Populist and radical political discourse
What is populism?
Populism is an essentially contested concept, in which the core of the concept is being
argued (and whether it even exists).
Different concepts come with different dimensions.
6 different definitions in this book:
- Popular agency approach (by historians): the elite and the people. Refers to
populism to a specific moment in time, specific historian moment
- Laclauaen approach: named after the researcher, a political philosopher (less
imperical research). Revolutionary force, elites don’t listen to the people people
get mad, leaders stand up and listen to the people changing the status quo
- Socio-economic approach: populism refers to irresponsible economic policy, giving
to the people what they want even though it is bad for economy
- Political strategy approach: leader that leans towards dictatorship, authoritarian
elements, the context mainly in latin america
- Folklore approach: the style is important, mainly in communication, media scholars,
how populists communicate characterized to be seen as someone of the people,
using amateurish and unprofessional political behavior, to match with the people.
- Ideational (to do with ideas) (Mudde & Kaltwasser): the elite and the people, as a set
of ideas about the world.
Populism as a thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into
two homogeneous and antagonistic camps, “the pure people” versus “the corrupt elite,”
and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will)
of the people.
- Thin-centered: some aspects of an ideology, but only one idea, not all the answers to
all the questions. Not so many thick ideologies, thin ideology is attached to thick
ideologies. Michael Freeden wrote about ideologies.
o There are different types of populism. What makes them populistic? All
antiestablishment and for the people. But who is the establishment and who
are the people, is different for every type of populism?
- Elitism and pluralism, seen by populists as opposites:
o E: elite is good, and people is bad. It is present but not used for electoral
advantage. the elite is superior in everything and people are dzngerous znd
vulgar, dishonest —> should not be involved in politics. elite will or reject
populism or support a limited model of it.
o P: the group is homogeneous, and pluralism is heterogeneous. The people
are homogeneous, and the people want this, and the elite is not listening
because they think there is no general will. there are too many different
groups with their own will and interests. politics should have many centrrs of
power to reflects all those different interests.
- Populism is not clientelism:
o C: ‘vote for me and I’ll give you something back’, rewarding your voters, e.g.,
Orban has been accused of clientelism. it is a mode of exchange. but
populism has a particular affinity with clientelism
, - Populism is unrelated to left-right distinction: left winged populists, right winged
populists, you find them everywhere. Different world views within populism.
The core concepts:
- The people: very complicated. The people are a construction, it’s a way of populists
speak about the people.
o Useless concept: the people are vague: ‘Power to the people’: is vague and
everyone can interpret it in its own way, when talking about concrete things
people can disagree with it. The vagueness of the people is the strength of
populism because they can frame the people in any way they want to
(contextual and situational)
o Populist are the people looking at the people for the heartland
o Empty signifier
used in combination with the following three meanings:
o The people as the soevereign: people as the rulers, notion of democracy, by
the people for the people. —> politiczl power “a government by the people,
of the people and for the people”
o The common people: the working class, socio culturally low, ordinariness, the
ordinary people (applying that there are non-ordinary people, who look
down to ordinary people). —> socioeconomic force. the common people are
being excluded from power due to their sociocultural and socioeconomic
status
▪ populists: to unite and mobilize an angry and silent majority against a
defined enemy (the establishment)
o The nation: populism often has a nationalist element, not worldwide, but the
workers as a sub of a nation. —> the nationality. a national community
defined in civic or ethnic terms, implies all those of native descent
- The elite: the elite are corrupt, and the people are pure. The morality is the
distinction between the pure people and the corrupt elite. The elite are in the basis
of power and always in leading position, this excludes populist and anyone who is
sympathetic to them. Mostly it is the political establishment, the media is more for
the right winged populists. It is a group that works against the general will of the
people —> hold on to the status quo —> the paranoid style of politics
o Right winged: academics, the media, the judges (mostly in Poland)
o Left winged: define elite in economic terms and they say that class divisions
are artificial
they are against the big market, because they put the ‘special interests’ above the
‘general interests’ —> kill small businesses. populists in power use this as an
explanation of not having enough success (cordon sanitaire), even
when they are in power, they’re being ‘sabotaged’
Do populists become elite when they get elected? GLB became the opposition in the
government. Trump positioned as a populist even when in power, everyone else was the
elite, even though he had the greatest power in the world. Orban sees the EU as elite
they all have a paranoid style of politics
populism completely emerged with nationalism: elite are seen as an alien, ethnicpopulism
(Latin America)
,they are other criterea to distinguish the people from the elite —> gives flexibility —>
definition of the people is not the same criterea for the elite (e.g., p: native ≠ e: alien)
- The general will: people come together into a community and legislate their interest.
the idea that the people have a will, and that the populist knows this will. It is against
the special interest of the elite and globalists and pluralists. There is one will, not
many.
- the repuclic utopia of self government: citizens can make and execute the laws, in
facor of referenda and plebiscites
o the notion of the general will is based on the notion of common sense
o It is against liberal democracy: democratic component is the rule of the
people, the majority rule; the liberal component is plural views, individual
rights, rights of minorities…
The advantages of the ideational approach
- Looking at populism as a thin centered ideology that attach to other concepts or
ideological families —> populism is malleable in the real world
- the ideational approach accommodate to broad range of political actors
- Many types of leadership and mobilization
- this approach explains the relation between populism and democracy. Populism is a
friend and foe. During the revolution, at that moment, a populist is a friend. Many
revolutions started by populists. But when democracy is established, populism is a
foe. Once you have a democratic system, populism is a threat
- The supply (politicians) and the demand (the electorates) populism is located in
both supply and demand. the populist demand to have support for populist ideas at
the mass level
Populism around the world
While all populists share a common discourse, populism is an extremely heterogeneous
political phenomenon. left wing populism combined with a form of socialism and right wing
populism with a type of nationalism.
Which specific form populism ends up adopting is related to the social grievances that are
dominant in the context in which it operates.
Each populist actor emerges because of a particular set of social grievances, which
influences its choice of host ideology, which in turn affects how the actor defines “the
people” and “the elite.” there is a grievance that leads to host an ideology that leads to a
definition of the people and the elite.
- Social grievances: an issue or a crisis, can lead to a grievance. Example: high energy
prices lower the taxes
- Who is the people, what is the problem, what is it that the people want (the general
will)?
the rise of populism is closely linked to the rise of democracy in the world.
populism profits from the growing global hegemony of the democratic ideal and from
electoral + frustrations with liberal democracies
Latin America: three waves of populism
, Thick People elite
ideology/grievances
Type 1 Socialism/communism The pure people: The corrupt elite:
During great virtuous mestizo national oligarchy in
depression until the Americanismo: beyond community alliance with
rise of the the left-right scale composed of imperialist forces
bureaucratic peasants and that was against the
authoritarian workers, neglecting economic import
regimes the citizens of substitution
1929-1960’s indigenous and industrialization
migration to urban African descent. model.
areas + not the whole
industrialization establishment
Type 2 Economic crisis the people were political actors who
Much shorter, Neoliberalism portrayed as a favored the
emerged early in Americanismo passive mass of existence of a strong
1990’s individuals, whose state and opposed
—> had no solution, ideas could be the development of
economic crisis went to IMF for harsh deduced from a free market.
neoliberal reforms, but opinion polls.
could stabilize the Informal sector and
economy and extremely poor
hyperinflation
Type 3 Radical leftist all those who are a fraudulent
End of the 1990’s Socialism/ excluded and establishment that
communism, fighting discriminated implemented the
for the free market against —> rules of the game in
inclusive, their own favor.
social grievances from implementing the populist wanted
the neoliberal reforms policies in favor of to give the power
the discriminated back to the people,
indigenous groups. implementing a new
constitution via a
referendum —>
opposition has small
capacity
Americanismo: an expression used in a language that does not originate in the Americas but
is borrowed from one that does; it is a type of foreignism.
the expression of a language foreign to America coined by its speakers on that continent.
—> all i habitants of latin america have a common identity and denounces imperial powers
North America
