Populist parties abandoned horizontal decision-making once they aimed to win power

Evidence

There was another side to the story, however. As suggested above, while the movements of the squares were torn between horizontal and vertical approaches, the former almost completely disappeared in the political formations that took up their legacy. Excessive horizontality and inefficient decision-making procedures were now prohibited: the purpose was to conquer power. Times had changed. The populist actors who emerged in the aftermath of the Great Recession were keen to suppress superfluous layers of organization, set up frequent online consultations with their members, adopt modern modes and channels of communication, and rely on a charismatic and telegenic leadership figure. — Arthur Borriello and Anton Jäger, The Populist Moment, 123

Categorization

• XREF: Fits the general dilemma of movement-to-party transitions, e.g. Occupy’s refusal vs. Podemos’s centralization; echoes Michels’ iron law of oligarchy. — connects to: Electoral victory does not select for different authoritarianism within a party

Broader Connections

• Electoral victory does not select for different authoritarianism within a party #corroborates (0.75)