avril 21, 2025
Home » Trump and populists: why their success is (almost) guaranteed

Trump and populists: why their success is (almost) guaranteed

Trump and populists: why their success is (almost) guaranteed


Populists who are successful are those who are radicalized: Orban in Hungary has evolved to the final right, the second Trump is much more radical than the first, and there are examples of the same in Bulgaria. Why is that? This analyzes Daniel Smilov in Text in « Deutsche Welle »which « diary » publishes.
Economists and political scientists are currently arguing about logic in these actions and few are those who think something good is done for the world or even for USAS But the « tariff drama » has played out to test a theory of populism that can be called « negotiation ». It aims to explain why such actions, which are on the border of common sense, and perhaps beyond, are attractive to many voters in developed democracies. And such voters who are not extremists and radicals, but belong to the moderate middle -class and even wealthy strata of society; They are educated and cannot be called « losses » by globalization or liberal democracy in any way.
Behind Trump is (almost) the entire Republican Party, which is supported by very wide circles of people going far beyond the Trump electorate.

There are duties, no duties – 18 hours in which Trump is almost 180 degrees

The politician as a negotiating instrument for pressure

The negotiation theory of populism claims that a successful politician should be a negotiating instrument to pressure opponents. To this end, he must create a serious threat of much harm to the opponent and at the same time create a situation of insecurity. If there is a formula of success for the populist, then it is relatively simple:

RH (a real threat to the damage to the opponent) + H (environment of uncertainty) – PB (real self -sacrificed harm to themselves, to their own voters and the country as a whole). If the value of this sum is positive, the negotiating populist may claim to have put his opponents in a difficult situation and they must make concessions. However, if the amount is negative, however, the negotiating populist risks being shot alone in the leg.
This calculation also explains the pirouettes of Donald Trump With regard to his tariff policy. He was able to create a great real threat to his opponents (RH) and even greater uncertainty in world trade (H), which created him negotiation pluses. As a result – even if we put aside his praise – some countries still wanted to negotiate with Trump (Japan and Korea, for example).
At one point, however, the situation became complicated because the PB (the real harm to the US) began to increase. Whether Because of China’s refusal And the EU to put up with the « tariffs », whether for other reasons, but interest on the US government debt began to grow, and the whole account turned out to be the devil of a donkey. With a debt of about $ 36 trillion, the United States has a debt of about 120% of GDP – similar values ​​to those of Italy.

How fake news moved in minutes $ 2.5 trillion. Wall Street

How fake news moved in minutes $ 2.5 trillion. Wall Street

But while Italian debt is mainly to Italian banks and the euro area, US debt is held by Japan, China and many other countries. Without the role of the dollar as a world currency, the US will be more vulnerable to Italy, which (fairly or not) is more vulnerable to it as a problematic link in the euro area. Therefore, changes in US debt interest rates and the dollar place in world trade are the key indicators of real harm that the United States can self -inflict. Both indicators turned red in the middle of this week. Which forced Trump to give up the full volume of duties.

Why do the voter like such opportunism?

With the globalization and affirmation of liberal democracy In the developed West, the opportunities for a great change in politics have decreased even with a major political victory in elections. The world is interconnected and – as it becomes clear – if you want to self -isolated, the price of a smartphone will become triple and your car will probably not be manufactured at all. The same is in domestic policy – if you want to radically change taxes or restrict judicial control, you will face many political and constitutional restrictions that will be you.

All this leads to a certain frustration of the voters and they begin to vote for negotiation rams that promise to « break » and « change » the whole system, but to provide their voters with larger victories and greater discounts.

In an ordinary situation, such « anti -system » players would vote a dozen percent in the marginal parts of the electoral system. But the frustration that nothing can change, also causes some « centrists » to vote purely tactically for the negotiating ram.

These voters do not want the system to change radically, but they want their profit from it to be bigger. Most Americans do not want the world order, created mostly by the United States, to end, but they want to win even more from it. Therefore, they choose the opportunistic strategy and vote for the negotiating populist.

Toy Crying: The inevitable radicalization

Negotiation populism is the instrument by which populist parties emerge from the political Mimans and head to the mainstream. This is the instrument through which they earn the votes of the established, centrist parties. The demands of the negotiation populists are deliberately raised very high to scare the omnipment of opponents and to make them prone to compromise. For example, by putting on the table out from the EU and NATO, the introduction of bans on sexual and other minorities, a ban on migration in the country, deportation of uncomfortable, laws for foreign agentsclosing universities, media ban, etc., you can « trade » the most insane things of the listed, say, a ban on migration plus lower taxes or higher budget costs for certain social groups.

If such a bargain happens, you will eventually even get a public relief that will congratulate populists for their understanding. There will even be those who will claim that populists have already become part of the mainstream and that the taboos against them – as far as they are – must completely be dropped.

The problem is that the negotiating populist must constantly radicalize his requests in order to create the RH – a real threat against his opponent. Because if he always gives up his more radical requests, the voter will decorate him as a weak « negotiation ram » and stop voting for him.
And indeed, populists who leave a more lasting mark are those who are radicalized: Orban in Hungary has evolved from the youth section of the liberals to the final right; The second Trump is much more radical than the first; Berlusconi in Italy was displaced by salvini and melons (which we will see how it will develop further).

Trump turned off smartphones and computers from import duties

Trump turned off smartphones and computers from import duties

In Bulgaria, from an Attack in 2005, which timidly raised a voice against the EU, now we have a pretty serious Cohort of Anti-EU and anti-anti-players who are increasingly acceptable partners for other parties. The last major change is the conversion of Delyan Peevski and a « New Beginning » to the Eurosceptics in the EU.

How will the negotiation populism end?

Of course, there have always been an isolationist voices in the US that wanted the United States to be self -sufficient and fixed in itself. There are also white supplies, homophobes, etc. – Like in most developed Western societies. These groups would certainly support American isolationism internationally and the break with liberal democracy in domestic policy. But the point is that they are a minority and would never win without the support of those « centrists » who vote for Trump as a « negotiated populist ». Centrists would be very disappointed if the United States really retired from globalization and became a supremasist non -liberal democracy.

Such a lasting development of things in the US is very unlikely. But temporary mistakes with quite tragic consequences can happen as a product of the inevitable radicalization of negotiation populism. The example of Brexit is indicative – many in the United Kingdom voted for Brexit with the idea of ​​improving the UK’s negotiation position against the EU, but Things escalated and ended with a « firm » exit of the British from the EUS

On Wednesday on the exchanges, a record for billionaire profits was set

On Wednesday on the exchanges, a record for billionaire profits was set

The same can happen with the American exit of the globalized economy – the threat to it can not only lead to a better negotiation position of Trump to trading partners, but to a trade war and self -designed damage to the US and the world of a giant scale.

Is Democracy capable of recognizing fascism

Is Democracy capable of recognizing fascism

The 1930 example of the 1930

In 1930, the US adopted The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which imposed 20% duties of foreign goods in response to the collapse of the US stock exchange since 1929 and the major depression began. By universal agreement, this policy only worsens things. Isolationism from the first year of elected in 1932 RooseveltS The shrinking of world trade three times, as well as the sections of the US loan to Germany leads to the collapse of the German economy. If at the 1928 election Nazis They have 2.6% in 1932. They reach over 33%.

The difference with the present moment is that politicians in the United States since the 1930s have acted under the pressure of events: they have reacted panic to the 1929 collapse. Now the danger is to achieve the same effect, creating great uncertainty in world trade and deliberately follows policies that can bring the world system to collapse. As paradoxical as it may be, « negotiation populism » is something that seeks logic and tools to extract political advantage in such situations.

The « recession of democracy » in the EU and Bulgaria is also deepened

And in Bulgaria it is no different

Bulgaria There is no isolated island of the processes described. On the contrary, we have a very serious experience with the « evolution » or « degradation » of populism from its more central forms to increasingly radical manifestations. Georges Ganchev in the 1990s and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha at the beginning of the new century were the « centrists » populists, who changed the system with their personal charisma and the placement of personality over the procedure and institutions.
This mild Berlusconi populism was replaced by sharper forms of anti-European (« attack ») and anti-corruption populism (GERB from 2007-2009). Radicalization later deepened until it reached « Revival »« Sword », « greatness ». ITN are also an interesting phenomenon that wanders between the centrist and the more radical forms of populism.
In general, however, it is clear why centrist voters can reach for the newsletter of more radical players – because they see a « negotiation » benefit for themselves from such a move. In such a situation, the opportunism of the voter is allied with the opportunism of the « negotiating populist ».

The result is interesting times, saturated with very high uncertainty and unpredictability. It is in such times that it is good for people not to watch only thin profits for profit, but to recall the fundamental values ​​of freedom and democracy. Both internally and internationally.

Prof. Capriev in his new book: Populism has a natural urge to authoritarianism and totalitarianism

Prof. Capriev in his new book: Populism has a natural urge to authoritarianism and totalitarianism

* This text uses ideas from a larger study of a team of Sofia University, funded by the European Union – Nextgenerationeu, through the National Plan for the Recovery and Sustainability of the Republic of Bulgaria.



View Original Source