Do Existing Populist Definitions Travel to South Africa?

• In Event: Critically Reinterpreting Populism in Africa

Abstract

Considerable scholarly work on populism in South Africa argues that the country is fertile socio-political ground for populism to take hold. Former president Jacob Zuma has been identified as a populist for his theatrical antics on the campaign trail (Mbete 2016, 2020; Melber 2018; Resnick 2017; 2018; Vincent 2011), while others who focus on his discourse question his populist credentials (Nyenhuis 2020; Folscher et al 2021). Among opposition figures, the same authors have also labelled Julius Malema and Pieter Groenewald as both espousing radical, racialized populist appeals. Considering Malema and his party, the Economic Freedom Fighters, recent work on populist attitudes (Nyenhuis and Schulz-Herzenberg 2023) illustrate party supporters do not strongly differ in their populist attitudes from supporters of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) or opposition Democratic Alliance (DA). Additionally, work on the EFF’s use of Instagram campaign messaging showcases the party’s behaviour fitting nicely into a strategic definition of populism (Weyland 2001; Nyenhuis and Schulz-Herzenberg 2024), while the party’s behaviour mimics aspects of both left-wing and right-wing populism from around the world.

The inconsistency in findings suggests that outcomes are largely driven by scholars’ definitional starting points, but also asks the question of whether definitional criteria formulated in other regions ‘travel’ to Africa. Some actors are deemed populist if one employs a performative or strategic definition of populism, yet they are seen as considerably less populist when using an ideational or discursive definition. This paper empirically investigates the utility of competing populist definitions to adequately account for the (limited) electoral success and political longevity of the EFF. It draws on available survey data, and on a unique data set on the party and Malema’s messaging on social media (Facebook and Twitter). In doing so, it sheds light on some of the long-standing definitional debates among populist scholars. It also articulates new possible directions for making sense of a party and leader who do not neatly fit into existing explanations and descriptions of populism.

Author

• Robert E Nyenhuis, University of Northumbria