The unexpected has happened:the political outsider Donald Trump is the new president of the United States. Historian Clemens van Herwaarden already foresaw this:he obtained his doctorate last week on the charismatic leadership of Pim Fortuyn, and the parallels with Trump are striking.
Dissatisfied citizens can indeed bring about major change. While the American newspapers wrote for months that Trump didn't stand a chance because he is a racist and sexist blasphemy, a majority of Americans decided otherwise. They forgave Trump for his weaknesses. Or they didn't even see anymore.
This is typical of charismatic leadership, according to historian Clemens van Herwaarden. In his dissertation Love for a Leader; the charismatic leadership of Pim Fortuyn' (Erasmus University Rotterdam), he researched the followers of politician Pim Fortuyn.
Although the political elite in the Netherlands did not really take this 'professor of the people' seriously, he quickly climbed the political stage. He blamed purple for eight years (cabinets of VVD, PVDA and D66 between 1994 and 2002) for everything that was wrong in the Netherlands. That message reached citizens who felt threatened or were dissatisfied. Just like now with Trump.
Van Herwaarden, not a Fortuynist himself:“If Fortuyn had not been shot on May 6, 2002, he probably would have won the elections that same month. In the polls, he was at 38 seats and the Pim Fortuyn List (LPF) would become the largest party." Then the same incredible thing would have happened in the Netherlands as now in the United States:a political outsider as Prime Minister.
We love you!
With 'Love for a leader' van Herwaarden tries to explain the phenomenon Fortuyn from his followers. For this he uses Max Weber's theory of charismatic leadership. Many social scientists do not want to investigate Fortuyn's charisma:it would be a character trait and therefore cannot be scientifically proven.
Van Herwaarden:“Charismatic leadership is not a personal quality, but you are attributed it by your supporters. It's almost something religious. Fortuyn was seen by several followers as a hero, savior and messiah who would overthrow the existing political order. Whether this is also the case with Trump remains to be investigated.”
To interpret Fortuyn's charismatic leadership, Van Herwaarden looks at three levels, from large to small:society (macro), the leader (meso) and the feelings and thoughts of individual followers (micro).
“Large segments of the bourgeoisie needed a strong leader who would make the syrupy government function better. He appealed to entrepreneurs with his call for fewer civil servants, while his mono-culturalist message gave the threatened bourgeoisie a sense of security. His struggle against the political elite was shared by low and highly educated people. We now also see that broad electorate in Donald Trump. Of course you won't become president of America with only Joe Sixpack as a supporter."
Breaking taboos
Fortuyn became the new leader for many disappointed citizens because they finally felt heard. Fortuyn identified the problems of the multicultural society, saying what many people thought but were afraid to say. Because that was not politically correct. A large group of followers got the idea that this special leader with an equally special message would solve the purple heaps of rubble he had appointed.
“The political elite was completely surprised by the number of Fortuyn supporters because many of them did not vote before. These people are underrepresented in political science research and polls. That is why the polls were completely wrong with Trump," said Van Herwaarden.
“In my research, the vox populi, the voice of the people, to life. The letters sent to Fortuyn before his murder show that several followers already saw Fortuyn as their savior. My research into charismatic leadership can be extended beyond Fortuyn and his followers. It could also explain why so many Americans who felt threatened and disappointed became supporters of Trump.”
Crisis due to purple
Van Herwaarden rejects the theory that Fortuyn became popular so quickly because of the Al Qaeda attacks on the New York Twin Towers in 2001:“Fortuyn already announced that he was going into politics. His story was broader than criticism of Islam. The success can be explained by the crisis-like atmosphere he created with his performance and in particular with the book The ruins of eight years in purple created. He completely broke off purple with the story that the economy had been too focused on one, at the expense of a unifying story for the people. Everything went wrong in healthcare, at the police and in education, and Fortuyn put his finger on it flawlessly. These topics are still topical and not just in the Netherlands.”
In the last weeks before the elections, Fortuyn rose enormously in the polls. “After his murder, the CDA was the reasonable alternative to 'never more purple'. That is the only reason the CDA got so many votes. And that Balkenende subsequently became prime minister.”
Underdog and successful
Pim Fortuyn was a self-made man who fully showed his successes, such as his beautiful city villa and expensive tailor-made suits. He profiled himself as a Catholic and deliberately used religious words to address people with a Christian upbringing. But the outcast who felt left out in the cold by the government could also identify with Fortuyn. Fortuyn was only too happy to cultivate his struggle against the established order. Everyone was against him:the media, the politicians, the left-wing elite.
Van Herwaarden's research shows that this opposition actually reinforced the personification of people with Fortuyn:“In the letters that Fortuyn supporters already sent before his death, they write 'I am just like Pim, I am not understood either.' But Fortuyn was not a smug populist:he confidently told benefit recipients to get out of the geraniums.”
Angry Americans
In 2002, everyone created their own image of Fortuyn and identified with different sides of him. Whether it was his business success or his struggle against the established order. As long as this personal identification is maintained, followers will forgive or downplay their leader's missteps. Just like with Trump's sexist or racist statements. And like Fortuyn, Trump is also critical of things that many people think but are not recognized by politicians.
Van Herwaarden:“The discontent of many disappointed Americans has been activated by Trump. They no longer believed that the family dynasties like the Bushes and Clintons would change anything. Trump also pulverized Jeb Bush during the primaries. Trump was admired by all walks of life. And although Trump also criticized the current policy in substance, he was given little space in the newspapers. For example, many Americans took his message about international trade agreements that would cost American jobs seriously.” It made Trump the underdog, taking on the establishment in the name of many disappointed Americans.
Favouritism
“A friend of mine was in Washington just before the election for her political work. She noticed how nervous key Democrats were. She fell off her chair because she saw that it is completely normal there to give family members important jobs. These administrative “Democratic” families were terrified that Trump would come to power as an independent loner. Then the road to the most important leader of the world would be closed. In the end, more than 90 percent voted for Clinton in Washington DC.”
But Trump won. Will the administrative cards in Washington be shuffled all over again? Would anything really change now? Fortuyn has never been able to fulfill his promises. For the next four years, it will be up to Trump to prove whether he is worthy of the trust of many disappointed and hopeful Americans.