The smug politician's guide to destroying democracy, in four easy steps

Telegraph

18-05-2025

George Simion is a former football hooligan turned Romanian nationalist who once threatened to 'sexually assault' another MP. On Sunday he stands a good chance of becoming president of Romania and an EU and Nato head of state.
How this far-Right leader, with a history of thuggish behaviour, won the first round of a presidential election and reached the threshold of power says much about the rise of populism across Europe.
From Romania to France, from Germany to Britain, politicians who base their entire appeal on denouncing the 'elite' have thrived on the avoidable errors of established political parties. In one European country after another, complacent leaders have helped conjure up the very populist challenge that threatens to sweep them away. Here are their four most egregious mistakes:
1. Ban opponents and ignore results you don't like
Simion owes his vertiginous ascent to the decision by the Romanian authorities to annul the entire presidential election after it was first held in November.
Calin Georgescu, an obscure far-Right populist, came first in that contest despite having polled in single figures during the campaign. A week before polling day, 25,000 social media accounts and countless TikTok videos sprang to life, all ardently promoting Georgescu.
The Romanian government concluded that a Russian influence operation had swung the outcome of the election. They decided to cancel the second round and re-run the whole contest, while banning Georgescu from standing again.
A furious Simion denounced a 'coup d'etat', saying that those responsible should be 'skinned alive in the public square'. But he was the biggest beneficiary of these actions.
When the election was re-run on May 4, Georgescu's vote swung behind Simion and delivered victory in the first round. On Sunday, this may be enough to propel Simion to the presidency. If so, he has already promised to make Georgescu prime minister.
The lesson is that populists are delighted when their candidates are banned or, better still, entire elections get cancelled. If both happen, as in Romania, even a former football hooligan might become president.
Populists seize on these decisions as definitive proof of their claim that a self-interested 'elite' is clinging to power no matter what 'the people' might think.
So far, Britain has avoided this error (though many would suggest an orchestrated campaign took place to reverse the outcome of the Brexit referendum), but France and Germany should take note. In March, Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Rally, was banned from seeking public office for five years, a measure which should prevent her from contesting the next presidential election in 2027. She has already lined up a loyal acolyte, Jordan Bardella, as a stand-in candidate.
Meanwhile, Germany's domestic intelligence service has classified the Alternative for Germany (AFD) party as a right-wing extremist organisation, even though it came second in the general election in February, winning 21 per cent of the vote.
Germany's new government is considering whether to take the next logical step and ban the AFD, though Romania's experience suggests that nothing would do more to boost its fortunes. Friedrich Merz, the new German Chancellor, showed that he understood this danger by observing: 'You can't ban 10 million voters.'
The perception that a government has lost confidence in the voters and wishes to ban them is exactly what helps populists to thrive.
2. Allowing the endless rule of established parties
Romania achieved democracy after the downfall of Nicolae Ceausescu, the Communist dictator, in 1989. Yet politics soon came to revolve around two established parties, the centre-left Social Democrats (PSD) and the centre-right National Liberals (PNL). Since 2021, both parties have governed together in a grand coalition.
Populists yearn to argue that mainstream parties are 'all the same' and there is no real choice between them. When those parties actually get into bed together and form one government, they risk vindicating the populist case.
With its tradition of grand coalitions between the centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU) and centre-left Social Democrats (SPD), Germany is vulnerable to this perception. The SPD was beaten out of sight by the AFD in the last election, coming third with only 16 per cent of the vote. Yet despite its worst performance in a national election since the 19th century, the SPD is still in government today in coalition with the CDU.
The danger is that, as in Romania, German voters conclude that they are being denied a choice and if they are against the government the only option is to vote AFD.
3. Breaking promises to control immigration
In a host of European countries – from Sweden to France, from Britain to Germany and the Netherlands – mass immigration has probably given populists their single greatest opportunity.
Under both the Conservatives and Labour since 1997, Britain has witnessed by far the largest inflow in its history. In Germany, Angela Merkel threw open the doors to Syrian refugees in 2015 and over a million arrived in a single year. Sweden made a similar decision and experienced an even greater influx relative to population.
Since then, the established parties in almost every European country have promised to close the doors again. But the danger is that voters conclude that no mainstream party has the will to reduce immigration and only populists can be trusted to act.
Voters will not forget the occasions when leaders have deliberately defied their wishes by allowing greater immigration. Tony Blair decided to open Britain's labour market to 10 new members of the EU – including Poland, Hungary and Slovakia – from the moment these countries joined the bloc on 1 May 2004. France and Germany, by contrast, maintained transitional controls.
The result was that over 800,000 Poles moved to Britain. The leave campaign's promise to end 'free movement' was a big reason for the outcome of the Brexit referendum in 2016.
4. Insulting the electorate
Downplaying concerns about mass immigration – or, worse, telling worried voters they are racists – is a sure-fire way of increasing support for populists. David Cameron once described supporters of Nigel Farage as 'fruit cakes and loonies and closet racists', though in fairness Cameron was speaking in 2006 as Leader of the Opposition. In 2010, Gordon Brown, then Prime Minister, described a voter who challenged him on the consequences of mass immigration as a 'bigoted woman'.
In Britain, as elsewhere in Europe, the impression was created that leaders of established parties despised any of their compatriots who genuinely opposed mass immigration. Nigel Farage and his counterparts have duly reaped the rewards.
These four mistakes, in different combinations in different countries, have created perfect laboratory conditions for populist challengers. They have also given Russia a heaven-sent chance to inflame social tensions and widen divisions by throwing its propaganda effort behind far right movements in America and across Europe, including Romania.
But Russia's efforts can only work if the tensions and divisions exist in the first place. What Russian intelligence calls 'active measures' will have no impact on confident, united and secure societies, without any fissures to exploit.
By making these crucial errors and opening the fissures, some of Europe's oldest and most successful political parties have unwittingly strengthened both their populist opponents and Vladimir Putin as well.