Populism's Rise
A Threat to Democratic Integrity in Britain
Once regarded as an occasional insurgent force at the periphery of politics, populism has evolved into a formidable disruptor of established democracies. Across the globe, from the Trumpian convulsions in the United States to the resurgent nationalism of Hungary's Viktor Orbán, populist movements have left a trail of fractured institutions and polarised societies. Britain, too, has not been immune. Populism is no longer an abstract or foreign phenomenon; it has entrenched itself in the national political psyche, exploiting vulnerabilities in democratic governance. Its rise presents a profound challenge to the integrity of Britain's democracy.
Populism thrives in times of discontent. Economic inequality, political scandals, and cultural shifts have created fertile ground for populist rhetoric to take root. By presenting themselves as the voice of the "true people" against a detached and corrupt elite, populists leverage public frustration with the status quo. In the UK, Brexit remains the most visible testament to this dynamic. The 2016 referendum, ostensibly a democratic exercise, was transformed into a populist crusade by figures like Nigel Farage. Promises of restored sovereignty and control resonated deeply but masked the complex realities of disengaging from the European Union. Far from strengthening British democracy, the populist rhetoric surrounding Brexit exposed its fragility.
The hallmark of populism is its disdain for pluralism. A healthy democracy thrives on the competition of ideas, the balancing of interests, and the recognition that no single group can monopolise legitimacy. Populists, however, seek to divide, framing dissent as betrayal and reducing complex policy debates to binary choices. This is a seductive but corrosive approach. The rise of populist discourse in the UK has seen an erosion of respect for institutions - be it Parliament, the judiciary, or the media - that are essential to holding power to account. The judiciary, for example, faced vicious attacks during the Brexit legal battles, with one tabloid branding judges as "Enemies of the People." Such rhetoric chips away at the public's trust in these institutions and weakens the democratic fabric.
The effects of populism are not confined to rhetoric; they seep into governance itself. Populists in power often seek to concentrate authority, undermining checks and balances that constrain their ambitions. In the UK, this trend has been evident in the willingness of some political leaders to override established norms. Take the prorogation of Parliament in 2019, deemed unlawful by the Supreme Court, as a stark reminder of how populist tendencies can manifest in governance. By prioritising executive dominance over institutional cooperation, populists risk hollowing out the very mechanisms that make democracy functional.
Yet the challenge posed by populism cannot be met by derision or denial. To dismiss its appeal is to misunderstand its origins. The grievances that fuel populist movements—economic insecurity, social inequality, and political alienation—are real and pressing. For all its flaws, populism highlights the failures of traditional politics to address these issues. The challenge, therefore, is to meet these grievances head-on while safeguarding the principles of democratic governance.
One critical step is to ensure that democratic systems are not only fair but seen to be fair. In the UK, the first-past-the-post electoral system perpetuates a sense of disenfranchisement among voters whose voices are consistently drowned out. Leading democracy organisations have documented how this system produces parliaments that fail to reflect the diversity of opinion across the country, further alienating the electorate. Proportional representation, a reform long overdue, would allow for a more representative and inclusive political landscape. By ensuring that every vote counts, it could counter the populist narrative of exclusion and restore faith in the democratic process.
Transparency, too, is essential. Populists often thrive in the shadows of dark money and opaque influence. Democracy advocacy groups have highlighted how the lack of rigorous oversight of political donations and campaign spending has allowed hidden forces to shape public discourse. Cross-party initiatives, supported by civil society organisations, are now pushing for stronger transparency laws and empowered regulatory bodies to enforce them, which would shine a light on these murky corners of politics, making it harder for populists to manipulate the system to their advantage.
Equally important is the need to rebuild public trust in institutions. This is no small task. Decades of neglect, scandal, and detachment have eroded the bond between the governed and their governors. Civil society groups have successfully demonstrated how initiatives that bring citizens into the decision-making process, such as citizens' assemblies, could help bridge this divide. By involving ordinary people in deliberative democracy, these assemblies could provide a counterweight to the populist claim of exclusive representation and foster a culture of collaboration and compromise.
Ultimately, the fight against populism is not a battle against the people but for them. Populism's allure lies in its promise to restore power to the people, even as it corrodes the systems that enable genuine participation. The antidote is not to reject the concerns of populist voters but to address them through more effective and inclusive governance. Britain's democracy, long regarded as a model for others, cannot afford to stand still. Working alongside civil society organisations and democratic reform groups, it must evolve—strengthening institutions, expanding representation, and renewing its commitment to pluralism.
The populist challenge is a call to action, not despair. By confronting it with confidence and principle, Britain can reaffirm its democratic values and lay the foundations for a political system that works for all its citizens, not just for the loudest voices. As history has shown, democracy's greatest strength lies not in its rigidity but in its capacity to adapt. It is time for Britain to embrace that strength.
As somebody said, "it's easier to be angry than to be informed." The Farages and Trumps and Orbans of this world have mastered the logic of this. How to get around that and back to democratic integrity is the problem of the moment.
I agree with every word in this article about the rise of Populism, particularly the comments about proportional representation. Our first past the post system means that voters are more like football fans.
I also would like to suggest that being a good government is quite difficult. A politician has to say things to get elected. He may believe that what is best for the country is the opposite of what would get him elected. Most politicians, (Trump and Johnson excepted) know that deliberately lying is not a good look. So media and skilled politicians play a silly game. The interviewer asks a loaded question; “Are you going to raise taxes?” or “Why don’t you ban smacking?” or, “How are you going to pay for it?” and the politician gives an answer that sounds like an answer but isn’t. To those who would be almost shouting at their TV, “Answer the question!” I humbly suggest that the politician may deserve more understanding. If he says that, yes, they will raise taxes, he is likely to undermine his party’s chances, fail to get elected, and give the media something to use as a weapon. So he fills up the interview time by saying that when they get into government they will look closely at the books and ensure that the tax burden is shared as fairly as possible, or something along those lines. It is my belief that PR would result in much more nuanced interviews and discussions.
Finally our own populism specialist is Farage. Mistakes and obvious shortcomings in the previous government gives Farage-type politicians plenty of opportunity to criticise. But we all know that criticising is much easier than solving. Look at Farage’s track record. Have the Brexit promises come true? If it wasn’t tragic it would be funny. We have less (no) say in regulations we have to follow; we have much more immigration; we have much more paperwork and we are significantly poorer than we would have been as members. We Brits like to dole out blame. I put the blame fair and square on the professionals who’s job description means they had a duty to know; the journalists and politicians.