Left vs. Right Populism: The Case Study of Spain

Introduction To Populism

Populism has been one of the most prominent themes in political discourse worldwide over the past two decades. Various political events, such as Donald Trump's rise to the U.S. Presidency in 2016 or Brexit, have been portrayed against the backdrop of populism's rise. Consequently, in day-to-day politics, populism is often used pejoratively to discredit and exclude political opponents as anti-democratic and polarizing. Similarly, parts of the academic community are highly critical of populism, depicting it as a negative force that threatens the liberal democratic system (Rummens, 2017; Urbinati, 2019). On the other hand, some acknowledge the potential dangers sometimes associated with populist political expressions but nevertheless view populism as a potential remedy for certain shortcomings of the current democratic system (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2013; Mouffe, 2018). Both approaches, however, tend to discuss populism in absolute and monolithic terms.

Yet, when examining instances of populism, it becomes clear that there are nuances, and the debate on this phenomenon should account for these differences. The term "populism" encompasses left-wing movements in South America, such as Chavismo, initiated by Hugo Chavez, the former Venezuelan President; Western European right-wing populist parties in countries like Sweden and Germany; and celebrity populists like former Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi. This diverse list of political actors suggests that not all developments described as populist can be condensed into a single concept. Thus, this article will explore the nuances of populism along the left-right axis, specifically focusing on the case of Spain.

Figure 1: Spanish Civil War Republican Poster published by the International Brigades (n.d.). Brandeis University.

Defining Populism

As previously stated, populism is often conceptualized as a universal term. However, there is no consensus on what populism encompasses or what it means for democracy. To begin, there are various ways to conceptualize populism. Is it a thin ideology, a discursive activity, or rather a political strategy? Proponents of the political strategy approach define populism as a “political strategy through which a personalistic leader seeks or exercises government power based on direct, unmediated, uninstitutionalized support from large numbers of mostly unorganized followers” (Weyland, 2017, p. 51). The fundamental elements of this definition are “the leader” and “the people,” with the direct and strong link between the two. This connection is based on deliberate strategies employed by the leader to mobilize and activate mass support. Another implication of this definition is that the connection between “the leader” and “the people” is not institutionalized, which makes populism a problematic force for democratic institutions (Weyland, 2017, p. 51). Therefore, the political strategy approach strips away any ideological or cultural notions and reduces populism to the political strategy employed by a charismatic leader, which is often derogatory towards democratic procedures.

On the other hand, the ideological approach argues that populism is

a thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately divided into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups: the "pure people" versus "the corrupt elite", and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale ("general will") of the people (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2013, p. 150).

The core argument of this definition is that populism is a set of ideas, though limited, often accompanied by another ideological position, such as nationalism. This approach, too, emphasizes the role of the people and the appeal to the general will. Nevertheless, it is more ambivalent toward the idea that populism is necessarily dangerous for democracy, leaving room for the notion that populism can act as a corrective (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2013).

Lastly, the discursive approach to populism fundamentally challenges the arguments against populism presented by the previous two approaches. It places populism at the center of “the political.” Ernesto Laclau, an Argentinian political philosopher, argues that populism is “the expression of a specific political rationale” (Peruzzotti, 2019, p. 34). As such, it is an ontological creation of the political imaginary of ordinary citizens. Consequently, populism is the articulation of the political creation of the people. In simpler terms, it is a symbolic and discursive construction of an “us-versus-them” dynamic, or rather a way to unite different identities and demands under a broader political umbrella. According to this view, any form of representative democracy is impossible without populism (Peruzzotti, 2019).

Figure 2: Barricade on the Rue Soufflot by Horace Vernet (1848-1849). Universidad de Salamanca.

Each of these approaches provides meaningful and important insights into populism. Still, this article argues that attempting to define a wide array of political actors as populists makes it impossible to develop an all-encompassing definition of populism. Nevertheless, these main schools of thought on populism identify a few developments that should be present in every instance of populism: mass mobilization and the construction of “the other.” In this sense, the only meaningful way to examine these various iterations of populism, including the Spanish cases, is to focus on the nature of the mobilization and the definition of “the other.”

Within this framework, the notion of exclusionary versus inclusionary populism as a measure of democratic and liberal commitment can be applied. This concept addresses how populist actors approach economic redistribution, social dimensions, and cultural issues, categorizing them as either inclusive or exclusive (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2013). Hence, the theoretical basis for analyzing Podemos and Vox is based on a discussion of mass mobilization and/or the creation of “the people” and whether it occurs through an inclusive or exclusive process, which will, in turn, determine their impact on broader democratic processes (Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser, 2013).

A Tale of Two Populisms: Spain’s Unique Political Dynamic

The potential discussion of the nuances in populism along the left-right spectrum is complex, given the myriad of constraints, ranging from spatial and temporal differences to the unique historical developments of each political system. In other words, it is difficult to compare the Sweden Democrats, a far-right Swedish party, with Chavismo, a left-wing populist movement, as their backgrounds and paths are entirely different as they emerged on the opposite ends of the political spectrum.

However, the case of contemporary Spain has managed to somewhat bridge this seemingly unbridgeable gap. Spain has long been a European exception to the rise of right-wing populism (Vampa, 2020). In fact, in the immediate aftermath of the Eurozone crisis, which hit Spain particularly hard, the left-wing movement indignados ("the outraged") was formed through the mass mobilization of various organizations, utilizing populist tactics as articulated by the key proponents of the discursive creation of identity and mobilization, Ernesto Laclau, an Argentine political theorist, and Chantal Mouffe, a Belgian political theorist (Monedero, 2020). When this movement later transformed into the left-wing party Podemos, Spain became an example of pure left-wing populism.

This perception of Spain as primarily a left-wing populist country began to shift gradually in recent years with the emergence of Vox, a nativist, right-wing populist party (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022). Although Vox was founded in 2013 as a splinter faction of Partido Popular, a Spanish center-right conservative party, it initially remained on the fringes, achieving minimal electoral success (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022).

Over time, Vox became more radicalized, particularly under the leadership of Santiago Abascal, who steered the party toward an anti-immigration, anti-minority, and anti-feminist platform (Casals, 2020). As a result, the party began to achieve significant electoral successes, making strides in the 2018 regional elections, particularly in regions like Andalusia, followed by notable success on the national stage in 2019 (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022).

Figure 3: Help Spain by Joan Miró (1937). Scottish National Gallery.

Thus, a country once recognized for its resistance to right-wing populism, potentially due to its fascist past, has become a unique case of dual populism. Spain now serves as a microcosm of political polarization, where two diametrically opposed, yet flourishing populist parties coexist simultaneously. This dynamic provides an opportunity to study the effects and differences between left-wing populism and right-wing populism on the democratic system. Since both parties operate within the same spatial and temporal context, many of the constraints that previously hindered a productive examination of populist nuances are eliminated.

Defining Features of Podemos

Podemos is a political party that emerged from a number of mass-mobilized organizations that stood behind the protests against the austerity measures in the aftermath of the economic crisis of 2009 (Font et al., 2021). From the outset, the party positioned itself as a left-populist party based on several characteristics. First, its program was formulated to battle the consequences of the economic crisis and proposed a redistributive economic agenda, aimed at the political elites who were perceived as responsible for the crisis. Second, the economic themes were combined with contemporary issues promoted by the left, such as ecology, feminism, LGBTQ rights, and so on (Custodi, 2021).

Since the main inspiration for its tactics is discursive populism (Monedero, 2020), it involves an attempt to mobilize different parts of society and create a shared identity based on social and economic exclusion by the mainstream parties. As a result, Podemos has moved beyond the traditional left-right divide and aimed to include people from different classes and backgrounds who were affected by the economic crisis, arguing that “when people were evicted or fired, no one asked whether they were right-wing or left-wing” (Monedero, 2020, p. 155). One of the crucial characteristics of Podemos’ trajectory is that it has risen from mass movements, leading to electoral results that disrupted the de facto two-party system in modern Spain (Font et al., 2021). As a consequence, Podemos represents a general tendency of populist parties, i.e., mass mobilization and the (re)creation of “the people.”

Figure 4: Manifestation by Antonio Berni (1934). LatAm Arte.

As previously mentioned, it is taken for granted by many that all populist parties have negative implications for democratic procedures without properly scrutinizing the political actor in question. Podemos has not been able to escape this same characterization (Seguín, 2017). Yet, the internal and external devotion to extensive democracy on the one hand, and the highly inclusionary approach on the other, suggest that it is unreasonable to dismiss Podemos as anti-democratic. Starting with its devotion to democracy, one of the main political goals of Podemos is to “attempt to reform democratic procedures by making them more collective, participatory, and, ultimately, egalitarian” (Seguín, 2017, p. 290). The party goes beyond the mere proclamation of a more representative and egalitarian democracy. In its internal structure, Podemos has different levels of decentralized decision-making, including Citizens’ Assemblies, Councils, and Circles, which are voluntary and participatory democratic groups independent of the party (Podemos, n.d.). These procedural models, especially the circular one, allow for open debate and the formulation of policies that are inclusive, democratic, and pluralistic in the sense that they allow for the participation of people inside and outside the party, and from different strata of society (Seguín, 2017). Thus, Podemos’ commitment to participatory and pluralistic democracy is not just a nominal one but an actual process of shaping policies and decisions within the party.

Moreover, Podemos can be considered highly inclusive. Simply put, it “adopts a vision of society in which different groups – for instance, workers, youth, and immigrants – are considered to be victims of dominating political and economic elites” (Font et al., 2022, p. 175). The only division, then, is between the privileged and the disprivileged, and mobilization occurs along that line. This process is the creation of a homogenous people through the shared lack of economic, cultural, and social necessities, while simultaneously encouraging heterogeneity and pluralism within this group. Culturally and socially, Podemos is nationalistic in a counter-hegemonic sense (Custodi, 2021). That is to say, it promotes nationalism as a multicultural representation of all citizens grounded in egalitarian terms. Moreover, globalization is not criticized as such, contrary to right-wing nationalism; instead, an alternative vision for a more equal, just, and fair global community is emphasized and promoted (Custodi, 2021). Thus, it would be reasonable to argue that Podemos promotes expansive inclusion and multiculturalism on democratic grounds.

Crucial Dimensions of Vox

Vox is considered a right-wing populist counterpart to Podemos, but from the outset, it is clear that there are critical differences in how Vox operates. The party emerged from the establishment, breaking away from the Partido Popular, a Spanish center-right conservative and traditional party, in 2013. In the early stages of the party's development, Vox was ridden with conflict, with its charismatic leader, Santiago Abascal, eventually emerging as the undisputed leader (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022). Part of his strategy involved formulating core ideas for the party, such as anti-immigration policies, opposition to abortion rights for women, and targeting sexual and cultural minorities (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022). Therefore, central to Vox is charismatic leadership, as opposed to the democratic and open organizational structure of Podemos. Vox also promotes a nativist perspective, with a nostalgic view of Spain's fascist and authoritarian past, including a romanticized version of its colonial history (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022), along with all the exclusionary elements that accompany this position.

The issue of mobilization is crucial when examining Vox's political trajectory. Vox originated from the traditional center-right party, emerging within the establishment rather than from popular mobilization or mass movements. Its electoral performance indicates a lack of robust support from the electorate. Initially, Vox operated as an extra-parliamentary party at the national level and participated in a few regional elections, achieving notable success in Andalusia in 2018 (de Borja Navarro & Yeh, 2022). In its first national electoral success in 2019, Vox garnered approximately 11% of the vote, later rising to around 15% that same year. However, by 2023, its share had dropped to about 12% (IFES Election Guide, n.d.). This suggests that neither the party’s emergence nor its electoral performance has been propelled by mass mobilization or significant public backing. Consequently, its populist rhetoric, which emphasizes nativism and a somewhat xenophobic portrayal of "real Spaniards" in opposition to the elites and the establishment (Vampa, 2020), appears exaggerated and unfounded, lacking the support of a widespread popular movement.

Figure 5: Stump Speaking by George Caleb Bingham (1856). Smithsonian American Art Museum.

Consequently, even though Vox claims to be a populist party from the radical right, it lacks what all scholars agree to be central to populism: mass mobilization. Nonetheless, it does exhibit traces of populism as imagined by the political strategy approach, with a charismatic leader who aims to redefine Spain's political landscape. Nevertheless, the core positions of Vox are completely opposite to those of Podemos, and that distinction is important to note in discussions of populism on the left versus right of the political spectrum.

Conclusion

The comparison between Vox and Podemos highlights significant differences between right- and left-wing populist parties. Podemos emerged in response to the 2008 economic crisis, capturing nearly a quarter of the vote and demonstrating strong popular support. In contrast, Vox was formed by the radical faction of the mainstream party and has struggled to gain substantial electoral traction. Podemos advocates for further democratization in both rhetoric and practice, while Vox, though not outright rejecting democracy, displays nostalgia for an authoritarian past and favors a centralized structure. Furthermore, Podemos seeks to create an inclusive "people", adopting a counter-hegemonic stance on globalization and nationalism. In contrast, Vox’s rhetoric is characterized by xenophobia and exclusion, targeting women, religious minorities, immigrants, and sexual minorities. Thus, despite both being labeled as populist, the distinctions between these two parties are stark and fundamentally opposed.

Finally, despite the present tendency to create a single definition of populism, both in academic and realpolitik contexts, the case study of Spanish populist parties from opposite political camps demonstrates the complexity of such an attempt. While there are certain traits that can be generalized in the discussion of populism, such as the role of "the people" and mobilization, even those elements are not equally important or employed in the same way across different cases. In the end, this analysis implies that the examination of populism could benefit from a more nuanced approach that takes into account other political factors, such as the traditional left-right division and the socio-political context in which parties emerge. Any such research would contribute to a better empirical and theoretical understanding of populism and its role in a democratic system.

Bibliographical References

Casals, X. (2020, October 15). How can Vox be defined? Five pointers for its interpretation |. Barcelona Metropolis. https://www.barcelona.cat/metropolis/en/contents/how-can-vox-be-defined-five-pointers-its-interpretation

Custodi, J. (2021). Nationalism and populism on the left: The case of Podemos. Nations and Nationalism, 27(3), 705–720. https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12663

de Borja Navarro, F., & Yeh, A. (2022). The Dangerous Discourse of “Us” vs. “Them:” Spain’s VOX Discursive Practices. Journal of Nationalism Memory & Language Politics, 16(2), 211–233. https://doi.org/10.2478/jnmlp-2022-0005

Font, N., Graziano, P., & Tsakatika, M. (2021). Varieties of inclusionary populism? SYRIZA, Podemos and the Five Star Movement. Government and Opposition, 56(1), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2019.17

IFES Election Guide. (n.d.). https://www.electionguide.org/

Monedero, J. C. (2020). Postdemocracy, postpolitics, and populism: fresh political thinking and Podemos. Latin American Perspectives, 47(3), 145–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582x19898244

Mouffe, C. (2018). For a Left Populism. Verso.

Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2013). Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition, 48(2), 147–174. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2012.11

Peruzzotti, E. (2019). Laclau’s theory of populism. In C. De La Torre (Ed.), Routledge Handbook of Global  Populism (pp. 29–43). Routledge Books. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315226446-3

Podemos. (n.d.). Organization. Podemos. https://podemos.info/en/conoce/

Rummens, S. (2017). Populism as a threat to liberal democracy. In Kaltwasser, Taggart, Ochoa Espejo, & Ostiguy (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Populism (pp. 554–570). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198803560.013.27

Seguín, B. (2017). Podemos and the ideals of populist proceduralism. Arizona Journal of Hispanic Cultural Studies/Arizona Journal of Hispanic Cultural Studies, 21(1), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1353/hcs.2017.0014

Urbinati, N. (2019). Me the People. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvk12sz4

Vampa, D. (2020). Competing forms of populism and territorial politics: the cases of Vox and Podemos in Spain. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 28(3), 304–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2020.1727866

Weyland, K. (2017). Populism: A Political Strategic Approach. In Kaltwasser, Taggart, Ochoa Espejo, & Ostiguy (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Populism (pp. 48–72). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198803560.013.27

Visual References