The key thing about Zelenskyy’s populism

On the tragedy and the inspiration

Hi, Ari here… as the war grinds on in Ukraine, many have been inspired by Volodymyr Zelenskyy. My new piece today is about him -- you can subscribe here to get all my writing:

---

War, War Crimes and Leadership

We have all heard that “war is hell.” If there is anything worse than the killing and tragedy of war, it might be war crimes, which violate the laws of war by targeting civilians, or resorting to barbarism that is deemed “unnecessary and excessive” for battlefield objectives. 

That’s what the world is processing this week, amidst these horrific atrocities committed by Russian soldiers.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy just visited the site of those atrocities. He appealed to the world to respond. And he continues to distinguish himself as a wartime leader. 

So it’s notable that Zelenskyy is basically a “rookie” in government, in his third year as president, as he leads an effective opposition that suggests Vladimir Putin underestimated both Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian resistance. 

It’s not just Putin. 

We know the Biden administration did not expect the resistance to work, because U.S. officials offered to help Zelenskyy flee before the expected invasion began. He declined, opting to stay and fight despite the odds. That (perhaps understandable) American offer would have compromised Zelenskyy’s current leadership. It might have hastened the fall of Ukraine’s government. So it shows the limits of “intelligence” and speculation (“experts say Kyiv will fall within weeks”); and how policies have unintended consequences (trying to keep an elected leader alive is a valid goal that may still set in motion even more deaths for others); and how the best “analysis” in the world can’t fully capture human elements, like how Zelenskyy stepped up and inspired his nation.

“I need ammunition, not a ride.”

So it spoke volumes when Zelenskyy famously quipped back, “I need ammunition, not a ride.”

So how did this man get here?

Zelenskyy was mostly known in his country as an affable and popular actor. He got a law degree, but never practiced law, building a career as the “Tom Hanks of Ukraine,” scoring leading man roles in the country’s rom-coms and blockbusters. (He also won Ukraine’s version of “Dancing With the Stars,” voiced Paddington Bear in Ukrainian, and was sort of beloved for his roles and perceived off-screen persona.)

As mass media has permeated people’s lives, we see more and more media figures excel in democratic politics. (In America: Reagan, Franken, Trump). 

Now, this dynamic can simply reflect a candidate’s mastery of the dominant medium -- Reagan connected on video, but also developed a policy and ideological platform that did have content. Or it can reflect a kind of reality confusion -- Trump pretended to run a boardroom in a fake business TV show, then pretended to run for President repeatedly, until he ultimately did -- and governed as more of a self-interested media machine than as a leader with a platform. (This bottomed out in 2020, when he made the GOP literally throw out the platform and run without one for the first time in a century.)

Zelenskyy’s rise might have initially raised a fear of something similar to Trumpism, because he starred in a show about an everyman who became President. And that process clearly helped many Ukranians “see” him as a potential President. If there were ever any doubt about his leadership, however, he has demolished it by rising to this occasion. 

In that role, he plays a history teacher who rants about government corruption in remarks that end up going viral. Here’s his speech:

“Why do our politicians come to power and make the same mistakes? It’s because they are f*cking mathematicians! The only thing they know is ‘how to divide, add and multiply’... their own wealth! We’re choosing between two bastards.. Do you know what is interesting? Nothing will change this time. Do you know why? It’s because [we] will choose a bastard again.”

In the show, the criticism goes viral. 

He becomes a long shot candidate, and then wins the Presidency. Then “art imitated life” when he ran for real. Then the public had to decide if this man they’d long liked and respected, or at least this personae, would deliver -- did he reflect real substance and leadership, or was this another round of acting (something politicians do a lot of)?

He leaned into the “artistic roots” of his candidacy, if you will, even naming his new political party after the TV show. He gave speeches explaining the link, but also where the show ended and his plans began, and invoked a kind of populism anchored in liberal values. 

A Populist Leader

“Populism” can mean a lot of things, especially when invoked at MAGA rallies or in (White) European screeds about immigration. As a literal political project, it means,

“The political approach striving to appeal to ordinary people, who feel that their concerns are disregarded by the established elite groups.” 

There have always been gaps between educated, connected elites and everyone else. 

In much of the world, however, those gaps are more extreme now, given the growing wealth gap, the primacy of advanced education in knowledge economies, and the rising dominance of technology in business and politics (which tends to be run and shaped by elites and early adopters).  

As a political “outsider,” Zelenskyy appealed to the promise that a citizen has as much to offer as sclerotic political elites -- the same promise of his character, the teacher turned president! 

That doesn’t mean anyone thinks he’s a “regular citizen” in every way -- it is only in his contrast to the permanent political class (and Ukraine has battled many problems with corruption and foreign-aligned leaders). People know he’s a rich, famous actor. 

And Trump fans knew Trump was a political “outsider” but not an “everyday guy,” (his persona doesn’t exactly lean into that). Now according to U.S. voters, Trump did not “step up” to his governing challenges, including COVID. He rarely deployed his (considerable) media and P.R. talents on behalf of America -- to unite it, or rally people together, or to summon some greater public interest. And he lost.

By contrast, Zelenskyy is deploying some of those skills he was known for -- rhetoric, empathy, pathos -- in concert with new ones required to govern in crisis -- judgment, sobriety, bravery, diplomacy. 

That talent and poise, combined with his link to the nation, is clearly channeling something we probably don’t fully understand -- what makes people fight and die for each other… what unites the wrongfully oppressed against more powerful invaders… what powers a new “David vs. Goliath” story against Putin. It would be truly uplifting if it did not come at such a high, tragic, heartbreaking cost. 

By staying and risking his own life, Zelenskyy is doing what so many elites spend so much effort to avoid -- sharing in the risk, service and experience of everybody else. And that is, perhaps, the ultimate populist test of a leader. 

---

Do you think Zelesnkyy’s background has made him a stronger leader for this moment?