popularity is bad for you. I avoid it like the plague,” and notorious spending habits condemned him arguably more so than NAFTA and the GST, as one of the most disliked political figures in Canadian history.
The blue sweater incident did little more than make Harper look uncomfortable, a look entirely at odds with the self-assured qualities a political leader is expected to embody. The comments pertaining to Canadians’ opinion of the arts were a PR fiasco, yet as witnessed by Stephen Harper’s timid but ultimately triumphant appearance at a National Arts Council fundraising gala this October 3rd, it cannot be denied that Stephen Harper is learning from his mistakes and his predecessors’ about populism. To everyone’s surprise, Harper strode onstage and performed a rendition of the Beatles classic, With a Little Help from my Friends, on piano, accompanied by celebrated cellist Yo Yo Ma. This performance and the brilliantly appropriate choice of repertoire indicated more than an attempt to make nice. It showed our PM reaching out to the public in his own earnest way and the Canadian public was happy to reciprocate. Both on the home front and internationally, the gala performance was an instant YouTube hit and Stephen Harper’s star and popularity appears to be on the rise, much to the dismay of the overly confident Michael Ignatieff. This, my friends, has been an excellent lesson on the workings of populism in the democratic system.
Related posts:
- There Are Great Life Lessons to be Gleaned by Watching Politicians and Reading Political History That’s Wilfrid Laurier from Quebec. He has no future. He...
- Stephen Harper Sings Beatles Song With Yo Yo Ma In case you missed it, here is Stephen Harper’s performance...
- Populist Party: Stephen Harper’s Conservative Criminal Justice Policy I am going to steer away from prorogation for a...
Tags: democracy, populism, stephen harper
Loading ...