What charities can learn from right-wing populism

Let's be honest, talking about right-wing populism in charity circles feels deeply uncomfortable. It should. We fundamentally oppose the division, the scapegoating, the deliberate exclusion of vulnerable people. But we can't ignore something else: it's been devastatingly effective at building movements and mobilising people.

This isn't about adopting their messages so much as understanding how they deliver them. Because while we've been crafting careful, nuanced communications, right-wing populist movements have been building passionate, committed communities ready to act. If we want to compete for attention, hearts and minds, we need to understand what we're up against.

What right-wing populism really Is

Right-wing populism creates a specific kind of division: 'us', the 'real' people with traditional values, against 'them', usually a combination of out-of-touch elites and threatening outsiders. It's not just anti-establishment; it's about restoring what they frame as a lost, purer version of society.

The key characteristics:

• Cultural nostalgia: Appeals to a 'golden age' when things were supposedly better
• Clear enemies: Identifies specific groups as threats to the community
• Simple solutions: Complex problems get reduced to removing the 'threat'
• Emotional urgency: Creates a sense that action must be taken now
• Authentic leadership: Leaders present as 'one of us', speaking uncomfortable truths

Why it builds such strong communities

Right-wing populist movements excel at community-building because they tap into fundamental human needs:

Belonging and identity: Anti-migrant rhetoric, for example, doesn't just oppose immigration, it creates a shared identity around 'protecting our way of life'. People feel part of something meaningful, under threat, worth defending.

Simple narratives: Instead of complex discussions about global economics, housing policy, or public service funding, they offer a clear story: 'They're taking what's ours'. It's wrong, but it's memorable and motivating.

Empowerment: They make ordinary people feel like heroes defending their community. Every vote, donation, or social media share becomes an act of resistance against those who would destroy their world.

Emotional connection: Fear, anger, and hope are powerful motivators. Anti-migrant movements don't lead with statistics about immigration. They lead with stories that make people feel something visceral.

Direct communication: They speak in everyday language, bypassing traditional media and institutions to talk directly to their audience. No jargon, no committee-speak.

The uncomfortable success stories

Look at how effectively these movements have shifted public discourse:

• Brexit: 'Take back control' was brilliantly simple, emotional, and empowering messaging
• Anti-migrant campaigns: Frame complex asylum systems as simple invasion narratives
• Anti-establishment movements: Position themselves as the voice of 'forgotten' communities

They don't win through better policies or more accurate facts. They win through better stories that make people feel heard, valued, and part of something important.

What charities can learn (ethically)

We can study their community-building tactics without adopting their divisive content:

1. Create clear identity, not just causes

Right-wing movements give people an identity ('patriots', 'defenders of traditional values').

Our version: Give supporters meaningful identities such as 'Climate guardians', 'Justice champions', 'Community builders'. Make supporting your cause part of who they are, not just what they do.

2. Frame problems as threats to shared values

Anti-migrant rhetoric works by framing immigration as a threat to community cohesion, safety, resources.

Our version: Frame injustice, inequality, or environmental destruction as threats to the values we all share: fairness, safety, future opportunities for our children.

3. Make supporters the heroes of the story

Right-wing movements position ordinary people as defenders against powerful threats.

Our version: Position donors as the ones who can solve what governments, corporations, or systems have failed to address. 'You are the solution the establishment won't provide.'

4. Use emotional urgency responsibly

They create urgency through fear ('invasion', 'destruction of our way of life').

Our version: Create urgency through hope and agency 'This is our moment to change everything', 'Together we can solve what they said was impossible'.

5. Speak directly and authentically

They bypass traditional channels to speak in everyday language about real concerns.

Our version: Drop the sector jargon. Talk about real impacts on real people in words that anyone can understand.

The refugee charity challenge

This is where the learning becomes most crucial. Right-wing movements have been devastatingly effective at framing migration as a threat. Many refugee charities respond with facts about legal obligations or economic benefits but can miss the emotional and community elements entirely.

What if refugee charities borrowed their community-building tactics?

Instead of: "Help us support refugees"

Try: "Most of us believe in fairness and decency. But a cruel, expensive system is failing everyone – refugees and taxpayers alike. Join thousands of others showing what British compassion really looks like."

This creates:

• A clear 'us' (decent, fair-minded people)
• A clear problem (the broken system, not the people in it)
• Heroic positioning (supporters as the real solution)
• Shared values (fairness, decency, effective use of resources)

Walking the ethical line

This approach requires absolute clarity about our boundaries:

Never dehumanise: Our 'enemy' is always systems, policies, or abstract problems, never people or groups

Stay truthful: Emotional appeals must be grounded in verifiable facts

Build bridges: Create larger 'us' groups that include, don't exclude

Focus on hope: Channel emotions toward positive change, not fear or anger

Maintain complexity internally: Simplify for public communications while keeping strategy nuanced

The path forward

Right-wing populist movements have shown us something uncomfortable: facts alone don't build movements. Stories do. Identity does. Emotion does. Community does.

We can learn from their tactics while rejecting their targets. We can create the belonging, identity, and empowerment they offer, but channel it toward justice, inclusion, and positive change.

The question isn't whether we should learn from successful movement-building. It's whether we're brave enough to compete at their level while staying true to our values.

Because if we don't learn to build communities as passionately committed to justice as they are to division, we'll keep losing the battle for hearts, minds, and social change.

What do you think? Are we ready to fight fire with fire - ethically?