In recent years, the study of populism within Middle Eastern politics has gained increasing scholarly attention, particularly in the context of Iran’s complex political landscape. Once regarded as a concept tied primarily to early state-building efforts, populism is now critically analyzed for its implications on democracy and liberalism. A groundbreaking study scrutinizes how Iranian politicians employ populist rhetoric on the social media platform Twitter, revealing new dimensions of political communication in a highly controlled and often repressive political system. This research dissects the ways politicians construct the concept of “the people,” illuminating how these narratives not only reflect but also actively shape power dynamics and political discourse in Iran.
The research begins by contextualizing populism as a flexible, “thin-centered” ideology that operates across various political factions, transcending conventional left-right distinctions. In Iran’s mediated political environment, Twitter emerges as a particularly fertile ground for the deployment of populist discourse, allowing politicians to bypass state-controlled media and connect directly with the public. Despite official filtering of the platform, Iranian politicians persist in their use of Twitter, an act itself imbued with populist symbolism. This direct engagement reinforces the image of authenticity and closeness to “the people,” characteristics that are central to populist leaders worldwide.
Central to the study is the revelation that Iranian politicians predominantly use populism in a conservative and power-oriented manner. Instead of fostering pluralistic or evolutionary political change, these politicians largely seek to maintain the status quo, employing a discourse that constructs a binary opposition between a unified “people” and an antagonistic “other.” This antagonistic “other” is crafted not only in opposition to foreign entities but also domestically, extending to rival political factions. This multifaceted process of othering enables Iranian politicians to galvanize support by framing political contests as existential battles between the true people and internal or external enemies.
Digging deeper into the concept of othering, the study identifies that Iranian political actors do not solely rely on intimidation-based tactics. Instead, they also strategically depict the opposition to the “other” as aligned with the people’s interests, effectively positioning the populace within the politicians’ own ideological camp. This technique of other-antagonism not only alienates adversaries but also reinforces a sense of unity and loyalty among supporters. Significantly, this phenomenon is not exclusive to high-profile figures like the Supreme Leader but is pervasive across a spectrum of Iranian politicians, highlighting the ubiquity of populist messaging in the country’s political ecology.
In evaluating the theoretical expectations of populism, which generally hold that liberal or evolutionary populism is more antagonistic towards out-groups while conservative populism emphasizes internal homogeneity, the study reveals a compelling divergence in the Iranian context. Contrary to international trends, Iranian reformists—often sidelined within the political system—tend to articulate a vision of the populace as unified and unsegmented. Conversely, conservative factions, which dominate and seek to preserve the political order, are more prone to advancing divisive “us versus them” narratives. This inversion challenges simplistic classifications of populist tendencies and underscores the unique contours of Iranian political rhetoric.
The persistence of populist strategies in Iran is traced back to the 1979 revolution, where populism first emerged as a pragmatic tool for political mobilization. Over four decades later, various political groups across the ideological spectrum continue to leverage populist discourse as a means of asserting influence and legitimacy. This historical continuity suggests that populism remains a vital, if complex, thread woven into the fabric of post-revolutionary Iran’s political identity. Yet, it is recognized that populism alone cannot fully explain the country’s political and social dynamics, given its thin ideological core and multifunctional utility.
A critical insight from the study lies in the mediatization of populism via social media platforms such as Twitter. The unique characteristics of these digital spaces—direct interaction, immediacy, and emotional language—amplify populist communication styles. Unlike traditional media channels subject to gatekeeping and editorial control, Twitter allows politicians to employ colloquial expressions and emotionally charged messages that resonate strongly with audiences, increasing mobilization potential. This shift not only transforms the nature of political discourse in Iran but also entrenches populist patterns by facilitating unmediated engagement between leaders and the populace.
Furthermore, the research highlights the ironic yet strategic significance of Iranian politicians’ use of Twitter despite state restrictions. By actively circumventing official bans, these politicians signal defiance against bureaucratic constraints and project an image of transparency and directness. This performative act aligns with central populist communication strategies, which emphasize bypassing intermediaries to reach the public “directly.” The medium thus becomes not just a channel but a symbol reinforcing the populist persona of political actors who adopt it.
The study’s analytical framework, which delineates distinct dimensions of the “populist people” such as Pure, Exclusive, Victim, and Other-antagonist, alongside anti-populist counterparts including Plural, Role-playing, and Immature, offers a powerful tool for decoding political rhetoric. This typology facilitates a nuanced understanding of how Iranian politicians conceptualize and deploy representations of “the people,” illustrating varied discursive strategies shaped by political orientation and circumstance. Importantly, this tool holds promise for comparative analyses, enabling scholars to examine populism in other authoritarian or theocratic contexts where similar dynamics might unfold.
Importantly, the research demonstrates that Iranian politicians spanning reformist and conservative divides, as well as appointed and elected elites, engage in diverse populist tactics aimed at consolidating discursive dominance. This multifaceted use of populism complicates simplistic narratives about Iranian politics and showcases the adaptability of populist rhetoric in navigating and contesting power structures. By focusing on the construction of “the people,” the study offers insights into the factional battles that define contemporary Iranian political life.
The findings also underscore the role of social media as a double-edged sword in authoritarian regimes. While platforms like Twitter enable direct communication and the dissemination of populist messages with far-reaching mobilizing potential, they simultaneously reinforce societal cleavages by nurturing exclusionary narratives. In Iran, these dynamics contribute to the entrenchment of polarized identities and the amplification of political rivalries, illustrating the complex interplay between technology, discourse, and power.
Looking ahead, the authors suggest future research avenues that focus on opposition figures’ use of populist rhetoric on Twitter to complement the present analysis of establishment politicians. By comparing how marginalized or dissenting actors construct “the people,” scholars can better differentiate the rhetorical strategies employed across Iran’s fractured political spectrum. Such comparative inquiry would deepen understanding of populism’s multifunctionality and reveal whether it uniformly operates as a tool of political leverage or manifests distinct variations aligned with structural divides.
Ultimately, this research contributes significantly to the burgeoning literature on populism by delivering a rich case study embedded in the unique socio-political fabric of Iran. It affirms the classification of populism as a “thin-centered” ideology, versatile enough to be harnessed by actors with diverse aims and ideological leanings. The study’s integration of theoretical rigor with empirical digital discourse analysis advances scholarly efforts to decode the complex relationship between political communication, media technology, and authoritarian governance.
In a broader sense, this work illuminates the transformative impact of digital platforms on political engagement in restrictive environments. By exposing how Iranian politicians mediatize populism to craft compelling narratives of identity and power, the study offers a template to explore similar phenomena in other non-democratic regimes. As social media continues reshaping political landscapes worldwide, understanding these dynamics is crucial for grasping the evolving nature of populism, authoritarian resilience, and contestations over the definition of “the people” in the 21st century.
Subject of Research:
Construction of “The People” by Iranian politicians on Twitter through populist discourse.
Article Title:
The populist people and mediatized populism: the construction of “The People” by Iranian politicians on Twitter.
Article References:
Majidifard, A., Fouladiyan, M. & Yousofi, A. The populist people and mediatized populism: the construction of “The People” by Iranian politicians on Twitter.
Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 1089 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05130-1
Image Credits: AI Generated
