Pluto-populists benefit from globalization but act against it
Donald Trump shouldn’t be defined by traditional left-wing or right-wing populist definition. As an outsider in politics, he didn’t show a clear stance on certain social issues before his election, and probably didn’t even care much about them. Right-wing populists pay attention to issues such as abortion, gun rights and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights, but Trump either evaded or contradicted himself on these issues during 2016 presidential election campaign. Instead of left-wing or right-wing populism, I think Trump stands for pluto-populism.
Pluto-populism is hardly populism in the traditional sense that supports downtrodden members of the society who struggle against the privileged elite. Trump, however, stands for the white people at the lower rungs of society whose living standards are better than the ethnic lot at the bottom.
Pluto-populism is a new phenomenon triggered by globalization in the 21st century. This first appeared in the developing countries with political institutions yet to improve. One example is deposed Thai prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra and her brother Thaksin Shinawatra, two telecommunication moguls who claimed to represent poor neglected farmers in the north of Thailand. People first attributed pluto-populism to immature politics of developing countries and their people’s lack of political consciousness. However, it can’t explain why there are also pluto-populists in Europe, for instance, Italian media tycoon Silvio Berlusconi. Pluto-populism is one of the consequences of globalization, which brings wealth as well as its skewed distribution that greatly promoted the idea. The plutocrats who finally became country leaders were often involved in monopolistic industries, such as real estate, telecommunication and extractive businesses. These industries relate closely with political power. How is Trump different from other pluto-populists? The answer is he dares to use extreme approach in pursuit of his political ends. Besides, he is against globalization although he has benefited from it. Just compare Trump with Ronald Reagan, and you will understand why he is not a globalist. Although Reagan also supported protectionism, he followed the rules and promoted the Uruguay Round negotiations. However, Trump intended to punish China because he believed it was unfair for the country to win more from globalization than the US does, and he then decided to neglect the rules.
An important period of change in the international order has arrived and it may create an impact as important as the dissolution of the Soviet Union. While Trump’s family still benefits from globalization, the anti-establishment and anti-intellectual president uses anti-globalization to serve his election goals.
There has been real populism in American history, like during the Andrew Jackson administration. Instead of disrupting the social system, it enlightened American people about their enthusiasm in politics which propelled domestic reforms and increased the US’ worldwide influence.
Trump is an unprecedented politician. His attempt to start a trade war with China is an example. It will harm the interest of people at the bottom of the society if a trade war is started. However, it’s too early to say the US system will therefore be sabotaged. There may still be solutions. The midterm election in November, which can be more important than presidential elections two years later, will likely demonstrate the dynamics of US society. Now that US politics is paralyzed and the unbalanced economy can’t be fixed by the social system, will Americans find an answer?