Ending her term as chairwoman of the Republican National Council, Ronna McDaniel called on party colleagues to support the choice of two people who Donald Trump personally chose to succeed her in this position. After the standing ovation of those present, she stated that there was no need to ask if there was anyone who would vote against. It was an interesting moment because it showed how the procedures established to protect the democratic process within the party are overturned by acclamation.
Trump is not the only right-wing populist leader who has bent a political party to his will. Capturing the party machinery is common for populists and autocrats, and history shows that the consequences are disastrous for a democratic political system. Establishing an autocracy in one's own party is a logical first step on the way to creating an autocratic state.
To tell the truth, calling for democracy and pluralism within political parties may sound idealistic. Endless, exhausting and complicated debates usually end with the "victory" of the most eloquent party speaker - or someone who doesn't have to drive the kids to school tomorrow. Also, intra-party democracy - like party elections in the United States - structurally favors ideological purists who lean towards extreme candidates, or favors those people who see politics as a hobby and the process is more important to them than the results.
But internal debates can produce better ideas for developing party policies. In any case, the winners of the debate can gain better insight into the other side's arguments and the facts in their favor and are likely to be more appreciative of the losers' views in the intra-party debate. Since they represent the same fundamental political principles as members of the same party, the differences that are debated usually boil down to how those fundamental principles should be interpreted and what policies should be implemented to implement them. If the losers get the impression that they have been given due attention, they are less likely to leave the party.
By respecting the legitimate opposition within their own party, politicians show commitment to the basic rules of the democratic game. If the balance of power is even, prominent representatives of the losing side will always be there to make sure that the winners don't stray too far from key party principles - or from democracy. The opinion of prominent party cadres is of great importance to the membership and must be taken seriously.
Trump has turned the Republican Party into a cult of his own personality. Critics are pushed out and attacked (often threatened with violence). Instead of accepting Nikki Haley as a worthy opponent in what political scientist Nancy Rosenblum describes as a Democratic "controlled rivalry," Trump says she has no place in his party: "She's on their side. I think he should change the party." And it was Trump who appointed Haley as the United States ambassador to the United Nations during his presidency.
It is also indicative that the Republican Party no longer even tries to offer anything resembling an election political program. Before the 2020 election, they simply repeated the 2016 program and pledged allegiance to Trump. A party with a real political program can suffer electoral defeat and immediately redouble its efforts to win over voters for the next election. Such parties have long-term plans, unlike parties that depend on the current attitudes of individuals and perceive every electoral defeat as the end of the world.
Some politicians solve this problem by choosing relatives as successors and turning the party into a quasi-dynasty or a political family business. This is what the Gandhi family did with the Indian National Congress, to the detriment of their own party and Indian democracy. In France, Marine Le Pen leads the radical right-wing party founded by her father. Trump appointed his daughter-in-law Lara Trump to the position of co-chair of the RNC, which is why the Republican Party is starting to look like a family business.
A cult leader has a power over his followers that is beyond the reach of even the most charismatic of politicians. A real political party would have found a way to stop Trump and his fanatical fans before the riots on January 6, 2021. And after that, Republicans had the opportunity to show courage and commitment to declared principles by voting to impeach Trump in February 2021. Instead, they're going against Trump. they declare exclusively in private conversations or after leaving politics. That is why this party is now run by a leader with deep-rooted authoritarian instincts, clearly unfit for political office. One of the two parties in the American two-party system has turned against democracy itself.
The problem is not just Trump. During one part of his mandate, the former president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, did not belong to any political party, which means that there were no politicians of similar beliefs around him who could control him. Other radical right-wing populists have political parties, but run them in an autocratic manner. There are well-known examples of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, or Jarosław Kaczyński, who so tightly controlled the Polish Law and Justice party, while it was in power, that he did not need any official position to govern the country.
Reform of political party regulations can be useful. The party of radical right-wing populist Geert Wilders in the Netherlands has only two members: Wilders and a one-member foundation whose only member is Wilders. Such one-man rule would not be legal in neighboring Germany, where it is stipulated that "the internal organization of the party must be in accordance with democratic principles."
Of course, intra-party democracy has its drawbacks: it can easily divide the party into factions, which repels voters; also, it can encourage unproductive or esoteric debates that can make the party appear too preoccupied with its own problems. But the transformation of the Republican Party is an example that shows that such risks are worth taking.
(Project Syndicate; Peščanik.net; translation: Đ. Tomić)
Bonus video:
