The following article summarizes the key ideas in Dr. Michaelangelo Anastasiou’s “Populism and the Mirror of Technology,” a chapter recently published in Andy Knott’s edited volume, Populism and Time (2024, Edinburgh University Press). The chapter was presented on November 22nd, at The Politics of Technologies in the Digital Age Conference, in Ioannina, Greece.

In an age of digital revolutions and ceaseless connectivity, the interplay between populism and technology offers an illuminating glimpse into how political dynamics evolve in a world increasingly mediated by the technological form. Imagine standing in a bustling public square—not in ancient Rome or revolutionary France, but in a digital space where memes, hashtags, and AI-generated viral videos shape political outlooks and relations of power. Here, populism isn’t just a phenomenon; it’s a digital opera, choreographed by the rhythms of the technological milieu.

In “Populism and the Mirror of Technology,” I dive into the dynamic nexus of populism and modernity, unpacking how technology reshapes political agency, space, and time. At its core, populism is more than a political strategy or an ideology; it’s a mode of action enabled by the transformative potential of technology. But to grasp this symbiosis, we must first peer into the spatiotemporal dimensions of both populism and its technological mirror.

As a conceptual prelude to the present exposition, let me clarify what I mean by the word “populism.” Much in contrast with mainstream uses of the term, which use it in a degrading fashion, often conflating it with nationalism, I use “populism” to designate a precise politic logic. “Populism” entails a process whereby associated, variable and even disparate political demands are symbolically consolidated (e.g. “we the people”) and expressed antagonistically (e.g. against “the establishment”). Understood as such, populism is neither inherently “good” or “bad,” “reactive” or “proactive,” etc. It merely represents a logic of political contestation. What, then, facilitates this political possibility?

The Dual Nature of Populism: Space and Time

Populism thrives on the ability to forge connections across space. This is not merely an ideological feat but a “logistical” one, as populism involves the unification of disparate social groups, which may reside in unique and often distant localities. Technology has been the historical enabler of this possibility, which was initially set into motion by the circulation of communication media. Print, radio, television and, more recently, the internet, social media and generative artificial intelligence (AI), all behold the same underlying potential, albeit in different qualities and degrees: they “bridge” the distance between “the source” and “the target” of communication.

Historically, populism has been synonymous with times of upheaval and dislocation—moments when existing structures falter and opportunities for political reinvention emerge. But what drives these moments of dislocation? Here, the concept of time is pivotal. Unlike static definitions of populism that “snapshot” its characteristics in a retrospective fashion, a diachronic approach reveals populism as a constantly evolving force, shaped by disruptions and recalibrations of the social order. These disruptions are powered by technology, which accelerates change and opens new avenues for collective expression and mobilization.
This capacity to traverse both space and time redefines the field of political engagement, making populism an enduring and adaptable phenomenon. Most importantly, it “morphs” populism to the very logic of technological possibilities.

Technology as the Great Enabler

Technology is not merely a tool but an enabler of possibilities. It allows political actors to transcend the limitations of the physical body and the local terrain, extending their reach across time and space. Historically, technological breakthroughs were accompanied by social and political revolutions. Let us recall how the invention of the printing press facilitated radical reconfigurations in Europe, not least the Protestant Reformation. Or, how the Industrial Revolution was followed by the cataclysmic echoes of generalized social upheaval.

These conjunctures are not incidental. What they reveal is the inextricable, if not organic, relationship between politics and technology. Precisely because technology allows humans to overcome their bodily limitations, it “translates” into increased productive output and increased political potential. Therein lies the potential, but also the curse of technology.

From the printing press to social media, technological advances have consistently altered the contours of political power. Early technologies like newspapers unified nation-states, enabling a shared sense of identity across vast regions. Fast forward to the present, and digital platforms amplify this effect on a global scale. Social media, for instance, collapses geographic barriers, creating “global squares” where ideas, grievances, and aspirations converge in real time.
Technology does more than spread ideas—it reshapes them. The instantaneous nature of digital communication encourages the use of emotionally charged metaphors and simple, relatable language. Terms like “the people” or “the elite” become effective tools in the populist arsenal, precisely because of their broad interpretative potential. They mean many things to many people, enabling political actors to consolidate diverse identities under a single, resonant banner.

However, this phenomenon cuts both ways. While technology democratizes participation, it also centralizes control. Populism, as a political logic, “exploits” the tension between these opposing tendencies—disruption and control, decentralization and unification.

The Power of Metaphors in a Technologically-Dislocated World

Populism’s reliance on overly symbolic language stems from the increasing complexity of modern life. As social and political systems grow more intricate, metaphors become essential shortcuts for making sense of the world. In populist discourse, metaphors like “the people” serve as powerful unifying symbols, distilling diverse demands and identities into a seemingly shared vision.

This reliance on symbolism reflects a broader dynamic: the so-called “overdetermined” nature of contemporary society. In a world where meanings become increasingly complex, fluid and thus ambiguous and multifaceted, the ability to craft compelling narratives is paramount. Populist leaders excel in this domain, leveraging metaphors to forge connections that resonate across cultural and ideological divides. “The people against the establishment,” “Yes, we can,” and “Make American great again,” are just some of many examples of “conceptually austere” metaphors that served the function of unifying related, disparate and even contradictory political demands. Technology plays a critical role in amplifying these metaphors. Consider how hashtags and viral slogans condense complex ideas into shareable, impactful statements. These digital symbols transcend their immediate context, becoming rallying cries that fuel collective action.

Most importantly, technology is the very precondition of the metaphoric possibility. The complexification of life and meaning in the modern world is merely reflective of technology’s dual logic of “speed” and “interconnectivity.” This reflects a quantitative precept, but with qualitative effects. Speed and interconnectivity facilitate the complexification of meaning, as various localities and thus cultures are brought together and interact with each other in shorter time intervals. Compare, as an example, the restricted notion of religion within an isolated 19th century village, versus what one can find about and of “religion” on the internet—ranging from complete theses on all world religions, to Jesus-As-Chuck-Norris memes, to deployments of religious rhetoric in Twitter culture wars etc. At the backdrop of this Frankesteinial soup of disembodied meanings, the evocative power of metaphor becomes an ethico-political compass. It affords “conceptual shortcuts,” if not existential comfort.

The Space-Time Dialectic: A Populist Playground

At the heart of this analysis lies the dialectic of space and time. Populism operates within this dynamic, navigating the interplay between stability (space) and change (time). Technology accelerates this interplay, creating opportunities for both consolidation and disruption. For example, a viral video can destabilize entrenched power structures in an instant, while a coordinated online campaign can solidify support for a (populist) movement.
This dialectic underscores why populism is uniquely “suited” to our technological era. Modern technological tools not only expand the spatial reach of political messages but also increase the speed at which those messages travel. As a result, populist movements can emerge rapidly, harnessing the energy of politically disenchanted social groups and turning it into a seemingly cohesive political force.

The Promise and Peril of Digital Populism

The rise of digital populism poses both challenges and opportunities. On the one hand, it democratizes access to the political arena, empowering individuals and marginalized groups to voice their concerns. On the other, it risks succumbing to the influence of undemocratic political forces that may undermine digital populism’s democratic potential “from within.” For example, far Right political forces, as well as their neo-Nazi variants, have capitalized heavily from novel digital tools. By effectively instrumentalizing digital potentials, these political constellations have generalized their ideological outlook by articulating new digital spaces that are fashioned in their image. Nationalism, conspiracy theories, hate speech directed at vulnerable groups etc., run rampant in the new digital public sphere. As these tendencies take their toll on an increasingly socially-fragmented digital landscape, they become amplified by the dual logic of predictive AI and capital accumulation imperatives, which underpin the architectural logic of digital platforms.

Navigating these challenges requires a nuanced understanding of the socio-technical landscape, as well as the political potentials that inhere in the very architecture of digital instruments. Populism’s potential to disrupt existing power structures can be harnessed for democratic purposes, provided it is guided by inclusive and democratic principles. At the same time, the centralization of technological power must be resisted, if not overturned, to preserve the pluralistic potential of the digital sphere. The question of how existing and anticipated technologies, including AI, can be effectively democratized, or transition to models of common ownership, commands political urgency.

A Mirror for Modern Politics

The relationship between populism and technology is not incidental but foundational. As modern tools continue to reshape the way we communicate, connect, and contest power, populism will remain a defining feature of political life. It holds up a mirror to our technological realities, reflecting both the possibilities and pitfalls of a world in flux. Populism, we say, is a form of creative disruption.

Understanding this dynamic is essential not only for decoding the present but also for shaping the future. By situating populism within the broader context of technological change, we gain valuable insights into the mechanisms of social and political transformation. The challenge—and the promise—lies in ensuring that these transformations assume a radically democratic form. This implies the presence of a revolution within a revolution, in what could ultimately culminate in a socio-political dialectic that maximizes the horizon of freedom and equality. These imperatives do not reflect the bearings of an abstract “idealism,” in the naïve sense of the term. They represent a necessary first-stage incision in the corpus of a presently violent technologically dislocated world.