The rise of modern populism - Takis S. Pappas

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

In the mid-1970s, after decades of political turmoil,

1970 年代中期，

希臘在數十年的政治混亂之後，

Greece finally seemed to be on the path to stability.

似乎終於朝著穩定邁進。

With the introduction of a new constitution

隨著新憲法推出，

and negotiations underway to enter European institutions,

以及加入歐洲制度的 相關協商都在進行中，

many analysts expected Greek politics

許多分析家預期希臘政治

to follow the pattern of the larger Western world.

會遵循廣大的西方世界模式。

Then in 1981, a political party called PASOK came to power.

接著，1981 年，

一個叫做 PASOK 的政黨上台。

Its charismatic leader Andreas Papandreou railed against the new constitution,

該黨派的迷人領袖 安德烈亞斯帕潘德里歐

對新憲法有所抱怨，

and accused those in power of “national betrayal.”

並指控掌權的那些人「賣國」。

Opposing Greece’s membership in NATO and the European Economic Community,

帕潘德里歐反對希臘參加

北大西洋公約組織 及歐洲經濟共同體，

Papandreou promised to govern for the betterment of the “common people"

他保證他的治國方式會把改善

above all else.

「一般人」生活放在第一優先。

He famously declared, “there are no institutions, only the people exist.”

他很有名的宣言是：

「沒有制度，只有人民存在。」

Papandreou’s rise to power isn’t a unique story.

帕潘德里歐崛起 掌權的故事並非獨一無二。

In many democratic countries around the world,

在全世界許多民主國家中，

charismatic leaders vilify political opponents,

有魅力的領導者 會誹謗政治對手、貶低制度，

disparage institutions, and claim the mantle of the people.

宣稱以人民為名。

Some critics label this approach as authoritarian or fascist,

有些評論家把這種做法貼上 專制主義或法西斯主義的標籤，

and many argue that these leaders are using emotions

許多人主張這些領導人

利用情緒來操弄和欺騙選民。

to manipulate and deceive voters.

But whether or not this style of politics is ethical, it's certainly democratic,

但不論這種政治風格是否合倫理，

肯定是民主的，

and it goes by the name of populism.

稱為「民粹主義」。

The term populism has been around since Ancient Rome,

打從古羅馬時期 就有民粹主義這個詞了，

and has its roots in the Latin word “populus” meaning “the people."

它的字根是拉丁字「populus」， 意思是「人民」。

But since then populism has been used to describe dozens of political movements,

但從那之後，民粹主義 就被拿來描述數十個政治運動，

often with counterintuitive and sometimes contradictory goals.

通常其目標違背常識， 有時還有矛盾的目標。

Populist movements have rebelled against monarchies, monopolies,

民粹主義運動曾經 抵抗過君主政治、壟斷，

and a wide variety of powerful institutions.

以及很多種強大的制度。

It’s not possible to cover the full history of this term here.

不可能在這裡談完 這個詞的整個歷史。

Instead, we’re focusing on one specific type of populism—

因此我們只把焦點放在 一種特定的民粹主義——

the kind that describes Papandreou’s administration

它被用來描述帕潘德里歐的政府

and numerous other governments over the last 70 years: modern populism.

以及過去七十年間數個其他政府：

「現代民粹主義」。

But to understand how political theorists define this phenomenon

但若要了解政治理論家 如何定義這種現象，

we first need to explore what it’s responding to.

我們首先得要探究它因何而生。

In the aftermath of World War Two,

第二次世界大戰後，

many countries wanted to move away from totalitarian ideologies.

許多國家想要遠離 極權主義的意識型態。

They sought a new political system

它們想找的新政治體系，

that prioritized individual and social rights,

要能重視個人和社會權，

aimed at political consensus, and respected the rule of law.

把目標放在政治共識， 並且能夠尊重法律規定。

As a result, most Western nations adopted a longstanding form of government

因此，大部分的西方國家採用了

一種歷史悠久的政府形式， 叫做「自由民主制」。

called liberal democracy.

In this context, “liberal” doesn’t refer to any political party,

用在這裡時，「自由」 並非意指任何政治黨派，

but rather a type of democracy that has three essential components.

而是一種民主類型， 具有三個重要元素。

First, liberal democracies accept that society

第一，自由民主制接受社會

is full of many, often crosscutting divisions that generate conflict.

充滿許多產生衝突、相互交錯的分歧。

Second, it requires that society’s many factions

第二，自由民主制需要 社會中的許多派別

seek common ground across those divisions.

跨越分歧，尋求共同點。

Finally, liberal democracies rely on the rule of law

最後，自由民主制仰賴法律規定，

and the protection of minority rights,

保護少數族群的權利，

as specified in constitutions and legal statutes.

正如憲法和法律所明文規定的。

Taken together, these ideals propose

綜上所述，

這些理想倡議

that tolerance and institutions that protect us from intolerance,

寬容和保護我們免受不容忍的制度

are the bedrock of a functional and diverse democratic society.

是功能多樣的民主社會的基石。

Liberal democracies helped bring stability to the nations that adopted them.

採用自由民主制的國家會更穩定。

But like any system of government, they didn’t solve everything.

但就像任何政府體制一樣，

它們無法解決所有的問題。

Among other issues, an ever-increasing wealth gap

其中一個問題是貧富差距不斷擴大，

led to underserved communities

導致欠缺社會服務的族群

who distrusted both their wealthy neighbors and their political leaders.

不信任其富裕的鄰居和政治領袖。

In some cases, political corruption further damaged the public's trust.

在某些情況下，

政治腐敗進一步破壞大眾的信任。

Growing suspicion and resentment around these politicians

公民對這些政客越來越懷疑、反感，

primed citizens to look for a new kind of leader

使得他們會想要找 一種新型的領導人，

who would challenge established institutions

能挑戰既有的制度，

and put the needs of the people first.

並將人民的需求擺在第一。

In many ways, this reaction highlights democracy in action:

這種反應在許多層面上 強調民主的運作：

if the majority of a population feels their interests are underrepresented,

如果大部分的人民 覺得利益沒被充分代表，

they can elect leaders to change that using existing democratic systems.

就會用既有的民主體制 選出能改變現狀的領導者。

But this is where assertive, modern populist candidates can subvert democracy.

但自信的現代民粹主義候選人 正可以在這種情況下顛覆民主。

Modern populists identify themselves as embodying the "will of the people,"

現代民粹主義者自認是在

實現「人民的旨意」，

and they place those interests

他們會把那些利益置於

above the institutions that protect individual and social rights.

保護個人及社會權的制度之上。

Modern populists argue these institutions

現代民粹主義者主張

這些制度被自利的少數所主導，

are run by a self-serving ruling minority,

who seek to control the vast majority of virtuous common people.

那些人想要控制 佔絕大多數的善良百姓。

As a result, politics is no longer about seeking compromise and consensus

因此，政治不再

透過包容的民主制度 來尋求妥協和共識了。

through tolerant democratic institutions.

Instead, these leaders seek to overturn what they see as a broken system.

反而是這些領導者追求推翻 他們認定的崩壞體制。

This means that where a liberal democracy has the utmost respect for institutions

那就表示，當自由民主制

非常尊重法庭、新聞自由 和國家憲法等制度時，

like courtrooms, free press, and national constitutions,

modern populists disparage any establishment that disagrees

現代民粹主義者就會用 所謂的「共同意志」

with the so-called “common will."

來貶低所有與他們不同的聲音。

Modern populist parties have arisen in many places,

現代民粹主義的黨派 已經在許多地方興起，

but the leaders of these movements are remarkably similar.

但這些運動的領導者極為相似。

They’re often charismatic individuals

他們通常很有魅力，

who identify themselves as embodying the “will of the people."

認為自己在實現「人民的旨意」。

They make exorbitant promises to their supporters,

他們會對自己的支持者 做出過高的承諾，

while casting their opponents as traitors actively undermining the country.

同時將他們的對手影射為 想要破壞國家的叛徒。

But whether these politicians are sincere believers or manipulative opportunists,

但不論這些政客是真誠的信仰者 或者想操弄的機會主義者，

the dynamics they unleash

他們釋放的動力可能會 深深撼動自由民主制的穩定。

can be profoundly destabilizing for liberal democracy.

Even when modern populist leaders don’t follow through

即便現代民粹主義領導者

並未履行他們最極端的承諾，

with their most extreme promises,

their impact on political discourse, the rule of law, and public trust

他們對於政治論述、法律規定， 以及公眾信任的影響

can long outlast their time in office.

可能會遠遠超出他們的任期。