essays and opinion

---

 People are talking more and more about fascism, and often confusing it with populism. I argue that we need to understand how fascism stands out. It has never been just a matter of words or beliefs. It is a leader-centered cult that uses violence to eliminate opposition.

Scholars and pundits – few of whom are populist supporters themselves – like nothing more than to call out the seeming foolishness of populist voters. However, I argue that there is frequently a rational explanation behind their choices. Populists may be a lot of things, but they are not irrational.

White working-class support for Donald Trump is not irrational once class is understood beyond income to include lifestyle, values, and social institutions such as public education, family structure, and community life. Many working-class Americans perceive these domains as threatened by elite cultural dominance and institutional neglect. Their support for Trump thus reflects a rational defense of their way of life, not a mere backlash of ignorance or resentment. 

Misinformation is less pervasive than widely claimed. Few people truly believe conspiracy theories like QAnon, and most evaluate information skeptically. Cognitive biases, not gullibility, explain susceptibility. Beliefs often reflect group loyalty more than ignorance. Persuasion works best through empathy and shared understanding, not confrontation or partisan framing. 

Populists are unlikely to lead Australia’s 2019 federal government, but voters with populist attitudes may still decide the outcome. These attitudes—strongest among supporters of right-wing minor parties—are linked to lower education and socioeconomic status rather than xenophobia. Ironically, their preferences could help keep the Coalition in power. 

For the 20 years after British colonial rule in India ended, the Jawaharlal Nehru-led Congress party engineered a remarkable state of democratic stability through the distribution of patronage to its political supporters. But within a few years of Nehru’s death in 1964, India’s party system descended into crisis. 

Comparative evidence shows that when populists gain power, democratic institutions weaken. Judicial independence falls, checks and balances erode, media freedom and civil liberties decline, and elections become less fair. While U.S. institutions are stronger, populist rule like Trump’s elsewhere has consistently undermined liberal democracy’s core safeguards and freedoms.