Populism Politics and the Pashtuns

Populism is a contemporary political trend that, on the surface, presents itself as the savior of the people, the defender of the deprived classes, and the restorer of justice. In practice, however, it often becomes a cause of social division, the weakening of institutions, and the rise of political instability. This politics divides the world into two simple camps. “us,” who consider ourselves pure and truthful, and “them,” who are portrayed as corrupt elites responsible for the people’s suffering. This simplification is populism’s greatest attraction, as it appears easy and understandable to the public mind. Yet this very simplicity is also its greatest danger, because complex political and economic problems are reduced to slogans, creating confrontation rather than solutions.

For a people like the Pashtuns, who already carry a long history of wars, mistrust, political marginalization, economic deprivation, and security pressures, populism is not merely a political choice but a historical test. It can amplify their voice and secure them a place at the central political table. At the same time, it carries the risk of pushing society toward new crises, new accusations, and new instability. Any politics that relies on personalities instead of institutions, and on emotions instead of law, ultimately weakens already fragile societies even further.

Populist leaders often present themselves as the sole true representatives of the people. This belief drives them to view parliament, the judiciary, free media, and other institutions as obstacles to the people’s will. When institutions weaken and decision-making becomes subject to personal preferences rather than principles, the rule of law loses its value. In such an environment, minorities, marginalized ethnic groups, and vulnerable communities suffer the most. The Pashtuns, who have often remained on the margins of state structures, become even more powerless when institutions weaken, because many of their political and legal rights can only be protected through strong legal frameworks, not through the promises and emotional speeches of a single leader.

Populism becomes even more dangerous when the “us versus them” narrative takes on ethnic or religious tones. In such situations, minorities quickly become targets of suspicion, accusations, and political pressure. Pashtuns, who are sometimes viewed through the lens of security concerns, border disputes, and political movements, can easily become targets in such an atmosphere. Civil movements come under pressure, freedom of expression is restricted, and political activity is viewed with suspicion. This gradually widens the gap between the people and the state and cuts the fragile thread of trust that sustains coexistence.

Populism promotes the politics of emotional confrontation instead of rational debate and understanding. Society becomes divided into hostile camps, each convinced of its absolute righteousness. In such conditions, shared national goals weaken, and collective solutions become nearly impossible. Hatred, mistrust, and violence grow. Pashtuns, who have already endured war, instability, and displacement, become even more exhausted in such polarized environments and lose many opportunities for progress. Every political shock leaves deep scars, because their social wounds have not yet fully healed.

The economic dimension is no less dangerous. Populism often rests on attractive but immediate promises subsidies, free services, grand claims, and rapid change. These slogans quickly capture public attention. However, if such promises are implemented without strong economic planning, transparent management, and accountability, the result is financial crisis, rising debt, and economic instability. Economic shocks hit Pashtun regions twice as hard, because investment is limited, industrial foundations are weak, and employment opportunities are scarce. In such conditions, every crisis deepens poverty and unemployment.

These risks are greater because Pashtuns have relatively limited political representation, economic weakness, and social structures damaged by prolonged conflict. Any politics that weakens institutions, sidelines the law, and divides society emotionally directly harms them, because the weak are always the first victims of instability.

The effective response lies in decentralizing power, strengthening local governance, and enabling communities to participate in solving their own problems. Support should be given to systems and ideas rather than personalities, because leaders come and go, but institutions and ideas endure. Politics should prioritize public welfare over ethnic emotions, because education, healthcare, employment, and justice are shared demands that can unite all people. Inter-ethnic alliances should be built so that politics revolves around shared interests rather than conflict. Most importantly, political awareness must rise, so people value policies, planning, transparency, and accountability instead of mere slogans.

For the Pashtuns, populism is a double-edged sword. It can amplify their voice and bring their grievances to national attention, but if it is not accompanied by strong institutions, legal frameworks, and political awareness, that same voice may become the cry of a new crisis. Populism may open the door, but it cannot build the house. A house is built on the foundations of law, institutions, awareness, and collective struggle. If the Pashtuns want to emerge as winners rather than victims at this stage of history, they must choose conscious, policy-driven, and institutional politics over emotional and reactionary politics. This is the path that makes the journey possible from slogans to systems, and from passion to stability.

Pashtun Is Not Weak, but Dispersed

Our Pashto-Dari Website

  Donate Here