Photo by Phil Scroggs on Unsplash

Ezra Klein interviews Pippa Norris, Nov. 1. 2022

​After the Cultural Backlash

Imagining a Process Populism

Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of "the people" and often juxtapose this group against "the elite". It is frequently associated with anti-establishment and anti-political sentiment. Authoritarian populism combines this view with the image of strong leader who, unshackled by conventional norms, speaks for the people. The coming election in the United States signals the power of authoritarian populism. This kind of populism is not unique to America; it is emerging all over the world. Can an alternative populism be imagined: a process populism? Your final exam is to imagine that alternative theoretically and practically, in eight to ten typewritten pages, using materials from this course and your own experience.
​

I have just finished teaching a course at an imaginary university called Process and Authoritarian Populism. Now it's time for the final examination. 

Our core texts for thinking about process and politics were Bruce Epperly's Process Theology and Politics and the slideshows of the Cobb Institute on Ecological Civilization and Just and Compassionate Communities.

Our core text for understanding authoritarian populism was Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism by Pipa Norris and Ronald Inglehart. Norris is ranked as the most cited political scientist in the world. As a complement to the book, we listened to her interview with Ezra Klein. (Click here. If you haven't heard it, it's well worth listening to.)

My students and I were impressed with Norris' idea that authoritarian populism is rooted not only in material and economic realities, but more deeply in a sense of cultural disorientation suffered by many who feel left out of, and alienated by, socially liberal values: "woke" life and discourse. According to Norris, the socially liberal "woke" culture has its roots in the 1960's with the emergence of a generation who adopted what they thought of as "post-materialist" values emphasizing individual freedom of expression, and who diverged from their parent's generation whose values, shaped by the world wars, emphasized security and stability, patriotism and religion. The generational clash continues today as the woke generation, self-styled progressive, witness their declining influence. A new generation has emerged, not easily pigeonholed in terms of age, class, ethnicity, or region, that rejects the woke values of hyper-individualism, wanting to reclaim a time (partly imagined) when life was more community-based, patriotic, and traditional. Hence the axiom in America: "Make America Great Again" where the people, not the "woke" elite, reclaim their power.

​As a final exam I'm asking my students to accept the argument of Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism and to imagine an alternative populism that is process not authoritarian in spirit. I call it creative communitarianism.

Such communitarianism builds upon the four hopes of the process movement: whole persons, whole communities, a whole planet, and holistic thinking - with a focus on whole communities. It is neither progressive nor traditional but rather both: emphasizing the importance of such communities having roots and wings: that is, continuity with inherited values, including religious values as well as openness to new futures. 

I am hoping that, as they develop their image of a process populism, my students might speak to those who do indeed feel left behind (or have felt that way until recently) even as they also speak to the interests of liberals and self-styled progressives. I've asked them to enunciate the core theories and policies of a creative communitarianism, and also to speak to a constructive role that religion might play in it, in the spirit of Bruce Epperly.

​I've encouraged them to try out their vision on friends and foes from divergent political stripes: liberals, conservatives, leftists, progressives, and those on the far right. And, if they wish, to name a contemporary political leader who, in their view, represents the possibility for a non-authoritarian populism, for whom they might cast a vote.

​This page is an invitation for you to take the final in your own mind and imagine your own version of a process populism. Or, if you prefer, to deny its very possibility, assuming instead that culture wars and political polarization are here to stay.

Bruce Epperly doesn't think so, and I don't either. For my part, I think his book often points in the needed direction, albeit with a progressive leaning. One thing is clear, things are changing and an old "woke" guard is passing. The future is open.

​- Jay McDaniel

On the Rise of Authoritarian Populism since 2010
​
Many people felt that the things which they took for granted, the things which they regarded as important for themselves and their community and their country, those things were being lost. And as a result, you saw increasing support for what we term in our book, authoritarian populist parties. And this is a group, which you can call them radical right, that’s a very common way of labeling them, but they’re not always right-wing in economics. Sometimes they’re fairly positive towards public spending, for example, in Scandinavian countries. What distinguishes them is that they really want to restore and push back against social liberalism, or as we call it in the contemporary parlance in the media, the woke agenda.

That’s…what’s going on. And in particular, a nostalgia for the past, because after all, we’re talking about people’s social identities. You can disagree about things like taxing and spending, but you can cut the pie in lots of different ways. And we can kind of agree to disagree.

But when it comes to issues of what you can say, for example, what is socially acceptable in terms of race and ethnicity or what socially appropriate in terms of issues of gender or sexuality, then a sense — it is really getting at the heart of who you are, who you feel that your identity is, what you can be proud of, what your status is in that society, and what your moral values are.


​

​On the Silent Revolution of the 1960's (challenging traditional values and against which populists revolt)

It became much more of a secular focus rather than religion, much more of a cosmopolitan focus rather than one that was based on nationalism or nativism. And so a generation grew up. And you can think about the hippies and a wide range of other movements around that period that challenge traditional values.

Now, the silent revolution was such because it was a gradual process. It wasn’t one which produced that many changes that were that visible. But it was one that gradually, rather like a rat in a python, went through the population. As the older generations died out, gradually, just through natural causes, as they were replaced by their children and their younger generations, so values in society as a whole started to change.


- Pippa Norris

​Defining Terms
​

WHAT IS AUTHORITARIAN-POPULISM?

Populism is defined as a style of discourse reflecting first order principles about who should rule, claiming that legitimate power rests with 'the people' not the elites. It remains silent about second order principles concerning what should be done, what policies should be followed, what decisions should be made. 
 
Authoritarian values endorse the priority of tough security to protect the tribe against threats from outsiders, adherence to conventional group norms, and loyal obedience to tribal leaders.  

The danger of this combination is that Authoritarian-Populism corrodes principles and practices at the heart of liberal democracy. Unshackled by checks and balances, claiming to speak for 'the people', strongman leaders trample upon norms of live-and-let-live fair play, constraints on partisanship, the protection of civil liberties, and the value of consensus-building; the importance of a bright line clearly separating personal and political interests; the unambiguous rejection of political violence and the active defense of human rights; the value of tolerating a multicultural diversity of lifestyles, beliefs, and ideas; and the importance of cosmopolitanism, open borders, and multilateral cooperation.

It is worth emphasizing that not all populists are authoritarian, and not all authoritarians are populists, by any means. The establishment can also be challenged to advance a progressive agenda. But Authoritarian-Populist parties and leaders blend both these potent appeals.  

- from Pippa Norris' website
​

Pippa Norris (born 10 July 1953) is a political scientist specializing in comparative politics. She is the McGuire Lecturer in Comparative Politics at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, and she has served as the Australian Laureate Fellow and Professor of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney, and Director of the Electoral Integrity Project. She is the author of many books, including a recent one dealing with the rise of authoritarian populism. She is interviewed by Ezra Klein of the NY Times about her book.

Process and Politics
​

Centered Pluralism
​

For process theologians, the image of God as the center animating all things is both personal and political. Centered and inspired by God, every creature deserves reverence. While issues of power and survival are essential to personal and community survival, the inherent value of human and non-human life requires ethical and political consideration. Moreover, if the circumference of divine love, creativity, and wisdom, is infinite, then no one falls outside the circle of ethical and political concern. Accordingly, process theology advocates a “centered pluralism” in religion, ethics, relationships, politics, and foreign policy. Diversity is essential to reality. In a pluralistic world, no perspective is absolute or final. In fact, the nature of spiritual maturity involves growing in wisdom and spiritual stature in which our own deepest values grow in relationship with the values of others.
 

Centered pluralism does not suggest that all perspectives equally reflect God’s vision. It does assert that the many voices of the body politic are positive, rather than negative, in the evolution of healthy democracies... Democracies flourish because of diverse opinions. This affirmation of diversity, like the separation of powers of the USA Constitution, places limits on unrestrained profit, power, and uniformity. It checks paternalistic, dominating, and monarchical tendencies, especially among heads of state and majority groups. While there are temporary winners and losers in the pathway of democracy, minority voices must be welcomed as sources of alternative and complementary wisdom, experience, and perspective. Democracy depends on an empathetic listening to the experiences of minorities, underrepresented groups, and politically “inconsequential” communities as much as following the policies established by the privileged and powerful.

Finding common ground is essential for the flourishing of democracy. But, common ground requires fidelity to the truth, commitment to factuality, recognition of our imperfection, and willingness to honor the “loyal opposition,” grounded in recognition of our common identity as God’s beloved children and our willingness to look beyond our ideologies to achieve the greater good for the community as a whole. In short supply in the current USA political environment, finding common ground requires learning from contrasting positions that complement and refine our own position. Accepting good-hearted critiques of our own positions prevents us from making unnecessary mistakes as we expand our vision of political possibility. Communication and flexibility are essential, and in imitation of God’s relationship to the world, we must balance our creativity and initiative with receptivity to others’ viewpoints.

I believe that the philosophical insights of the United States Declaration of Independence and Constitution can be illuminated by the process-relational metaphysics of Alfred North Whitehead and his theological followers. The Declaration of Independence and Constitution reflect the creative transformation of the philosophical and religious vision of Enlightenment Deism with that of more traditional Christians. From the beginning, pluralism and change were embedded in the American experiment and the adventures of ideas that gave birth to the quest for a more perfect union.

Epperly, Bruce G. Process Theology and Politics: 43 (Topical Line Drives) (p. 14). Energion Publications. Kindle Edition.