ABSTRACT
“Populism” is a useful term in political science for labeling a “thin” ideology as well as a related rhetorical style that can be highly useful tool to acquire power from opposition. Populist attitudes can change, though, when populists gain power, for two reasons. First, when getting into government, they often lose their anti-elitist appeal as they become the elites themselves. Second, populists in power make much greater effort to create and strengthen their own elites, rather than helping the poor. In this chapter, we analyze the attitudes of voters of populist parties in government. Our studies in Hungary and Poland showed that voters of so-called populist parties (Fidesz and PiS) are, in fact, less anti-elitist and less people-centric than voters of opposition parties that are not labeled as populist by the social science literature. Based on the existing components of populist attitudes, we can put together a different concept. This article suggests the term political tribalism and defines it as the combination of a Manichean worldview that defines politics as the ultimate war between “good” and “evil”; anti-pluralism; and authoritarianism that empowers the leader of the tribe via unconditional trust. Tribalist leaders, while talking about the “people” as a homogenous concept, use divisive social identity categories and strategies, fueling antagonism and hostility between political ingroups and outgroups. The nature of tribalism, its cures, and possible future avenues of research are discussed.
