Expert Urges Politicians to Embrace Emotion to Combat Populism

In contemporary politics, especially in Germany, emotional expression often takes a backseat to rational discourse. Political consultant Johannes Hillje argues that this aversion to emotion could hinder democratic engagement, particularly in the face of rising populist movements like the Alternative for Germany (AfD).

Hillje emphasizes that emotions are pivotal in shaping political thought and engagement. In his recent publication, he advocates for a shift towards acknowledging and integrating feelings such as hope, fear, and anger into political dialogue, rather than allowing these emotions to be monopolized by populist factions.

He notes that, historically, politicians in Germany have adopted a stoic demeanor, often viewing emotional expressions as unprofessional. However, Hillje contends that this approach is outdated and potentially detrimental, as it fails to resonate with voters who are increasingly experiencing uncertainty and fear in their everyday lives.

He critiques prominent political figures, suggesting that while some may project a certain emotionality, it often manifests as impulsiveness rather than genuine engagement with voters' feelings. This misalignment, he argues, can lead to unintended negative reactions from the public.

Hillje traces the roots of Germany's emotional reticence back to post-World War II leaders who sought to establish a political culture devoid of the emotional manipulation seen in the Nazi regime. This legacy has contributed to a prevailing reluctance among politicians to engage emotionally with their constituents.

In the current political landscape, where radical parties are successfully leveraging emotions to garner support, Hillje asserts that democratic leaders must adapt. He highlights the necessity for politicians to understand how emotions are linked to the fulfillment or violation of core values, such as security and social justice, which can significantly influence public sentiment.

He draws parallels between modern political strategies and those of past movements, warning that neglecting emotional engagement could lead to a repeat of history. Hillje believes that a more emotionally attuned political culture could empower voters and counteract the narratives pushed by populist entities.

To effectively generate hope among the electorate, he outlines three essential components: defining clear objectives, presenting feasible pathways to achieve those goals, and empowering individuals to believe in their capability to effect change. This contrasts sharply with the prevailing narrative of necessity and obligation that often characterizes current political discourse.

Ultimately, Hillje calls for a reimagining of political communication where emotions are not seen as a weakness but as a vital element of effective governance. By embracing a more emotionally inclusive approach, democratic leaders could not only counter the allure of populism but also foster a more engaged and hopeful electorate.