<p>The question of using rhetoric across disciplines raises the question of how we conceive of rhetoric itself. The problematological philosophy of rhetoric proposes a general perspective, defining rhetoric as the negotiation of distance in regard to given questions. This relational theory can be deployed at a meta-theoretical level and to empirical social science. The relational philosophy of rhetoric as embodied action can be integrated with the relational analysis of other social interactions. Applied to contemporary politics, this supports the analysis of globalization and populism in terms of the political dynamics of distal or proximal distanciation, through rhetoric and policy actions. Rhetoric mobilizes the populist, proximalist reaction against globalism. Populists use strong emotional language and <i>ad hominem</i> attacks on rivals to widen difference and distance, mobilizing the passions against distal foreigners or proximal ethnic populations at home, against globalist (neo)liberals and the remote establishment. Fostering a pathos of displacement, resentment, even rage, ‘left behind’ voters have rejected the elite-driven distal politics of globalization and reasserted a politics of proximity in the form of political and economic reterritorialization. We examine two populist cases of Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán through trade and education policy. Trump rhetorically positions the US as the loser and victim of globalization. Orbán's rhetorical positioning is more subtle, adjusted to the structural constraints of Hungary’s semi-peripheral position. In higher education, populists attempt to delegitimize institutionalized science and its representatives, which act as an intermediary institutional barrier between the political leadership and closer, direct communication with civil society.</p>