**TL;DR: When aimed correctly, populism is a force that can repel tyranny. When aimed incorrectly, however, populism can target well-intentioned institutions and eat the very democracy it created.** “Populism argues that elites are corrupt and the people need better representation” [(1)](https://news.stanford.edu/2020/03/11/populism-jeopardizes-democracies-around-world/). The United States was born out of populist calls for self-representation among the allegedly self-serving British monarch and parliamentary elites. Enlightenment-derived concepts like universal equality and inborn rights formed the basis for the populist demands of parliamentary representation and local colonial legislatures which swept colonial America. Thus out of populism ensued the great democratic “American experiment,” wherein every man – regardless of status – would be entitled equal representation under a “one man one vote” doctrine. Athenian democracy, too, rose out of populism. Dr. Lipset of George Mason University relates that, in pre-democratic Athens, “The ruling aristocracy gradually acquired the best farmlands, while many small farmers went into debt...The more wealth and privilege you had, the more you had to say about the nature of the system” [(2)](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/1995/09/13/the-birth-and-death-of-democracy/457c2046-ff94-4d5e-80cd-62fae02b7dd4/). In order to quell the rage of the indebted and disenfranchised, the Athenian sage Solon launched a process of political liberalization that would grow into a democratic Athenian government [(2)](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/1995/09/13/the-birth-and-death-of-democracy/457c2046-ff94-4d5e-80cd-62fae02b7dd4/). Even in ancient Greece, those who felt trampled on by the velvet shoes of nobility used populism as a vehicle to achieve political equality. Yet, when allowed to run its course, the same populist demand that spawned democracy amusingly re-emerges to entice democracy to eat itself. Mantling the ultimate modern populist, Donald Trump paved his road to the White House with rhetoric that appealed to the archetypal middling American worker; “Hedge fund managers are getting away with murder” and “I have a great relationship with the unions” were some of his 2016 campaign trail war cries [(3)](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/donald-trump-working-class-voters-219231). Four years later, however, he unleashed populism’s destructive side with claims that his political opposition defrauded him of the 2020 election. As is customarily populist, Trump called foul on corrupt big politics, targeting the US electoral system – and the US democratic machine by association. He ended up aiming populism’s elitist contempt at his political opponents in Washington, using populism to (physically) attack democracy in the January Capitol riots. Populism is indiscriminate in choosing victims. Its support of equality can be a useful tool for socioeconomic reform, yet can also consume democracy when turned on democratic institutions. As Stanford political scientist Anna Gryzmala-Busse duly points out, “Populist politicians and governments view the formal institutions of liberal democracy as corrupt creations spawned by crooked establishment elites – and so they systematically hollow out and undermine these institutions, such as the courts, regulatory agencies, intelligence services, the press, and so on. They justify these attacks as replacing discredited and corrupt institutions with ones that serve ‘the people’ – or, in other words, populist parties and politicians. Moreover, precisely because populists claim to represent “the people,” they have to define the people first and that often means excluding vulnerable and marginalized populations, such as religious or ethnic minorities and immigrants” [(1)](https://news.stanford.edu/2020/03/11/populism-jeopardizes-democracies-around-world/).

**Populism offers democratic renewal by bringing new policies and people into government to tackle elitism, however, populist parties can also undermine accountability and work to erode the checks and balances that exist in democracy to achieve their aims.** • As populism has a focus on representing “the people” rather than “the elite”, it offers the potential for a more representative democracy. • However, the history of populist ideology has shown that populist parties frequently focus on personality politics, meaning that the leader is often given more attention at the expense of the party and policies itself. For example, Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 US presidential election. • Academic [Zsolt Enyedi](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2017/07/24/is-populism-really-a-threat-to-democracy/#One) argues that populism is a threat to democracy because it holds the potential of providing the state with a moral status that it otherwise lacks; once a populist party is in power the defence mechanisms against tyranny with inevitably under threat as their ideology seeks to represent “the people” • Alternatively, academic [Chantal Mouffe](https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2017/07/24/is-populism-really-a-threat-to-democracy/#Two) argues the only way to save democracy is to promote progressive populism as it would mobilise common effects towards equality and social justice.

**Modern populism rarely operates without disregarding fundamental institutions which are required for representative democracy to function properly.** Modern populism generally hinders to advancement of democratic ideals: • Firstly, populist movements tend to have charismatic and persuasive leaders which claim that they alone are the answer to the citizens’ problems. For example, the late left-wing Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez once claimed [“I am not an individual – I am the people”](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43301423). As a result, they quickly churn out wild and unrealistic policies, such as [building a wall](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46748492) to keep out illegal immigrants, which easily appeal to people’s prejudices and prevent opportunities for genuine and informed debate. • Secondly, since populist leaders see themselves as the solution to the country’s problems, they brand their opposition as enemies and traitors. In doing so, [they attack key democratic values](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMNwUh0X5eI) such as the rule of law, constitutionalism and the need to achieve consensus, seeing them all as instruments of the establishment. Consequently, modern populists tend to exhibit more authoritarian characteristics, which is ultimately detrimental to democracy.