The Counter-Playbook: Resisting the Populist Assault on Separation of Powers
Stephen Gardbaum
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3485761
2019-01-01
SSRN Electronic Journal
Abstract:There are currently two types of populist regimes around the world. The first engages in populist politics, rhetoric and (sometimes) policies but essentially works within the institutional structure of constitutional democracy it inherited and was elected in, even if it undermines many of the constitutional norms that support and supplement this structure. Think here of Trump's America, Modi's India, Duterte's Philippines, and (so far) Bolsonaro's Brazil. By contrast, the second type of populist regime undertakes a determined assault on the institutional structure of constitutional democracy, prioritizing systemic change that dismantles its essential elements and values. Here, the key examples are Orbán's Hungary, Chávez and Maduro's Venezuela, Erdoğan's Turkey, and Kaczyński's Poland. In this sense, the first may be thought of as political, and the second as structural, populism. Of the essential elements of constitutional democracy — roughly speaking, free and fair elections, political and civil rights, rule of law, and separation of power — structural populists have not targeted all equally. Rather, the major aim of constitutional and institutional change has been to neutralize all sources of independent and dispersed political power and concentrate it in the populist regime. This article argues that since undermining institutional checks and balances has been the distinctive strategy and primary focus of structural populism, then the defense and protection of constitutional democracy must develop a similar disciplined focus as its enemies, in the form of an anti-concentration principle that makes dismantling separation of powers more difficult to accomplish. This anti-concentration principle has a number of components in practice, addressing most of the major structural elements of constitutional, institutional, and democratic design, and amounts to a counter-playbook for constitutional democrats on how to increase resistance to, or preemptively thwart, the moves that have proven so successful over the past few years. Of course, relying on constitutional, institutional, and democratic design to render the concentration of political power more difficult to achieve is not a panacea, and can only be part of any solution to the threats posed by authoritarian populism, but it is not irrelevant. In particular, the counter-playbook that is developed and presented in this article may help to prevent type one populist regimes from becoming type two regimes, and frustrate or slow down the slightly less determined, ruthless, politically astute, or popular structural populist so that some future type two regimes will be less successful in attaining their goals and/or shorter-lived. Even if the strongest roof cannot withstand a Category 5 hurricane, it is still sensible to build one in the event of a Category 2, 3 or 4.