In 1935, Sinclair Lewis published what would go on to be his most famous novel, It Can’t Happen Here. The novel describes the rise of Berzelius “Buzz” Windrip, a populist politician who resembling Louisiana’s Huey Long or, for modern readers, Caracas’ Hugo Chavez. He is described thusly:
Certainly there was nothing exhilarating in the actual words of his speeches, nor anything convincing in his philosophy. His political platforms were only wings of a windmill.
Windrip goes on to take over America, slowly turning it into a fascist state.
While totalitarianism does not threaten the United States today, and does not seem likely to in the future, Populism (a sort of soft-despotism) does. Rhetorical over-inflation—one of the hallmarks of a populist—is a continuous threat to a country whose decision-making process relies on sober conversation. And while we have had our share of sober-sounding (and minded) politicians, recent comments by presidential hopefuls should serve as a reminder that a populist trend is always a few utterances away.
What is interesting about populism in the United States, is its copy-cat quality. After all, once the political class takes note that rhetoric sells, it is hard to scale back. Take, for instance, Donald Trump’s surge in the polls, despite numerous controversial, tone-deaf statements. Below is a wonderful collection tallied by NPR:
“I see your senator, what a stiff. What a stiff: Lindsey Graham.”
“And then you have this guy Lindsey Graham, a total lightweight. Here’s a guy — in the private sector he couldn’t get a job. Believe me. Couldn’t get a job. He couldn’t do what you people did. You’re retired as hell and rich. He wouldn’t be rich; he’d be poor.”
On President Obama
“We’re tired of being pushed around, kicked around … and led by stupid people. They’re stupid people!”
On the media
“I have many millions [of followers] between Twitter and Facebook. It’s great. It’s like owning a newspaper without the losses. It’s incredible.”
The people reporting unemployment figures (i.e., the Bureau of Labor Statistics)
“Bunch of clowns. Bunch of real clowns.”
This shoot-from-the-hip approach may strike many voters as a refreshing breeze in a bog of political misdirection. There is apparently an appeal to populism, as well, in times of economic stress. Consider the Latin American approach of making false promises of economic largess to the beleaguered poor. But not all candidates are content to follow the populist tide. Jeb Bush, whom some see as a likely Republican nominee, said this in response to Trump’s antics:
“Mr. Trump has every right to have every belief he has. He’s going to run, that’s fine,” Bush said. “But I don’t want to be associated with the kind of vitriol that he’s spewing out these days.”
Trump’s counterpart on the left, or, as a recent Wall Street Journal article termed them, the “disrupter brothers,” is Bernie Sanders. The socialist from Vermont is right at home using language of economic populism to advance an agenda that clearly distinguishes his campaign from other Democrats. (Sanders, to be fair, has never changed.) Elizabeth Warren also has a populist streak, which caused early commentators to wonder if Hillary Clinton would start to fall in line with the trend. (She has.)
Ultimately, rhetoric, no matter how inflammatory, has to be backed up by deed, so the best statesmen tend to possess the right combination of speech and action. Churchill had it, and so did Reagan. FDR did as well.
Here is Churchill:
And, true to form, Churchill met the monster and defeated him.
Here is Reagan in his First Inaugural:
During this speech, 52 American hostages who had been held by the Iranians for 444 days were on their way home.
Today, there are a few younger politicians who show sparks of anti-populist seriousness.
Paul Ryan is one example. Known for his dispassionate, “wonky” quality, Ryan is the last person in Washington anyone would dream calling a populist. And yet, a recent speech at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in support of his poverty reduction proposal, demonstrates that the admixture of passion and social politics does not always result poorly. While Ryan is not running for president, other candidates, both Democrats and Republicans, might consider his approach; it cannot hurt, and compassionate conservatism, if anyone is looking for a branding idea, is not a half bad rhetorical touch. And after all, its much better than sounding like Hugo Chavez on World Water Day:
America could use more serious, non-populist politicians in the halls of power. The experience of Latin America makes this painfully clear. Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump style populists need not apply.
Jaime Daremblum, who served as Costa Rica’s ambassador to the United States from 1998 to 2004, is director of the Center for Latin American Studies at the Hudson Institute.
