• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development FAAE Ï NUMBER 136 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 42nd PARLIAMENT EVIDENCE Thursday, April 11, 2019 Chair Mr. Michael Levitt 1 Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development Thursday, April 11, 2019 In Europe, the number of populist governments has shot up from about seven in the year 2000 to around 15 or 16 at this point. The Ï (0850) average vote share that populist parties gain in national elections has [English] increased from about 8% in 2000 to over 26% now, and the trend The Chair (Mr. Michael Levitt (York Centre, Lib.)): I'm going continues to rise. We're likely to see a record result for populist to call to order the 136th meeting of the Standing Committee on parties in upcoming elections for the European Parliament. Foreign Affairs and International Development and the continuation, the second day, of hearings on our study of the threats to liberal One really striking thing when you think of the famous phrase by democracy in Europe. Winston Churchill, “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the [heart of Europe],” We are very pleased to be joined for our first panel this morning is that it's now actually possible to drive along the line of that iron by Dr. Yascha Mounk, from Washington, D.C. He's an associate curtain through countries like Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, professor at the school of advanced international studies and the Austria and Italy, and never leave a country ruled by populists. Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University. He's also a senior adviser at Protect Democracy and a senior fellow at the German That is the first point. We need to stop thinking of these as Marshall Fund. Good morning, Dr. Mounk. insurgent political movements. We need to stop thinking of them as marginal political movements. They are now in many ways the Also joining us here in Ottawa, from the University of Georgia, is dominant political force in large swaths of Europe. Dr. Cas Mudde, professor of international affairs in the school of public and international affairs. The question is why that is dangerous to democracy. Why should we be talking about authoritarian populism in a hearing on threats to I want to welcome both of our guests—our witnesses—for joining democracy? To understand that, I think it's helpful to think about the us here. Dr. Mounk, I think we should start with you since you're nature of populism, which Cas Mudde and others who are present with us on video conference and sometimes the lines go a little crazy. here have researched a lot as well. We'll begin with you, if you can take around 10 minutes. We'll move straight to Dr. Mudde, and then of course we'll open it up to all In my understanding, it is at first puzzling why we should think of members because I'm sure they're going to have some insightful some of the figures I've mentioned as being related at all. At first questions for you this morning. sight, it's not obvious why we should class people like Donald With that, Dr. Mounk, please proceed. Trump in the United States, people like Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey, people like Viktor Orbán in Hungary and people like Hugo Professor Yascha Mounk (Associate Professor, School of Chávez and now Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela as part of the same Advanced International Studies, and Senior Fellow, Agora kind of political movement. After all, they have deep ideological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, As an Individual): Thank differences, especially when it comes to economic policy, where you very much, Mr. Chair. some of them would be classified more as left wing and others more First of all, I want to apologize for not being able to be in Ottawa as right wing. in person today. I hope to do so on another occasion. They also have very different enemies. Some of them, for I want to talk about three main points. The first is to just point out example, tend to victimize and vilify Muslims. Others, Recep Tayyip that populism is no longer a marginal political force in Europe. It's Erdogan in Turkey, for example, tend to victimize and vilify actually the defining force, and that is the main source of the fracture anybody who's not a Muslim. They don't have a set of common of liberal democracy at this point. The second is to explain how and enemies. why it is that populism is dangerous to liberal democracy, and the third is to speak a little bit about what I see as a potential impact on The way to understand what does connect them, I think, is a Canada in particular. rhetorical style, a way of thinking about politics and understanding the nature of politics. What they have in common is the claim that The first thing to point out is that, around the world, the four the real reason we have political problems is because of a political largest democracies are now arguably ruled by authoritarian leader who is corrupt and self-serving and who cares more about populists, not just your neighbour to the south here in Washington, various minority groups than about people who are “like you and D.C., but also in Brazil, India and arguably Indonesia. me”. 2 FAAE-136 April 11, 2019 Therefore, they conclude that the only way to deal with this allies among the increasingly powerful ruler, are going to be problem is for somebody who truly represents the people to come disadvantaged. along, throw out all of the current power structures and stand up for ordinary folk. The second threat that is very important is to trade. You see a form of politics that is often not fact-based and that tends to incite The distinctive move here is not just a claim that there are irrational fears rather than scientific evidence. As we've seen in the problems with the current government or the current set of ongoing process of ratification for the free trade agreement between politicians and that the opposition can do better or that politics Canada and the European Union, that can lead to all kinds of needs some new faces and perhaps even new parties. All of that is a misinformation, which makes it much harder to persuade people to perfectly legitimate part of democratic politics. The distinctive agree to important trade agreements. element of these populist claims is to say that they and they alone can represent the people and that anybody who disagrees with them The third point is, obviously, military. We've seen the rise, over is, by nature of that fact, illegitimate. time, of populists, and in some cases outright dictators in NATO member states. This has put an obvious strain on this very important That helps to explain why it is that, for a time, populists tend to do military alliance. Populists often have sympathy for other dictatorial so much damage once they enter the government. regimes so that we see a real rapprochement of many countries ruled Ï (0855) by populists across Europe, or governments that have a strong populist element, with Russia and to some extent with China and The things that we observe in a lot of these countries are that as other adversaries of liberal democracies such as Canada and the soon as they get in, they start to delegitimize the opposition as United States. traitors, rather than Her Majesty's loyal opposition. They start to talk about independent institutions that would limit their power and that The last point I want to make encompasses all of that. One way of might stand up to executive overreach, in the form of courts, for thinking about the threat to liberal democracy, and the threat, example, as “enemies of the people” or as “so-called judges”. They especially to the interests of Canada, is simply from existing populist tend very strongly to attack the press, saying that it is working governments, but I think even there there is a deeper strategic threat, against the people if it is working against the government or which is uncertainty. It is very hard to sustain a military alliance and criticizing the government. it is very hard to rely on free trade agreements when you don't know which country will fall next to authoritarian populism and may, If the way to understand our political systems is as liberal therefore, cease to be a reliable partner in the military and the democracies that are committed both to individual freedom and to economic scenes. collective self-government, the first set of damages tends to be to the (0900) liberal element of the political system. It tends to undermine Ï individual rights, in particular minority rights. It tends to run counter The threat of populism comes not only through existing populist to the rule of law and the separation of powers. governments but also through making it much harder for nations like Canada to know what kind of relationship they will be able to enjoy But the damage isn't contained to that, because once these with countries like Italy, France or even Germany, in five or 10 governments have managed to make the judiciary dependent on their years. will and their whim, once they have managed to limit the free press, once they have managed to vilify the opposition and change electoral Thank you very much.

Load more

  20

Copy Link