A sarcastic interpretation of the phrase “rule of the people, by the people, and for the people” gives us the very concept of populism. Populism is a political strategy that arises from within a democratic system, aiming to gain support by using expression that render the sentiments of the “common people” in opposition to the “corrupt elite.” Populists often portray themselves as patrons for the ordinary people, asserting that the current political system is engineered to serve the interests of the wealthy and influential while discarding the needs of the general public. They often utilize polarizing language to nurture a mindset of ‘us versus them’ and suggest simplistic solutions to complex issues that relate with their supporters.
Research has observed that global populism, particularly in South Asia has rabidly skyrocketed in the 21st century politics. Populist agendas often homogenize with distinctive ideologies like nationalism, liberalism, and socialism to lure in supporters. Popular politicians, religious leaders, and public influencers often use demagoguery to propagate their messages, which entrap the susceptible public sentiments and therefore serve as a catalyst for the catharsis of democracy.
Populism arises when there are social and economic issues in need of attention and when political parties meant to serve the public fail to effectively address these enduring problems. Charismatic leaders emerge as a result of increasing dissatisfaction among the population, using religion as a tool to solidify their populist narratives. The demonization and nationalism promoted by the populist leader cultivate a sense of community and togetherness among their adherents, intensifying nostalgic and patriotic emotions and strengthening the populist leader’s portrayal as a rescuer or messianic figure who can bring the nation back to its former glory.
Growing public unhappiness has been the driving force behind the emergence of populism in South Asia, where political leaders have resorted to a variety of strategies to garner support and power. its explanation will look at what led to its surge, how it affected local politics and democratic institutions, and how it undermined democratic norms and established political parties. It will also look at the particular kinds of populism that are prevalent in nations like Pakistan and India, as well as the opportunities and problems that this might have for South Asian politics in the future.
Pakistan:
Populism has become more common in Pakistani politics as a result of the prevalent social unrest, economic instability, and the crumbling of established institutions. The nation has a history of populist movement that have emerged from within the fragile boundaries of democracy as a result of the nation’s sinking faith in the policies and unfulfilled promises of the government. Poverty, ethnic and linguistic conflicts, civil wars, economic stagnation, security issues, and refugee crises have resulted in the formation of prominent barriers. Thus, the nation has undergone military dictatorships with brief periods of populist democratic regimes that gradually gave way to authoritarian systems. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), led by Imran Khan, has emerged in the recent years to steer the democratic system backed by populist tactics, of course. Under the leadership of former cricket player and ex-captain of the National Team Imran Khan, PTI focused on nonprofit organizations and philanthropic initiatives at first, such as the building and establishment of Pakistan’s first cancer hospital, The Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital in Lahore.
Following the events of 9/11, Khan became more fervent with his political activities in PTI and quickly gained scrutiny on news programs and traction by appearances in primetime talk shows. Khan was against the autocratic Musharraf Presidency and the US’s alleged support for it since the “war on terror”. He employed populist strategies, emphasizing on upholding justice and placing blame on others, utilizing his powerful position. He was arrested and expelled from parliament as a result of PTI’s strong resistance and harsh actions against the administration. Then, under Zardari’s PPP leadership, Khan functioned as an outsider opposition figure. He fiercely fought the government in the 2010s using the media, big-scale protests, collaborating with influential figures, and the iconic “Long March”, and through competing in the general elections. In 2018, Khan secured his chance to establish the government after actively opposing in the 2010s.
Imran Khan’s PTI party, despite winning the election, failed to keep its pledges. Despite having a strong mandate, the leaders prioritized winning elections and retaining power over enacting substantial change. Critics chastised the PTI administration for failing to execute the measures. Some of the main areas where the PTI government was criticized for its failure to deliver include:
Economy: Despite promises of economic growth and job creation, the economy under the PTI suffered from slow growth and high inflation, resulting in increased poverty and inequality. It had promised to end corruption in just 19 days, however it failed to implement so.
Lack of experience: Many members of PTI, including Khan himself, lacked experience in governing and running a country, which led to poor decision-making and a lack of effective policy implementation.
Internal conflicts: PTI was plagued by internal conflicts and power struggles, which weakened the party’s ability
Lack of strategic foresight and long-term planning. The party members seemed least interested in policy making and were more invested in internal party conflicts.
Khan’s government was dismissed in 2022 following a vote of no confidence. Despite the continuous exposure of falsehoods and realities surrounding Khan and the PTI during his time in office, there are still individuals who support him based on their affiliations.
India:
India, a democratic country recognized for its variety and pluralism, is facing a tendency of ‘Saffronization’ among its liberal institutions, which has politicized discourse and undermined the country’s democratic underpinnings. The term ‘Saffronization’ derives from the color saffron, which is connected with Hinduism. Populism and saffronization are inextricably linked, pursuing their goals by appealing to the public and addressing cultural issues. The right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ascended to power by employing populist rhetoric and utilizing intermediary parties such as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the ‘Sangh Parivar’. The BJP sought to create Hindu hegemony in the area, but the ‘Akhand Bharat’ concept envisioned a united, unpartitioned India that included the modern Republic of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and various ancient empires.
India’s populism is influenced by religion, nationalism, caste, class, ethnicity, and welfarism. This discourse often peaks around elections, with politicians rallying voters.
The current wave of populism in India is deemed rather unique, with the RSS (Republican Socialist Party) opposing the Congress party due to its efforts on secularism. The RSS has opposed the tricolor national flag designed by the Indian National Congress for over fifty years arguing for a saffron-colored flag and emphasizing ‘bharatmatta’ or ‘Mother India’. The RSS also prioritizes social welfare initiatives to birth role models among Hindus. However, now many once RSS volunteers have become influential figures in politics, leading their own political parties. Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Narendra Modi are such leaders whose roots are juxtaposed with the RSS. Both have employed provocative language fused with religious symbolism to form a Hindu nation. They have utilized social media campaigns, formed alliances, and exploited religious symbolism to please their followers. This has invoked a connection of BJP with their followers, exacerbating communal violence and racial hatred in India. Their polarizing methods have been so far successful, in achieving their goals.
The BJP during its past tenures, has commenced legislation to protect and glorify Hindu culture. The National Register of Citizens is one such measure, with the target of establishing India as “Hindu by character, by culture.” These measures are seen as benevolent, granting entry to Indian citizenship for selected oppressed minorities from the neighboring countries, while deporting Muslims without proper legal records. Amit Shah, a BJP member is a main advocate of these policies. Shah has also made malicious moves in Kashmir that is India’s sole Muslim-majority state, such as abrogating Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution in 2019. Consequently, splitting Kashmir and labelling it as a union territory under direct rule from Delhi.
Once again, the BJP has achieved victory in the recent General Elections in India. Despite a strong support base, the party’s policies are developing to be risky rather than beneficial. The issue of minority prejudice and bigotry in India is gathering global outrage. Moreover, the media that is facing subjugations under the Modi Sarkar, is triggering criticisms of the so called ‘electoral authoritarianism.’
Conclusion:
Wrapping up, the rabid extension of populism across South Asia renders an alarming challenge to democratic values and institutions. While it may be too early to state how this status quo will play out in the region, it is evident that the future of democracy in South Asia will continue to stagger as the proficiency of the political leaders change, and citizens alike. To recognize the dangers of populist factions and take measures to guard the pillars of democratic governance; we must unite through collective effort and a commitment to democratic values. This way we can expect to defy the might of populism and ensure that South Asia remains an example of democracy and pluralism in the region. As populism continues to gain acceptance across South Asia, it is critical for citizens and political leaders to remain woke and uphold the values of a republic. How can the democratic South Asian countries handle the chaos erupted from the surge in populism and nationalism? The solution to this question can be uncovered in the perception building and education of our citizens with respect to the dangers of populism in administration. It is vital to clarify them of how their resolute and loyal support for popular leaders is commonly based on emotional attachment rather than sensible thinking.
Bringing you updates across Asia!
Add a Comment