Populist Authoritarian and Catholic Political Ethics: A Framework for a Moral Review

Abstract

Can there be an ethics of politics or political ethics in authoritarian populist democracies? Given that politics operates under potentially risky and morally ambiguous methods that involve strategic calculations with some elements of irrationality, developing an ethics of political leadership can be an abstruse exercise. The frequent mismatch between political methods, objectives, and outcomes exemplifies the complexity of political reality and its unpredictability. The existential tension between utilitarian and deontological approaches to ethics frequently arises in politics. However, to address the failures of democracy in political leadership, it is imperative to explore the ethical implications of authoritarian populism. By scrutinizing how authoritarian populism undermines democratic principles and polarizes societies, one can better understand its moral challenges and work towards developing a more ethical framework for political leadership. This article discusses Catholic political ethics in response to populist authoritarianism from three different perspectives: first, it analyzes what populist authoritarianism entails and its limitations in political governance; second, it discusses diverse components of political ethics, highlighting realistic dilemmas in the application of each component; and third, it makes an ethical evaluation of populist authoritarianism from the Catholic social ethics perspective, emphasizing human dignity, common good, and solidarity as key to countering populist authoritarianism. The article makes two ethical suggestions in line with Catholic political ethics to address populist authoritarianism. The first is the principle of social cohesion, aimed at addressing the social, ethnic, racial, political, economic, and religious divisions that characterize populist authoritarian leadership. The second is the principle of social recognition, used as a strategy for safeguarding the common good by centralizing human dignity.