How progressive politicians can win again

The politics of populism have defined the last decade. Brexit in the UK, and the election of Donald Trump in the United States have been the marquee moments for a newly confident movement. But the rise of the League in Italy, the National Rally (formerly the National Front) in France and the AfD in Germany and the dominance of Viktor Orban in Hungary shows the breadth of the appeal of populist politics.

What effect will the coronavirus pandemic have on this rising tide? On the one hand, it is undoubtedly a crisis of globalisation — and opposition to globalisation is central to all the successful populist movements. Compounding this, the single transferable policy solution of all populists — “Stronger Border Control” — is actually a key element for successful pandemic management. Is the post-Covid moment going to be an extension of the populist era?

There are, of course, countervailing forces. Experts are back and anti-vaxxers are showing rare restraint in the face of the pandemic. Also government is back in a big way, intervening, as Michael Heseltine once promised, “before breakfast, before lunch, before tea, and before dinner”. The current crop of populists are not low tax, small state conservatives. They like the state but mainly for its power and patronage, not for its creative and shaping role, the one that will be most needed in the coming decade of economic recovery and reconstruction.

Covid doesn’t replace the defining political contest of the last decade — it reframes it and in a way that potentially benefits progressive politicians. It is no longer going against the grain to argue for the value of government programmes. Most governments round the world have shown that their good work can save lives and jobs. Where there has been significant government failure, citizens have learned that “government” in general is not the problem, just their specific government.

The danger, though, is that progressive parties believe that since the pandemic has made the case for more government, then they can return to their natural position as the best managers of government. That technocratic attitude, with its profoundly managerialist values, was the undoing of the “Third Way” — the politics of Clinton, Blair and Schroder in the nineties and noughties. Progressive politics became a matter of PowerPoint presentations rather than passionate persuasion.

What is needed is a new formula. And the best place to find it is among the leaders who have won in the modern context. In the 1990s, successful centre left governments formed a Progressive Governance Network which enabled politicians to share experiences, policy ideas, and campaign expertise. Now mainly in opposition, those progressive parties and their strategists have a new network — Global Progress — seeking to learn the hard lessons of defeat and draw inspiration from the victories of leaders such as Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron and Jacinda Ardern. The progressive strategist Matt Browne has studied them and identifies four key elements that underpin successful centre left campaigns: “authentic leadership, a sense of insurgency with a clarity of purpose, the ability to unify, and a willingness to experiment with organisational innovation.” In short, like all successful politicians, they have stolen some of their opponents’ clothes.

The key insight is that, like the populists who win, victorious progressives are insurgents, but with a twist. The central appeal of populist political campaigns is not just “things need to change”, but it is also that “things couldn’t be worse if they were thrown up into the air”. Traditionally, progressives have pushed back, arguing that “things could indeed be much, much worse” — and that has often been interpreted by voters as a defence of status quo. The answer, Browne compellingly argues, is not “Yes, but…” which voters see as collusive. Instead, progressives need to say “Yes, and…”, setting out a programme that connects emotionally as well as engaging rationally.

Insurgency with a clarity of purpose leads to policies that capture and channel the energy and appeal of populism — but with very different ends. In this age of social media, an authentic voice is an essential characteristic of successful leadership. Just as FDR gained authority with his fireside radio chats, and JFK won the television debates, so President Trump has used the dominant media form of his age to amplify his voice and cut through directly to voters. His success is often ascribed to his harshness and undoubtedly the divisiveness played a key role in his success, motivating his supporters and depressing critical parts of his opponents’ political coalition.

This can work for progressives. Appeals that unite — like Jacinda Ardern’s response to the racist massacre in a mosque in Christchurch — can be amplified and carried round the world. And for the same reasons: when you hear Prime Minister Ardern speaking you know she is telling it as it is, and how she feels. The silent majority, as both #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter show, are no longer the people to whom Richard Nixon so successfully appealed in the 1968 Presidential election. Globalisation in all its forms, from consumption to travel, has dissolved borders not only for trade, but also in the mind.

It is no coincidence that the innovations of Macron’s campaign, during which he ripped up the traditional French party structure, and started organising with hundreds of new supporters evangelising through “TED-style talks”, is mirrored by the multichannel, multi-platform approach taken by the recent protests for equality.

This is what an “insurgent progressive” campaign looks like. If more politicians take note, then they too could be back in the game.