Table of Contents
Populist leadership, as seen in contemporary cases like Donald Trump, strategically fuses identity-based mobilization (constructing a polarized “people vs. elite” narrative), charismatic personalization that centers authority in the leader’s persona, and a conflict-driven communication style that leverages simple, emotional rhetoric and media visibility to redefine legitimacy as the direct expression of the popular will.
1) The Identity Logic of Populist Leadership: The iSIMPL Framework
(1) Populist leadership is an identity politics that mobilizes sharp oppositions between “the people” and “elite/others.” The integrative social identity model (iSIMPL) by Uysal and colleagues explains a leader’s success as the capacity to redefine the ingroup identity and produce an action repertoire aligned with it (Uysal, Jurstakova, & Uluşahin, 2022). This view positions populism not merely as discourse but as a process that co-frames collective belonging, threat, and legitimacy.
(2) According to iSIMPL, the leader appears “prototypical” to define “our” norms; acts as an “identity entrepreneur” to draw boundaries; and as an “identity craftsman” to make belonging palpable through rituals and symbols (Uysal et al., 2022). In Trump’s case, rallies, slogans, and repeated narratives (e.g., “drain the swamp”) point to the ritual dimension of identity construction. These rituals convert shared anger and grievance into a collective experience that amplifies political energy.
(3) The model states that the simultaneous construction of vertical (elites) and horizontal (immigrants, minorities) threats consolidates group solidarity (Uysal et al., 2022). When populist belief components—moral superiority of “the people,” distrust in institutions, and sacralization of the popular will—combine with identity processes, the leader–follower bond strengthens both emotionally and normatively. Thus, the leader speaking for “us” appears to reduce the need for institutional intermediaries.
(4) The iSIMPL framework also explains why populism can generate high short-term mobilization: clear boundaries, strong emotions, and low cognitive-cost narratives (Uysal et al., 2022). Yet this advantage can clash with the need for institutional compromise in complex policymaking. In Trump’s practice, rapid decision-making and the emphasis on “leader will” reflect this tension.
Read: Organizational Psychology 101- Comprehensive Guide
List 1: iSIMPL’s five key elements of populist leadership
- Leader ingroup prototypicality and norm setting: The leader appears as “one of us,” embodies group norms, and defines what it means to be a “good” ingroup member (Uysal, Jurstakova, & Uluşahin, 2022).
- Simultaneous construction of vertical and horizontal threats: Elites (vertical) and outgroups such as immigrants or minorities (horizontal) are framed as endangering “the people,” which intensifies cohesion (Uysal et al., 2022).
- Reframing legitimacy through “the will of the people”: Authority is justified by invoking the moral primacy of the people and distrust of mediating institutions (Uysal et al., 2022).
- Identity craftsmanship via rituals, slogans, and symbols: Rallies, chants, repeated narratives, and symbolic artifacts make belonging tangible and emotionally salient (Uysal et al., 2022).
- Sustained emotional mobilization: Anger, resentment, and pride are channeled to maintain engagement over time with low cognitive-cost narratives (Uysal et al., 2022).
2) The Populist Communication Style: Language, Media, and Visibility
(5) Block and Negrine (2017) frame the populist communication style along three axes: identity construction (people–other dichotomy), rhetoric (simple, polemical, emotional), and media strategy (high visibility fueled by conflict). Trump’s language—simplified slogans, repetition, emotional loading, and “us–them” contrasts—fits this schema in a typical fashion (Block & Negrine, 2017).
(6) The relationship with media contains both antagonism and dependence. Conflict with mainstream media strengthens the narrative of “biased media/elites” while also boosting visibility (Block & Negrine, 2017). The directness of Trump’s social media use creates unmediated leader–mass communication; thus, the emotional and normative closeness described by iSIMPL is reinforced (Uysal et al., 2022).
(7) Populist communication turns rallies into “identity festivals”: rituals, evocative music, shared slogans, and flags deepen identity boundaries sensorially and bodily (Block & Negrine, 2017). This is not only about the content of the message but also its staging and rhythm of repetition. Trump’s mass events are visible examples of this performative style.
Read: Servant Leadership 101: Comprehensive Guide
3) The Question of Charisma: Personalization and Radical Claim
(8) Pappas (2016) argues that populist leaders are often perceived as charismatic, but this emerges via two components: personalized rule and a radical transformation claim. Personalization refers to centralized authority over the party/movement and an unmediated emotional bond with voters. Radicalism is the delegitimation of the established order and the claim to a “new order” (Pappas, 2016).
(9) In Trump’s case, placing the personal brand at the center, loyalty-based alignment, and the downplaying of institutional intermediaries intensify personalization. Simultaneously, a refounding promise against the “establishment” fuels the radical claim (Pappas, 2016). When these two axes combine with iSIMPL’s identity politics, they enable the leader to become a living symbol of the “us” identity (Uysal et al., 2022).
Table 1: Charismatic leadership dimensions and their manifestations in Trump
| Dimension (Pappas, 2016) | Indicator | Trump Manifestation | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personalization | Centralized authority over party/movement | Personal brand–centric leadership and loyalty-based alignment around the leader’s persona | Pappas (2016) |
| Personalization | Unmediated emotional bond with followers | Rally-centered, slogan-driven direct communication that fosters a strong affective tie | Pappas (2016) |
| Radicalism | Delegitimation of the established order | Anti-establishment, anti-elite framing that questions the legitimacy of existing institutions | Pappas (2016) |
| Radicalism | Foundational “new order” claim | Promise to “refound” governance in the name of the people’s will, bypassing intermediaries | Pappas (2016) |
Note: The communicative performance that sustains these charismatic attributions often relies on a populist communication style—simple, polemical, emotional rhetoric and conflict-amplified media visibility—which strengthens identity processes described by iSIMPL (Block & Negrine, 2017; Uysal, Jurstakova, & Uluşahin, 2022).
4) An Integrated Reading: Interaction of Identity, Charisma, and Media
(10) When read together, Trump’s populist leadership style—iSIMPL’s identity-centered politics (Uysal et al., 2022), the performative, conflictual, emotional nature of populist communication (Block & Negrine, 2017), and the personalization–radicalism components of charismatic leadership (Pappas, 2016)—appears more holistic. Identity processes amplify the communicative emotional impact; communicative performance strengthens charismatic attribution; and charismatic personalization legitimizes speaking on behalf of “us” by bypassing institutional intermediaries. This mutual reinforcement loop is effective for short-term mobilization and agenda-setting, yet it can create tensions with institutional balance and specialized policy production (Uysal et al., 2022; Block & Negrine, 2017; Pappas, 2016).
Conclusion
In sum, populist leadership operates through a mutually reinforcing cycle of identity construction, charismatic personalization, and a performative, conflict-centered communication style. Read together through iSIMPL, Pappas’s account of charisma, and the populist communication framework, the Trump example illustrates how “the people” can be elevated as the supreme source of legitimacy while intermediating institutions are bypassed. This configuration can deliver rapid mobilization, clear narratives, and agenda-setting power, yet it also generates tensions with institutional checks, pluralist compromise, and policy complexity. Understanding these trade-offs is essential for evaluating both the appeal and the democratic risks of populist leadership.
References
Block, E., & Negrine, R. (2017). The populist communication style: Toward a critical framework. International journal of communication systems, 11, 178-197.
Pappas, T. S. (2016). Are Populist Leaders” Charismatic”? The Evidence from Europe. Constellations: An International Journal of Critical & Democratic Theory, 23(3).
Uysal, M. S., Jurstakova, K., & Uluşahin, Y. (2022). An integrative social identity model of populist leadership. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 16(12), e12713.
