Verified by 
Here is a hypothetical: The small pizza place owned by Harry Right and Noah Smart (not real names) used to be one of the most successful fast-food businesses in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Last week the place shut down, and COVID-19 had nothing to do with it. The troubles started more than a year ago when a devoted client named Ben Dutom (not a real person) entered the place. After paying for his pizza he bent over to reach Mr. Right's ear and whispered: Don’t you notice that Smart is looking down upon you? Whispered and disappeared. Initially, Mr. Right didn’t take this comment seriously, but a week later when his suggestions to slightly redecorate the place met no response by Mr. Smart, thoughts started creeping in that maybe, just maybe Mr. Dutom was right.
Occasionally, Mr. Smart, who always thought of Mr. Right as the sharper businessman among the two, had his own ideas on how to promote the business. But from the moment Mr. Right started suspecting that Smart was looking down upon him, Mr. Right rejected every suggestion made by his co-owner, including the most reasonable ones, such as paying the city tax on time before penalties are added. He knew it had to be done but worried that acknowledging his partner for having a good idea will only encourage him to further look down upon him. Quite naturally, the feeling of degradation is more painful than the loss of income for the joint business. Mr. Smart was puzzled. He could not find a reasonable explanation for why on earth his ideas were being rejected, all of which meant to initially promote the business, and later to rescue it from a total collapse. Gradually, Mr. Smart started having a second thought: Is my partner as talented as I thought he is when we started our joint venture? Unsurprisingly, Smart indeed started to look down upon his partner – every day from a slightly higher spot, and in a more pronounced manner. The R & Spizza place had no chance to survive.
Ben Dutom abbreviates Bolsonaro, Erdogan, Netanyahu, Dutere, Trump, Orban, and Modi. The pizza place symbolizes the tragic relationship between the enthusiasts of populist leaders and their vigorous opponents worldwide. Some false myths on the identity of these two groups should be refuted: Populists’ supporters are not less intelligent than their opponents. They might be less educated, but education and intelligence are two different things. The support of populist leaders is not driven by underprivileged people who protest against social and economic inequality. The supporters of populism have no problem with the rich of their country. On the contrary; one, almost necessary, condition to become a right-wing populist leader is being wealthy. The line separating these two groups is not the one separating wisdom from stupidity or wealth from poverty. The separating line is primarily education. Trump’s salient attempts to derogate science and medicine, Erdogan’s purge of almost 1600 university deans, and Orban’s war against his country’s most prestigious university are all means by which populists are drawing this line.
But there is another separating line – related but arguably more important than education: Insult. This line separates between those who feel that the other group is looking down upon them and those who are willing to admit that, yes, they indeed look down upon those who vote for populism. Just like Mr. Right populists’ supporters know that their leaders are liars and corrupt, that their policies are against their interests. But just like him, all these are less important than the insult, and they will keep voting for their populist leader to inflict pain on those who look down upon them. Those who believe to be smarter and more ethical. These voters are using ballots as bullets. And like Mr. Smart, those who oppose populism are puzzled about what on earth makes people vote for such a despicable leader?
Their false conclusion is that these voters are simply stupid, a conclusion that makes them look down upon the other group, each day from a slightly higher view point. This in turn intensifies the feeling of insult among those mildly supporting populism making them show much stronger support to their populist leader. This vicious cycle feeds populism and strengthens it.
Interestingly, almost globally liberals always blame right-wingers for not being smart enough in their political choices. Right-wingers on the other hand never blame their rivals for not being smart enough. They typically hold them to be vicious and sometimes traitors but not stupid. This different reflection, of one group on the other, points to the fact that one group feels insulted and the other one is indeed insulting.
Before the Brexit referendum and before the recent election in the US, I was asked to add my signature to a petition drafted by economics professors claiming that Brexit, in the first case, and Trump’s reelection in the other, will have devastating effects on the economy. In spite of believing that these statements are correct, I refused to sign these two petitions and urged my colleagues to give up the initiative. These patronizing petitions are the ultimate “shoot yourself in the foot” strategy for those who wish to weaken populist causes because they are more than simply looking down. They represent the looking down upon the Lilliput people from the position of an ivory tower. From the point of view of a member of the other group, this looking down upon is telling them: Listen to what we say: We know better than you, and we want the best for you. Since you are incapable of grasping the extent of the disaster your childish political choices might cause, you should leave it to us to decide on your behalf. One ought to be doubtful whether such a statement might sway votes leftwards.
And what about Ben Dutom the populist leader? In all the countries where he succeeds he always uses the same dual strategy: On one hand convincing his supporters that his opponents are looking down upon them, and on the other hand generate sufficient anger among his opponents so that their protest can serve him as raw material for his insult industry. Trump has always enjoyed the demonstrations against him. Unlike Netanyahu, he never tried to stop them, using COVID-19 as an excuse against these public gatherings. He knew that they increase the support among those who already support him, that it would hence increase their election turnout, and hence his chances to be reelected. This might not be a good enough reason to avoid these demonstrations but one should be aware of their consequences.
In most countries where populism rules both groups fall prey to manipulations by the populist; each in its own way. This is how Hillary Clinton got trapped with her reference to Trump’s supporters as a “basket of deplorables.” Clinton knew that this would not do well for her campaign but just like the people she was referring to who acted on the basis of their insult, she acted on the basis of her anger.
“It’s the economy stupid” doesn’t apply to today’s politics anymore. Both the Brexit as well as the last two US presidential campaigns were lacking serious discussion concerning social and economic policies because all parties realized it would be a waste of resources. Elections these days look more like football matches, where the winning team always feels insulted, and the losing one is certain to be way better than the one it was losing to.
