Populism: theoretical approaches, definitions
POL333 Populism and political parties


•
•
•
•What is populism?
2

Problems with populism
•
•
•No universally accepted definition: Canovan (1999): ‘contested concept’, vague term (Stanley
2008), retaining an ‘awkward conceptual slipperiness’, ‘chameleonic nature’ (Taggart 2000)
•
•
•Reasons for difficulties with a good definition of populism:
•
•
•
3

Media and public perception of populism
•Stretching of the term
•
•All politicians are populists (from time to time)
•
•Content – unrealistic promises, irresponsible policies, demagogy, spending, socialist policies,
xenophobia…
•
•See Bale, Taggart, van Kessel. 2011: Thrown around with abandon? Popular understandings of
populism as conveyed by the print media: a UK case study. Acta Politica 46 (2).
•
•Populist accusation as a weapon of political fight
•
•Perception of populism as demagogy
4

Three waves of populism (Pauwels 2014)
•Empirical diversity of populism
•
•19th century populism – the People`s Party in the USA, „narodniky“ in Russia (Canovan 1981,
Taggart 2000)
•
•Latin American populism – Peron, Chávez, De la Torre…
•
•New populism – radical right-wing or radical left parties in Europe
•(+ exclusively/centrist populist parties)
•
•
5

1.
1.
•
•
6

POPULISM AS A STRATEGY/ORGANIZATION
•‘a specific way of competing for and exercising political power’ (Weyland, 2001)
•A way of implementation of a populist programme
•‘a political strategy through which a personalistic leader seeks or exercises government power
based on direct, unmediated, uninstitutionalized support from large numbers of mostly unorganized
followers‘ (Weyland, 2001; study of Latin American politics)
•Direct quasi-personal connection between the leader and the people - the spokeperson of the ‘vox
populi’
•Loose organization structure of populist movements
•Organizational aspect of populism (explanation of the low stability of electoral support of
populist movements in LatAm)
•A top-down mobilization strategy
•Drawbacks?
•
7

POPULISM AS A COMMUNICATION STYLE
•Communicative, rhetorical elements – performance vs. content
•Simplistic language, direct communication, colourful expression, swearing, slang X formal language
of the elite, ‘tabloid style of populism’ (Canovan)
•Jagers and Walgrave (2007) – ‘a political communication style of political actors that refers to
the people’, appeals to and identifies with the people and pretends to speak in the name of the
people – thin vs thick populism
•populism as a tool used by different political parties, movements, individual politicians –
problematic in the context of comparative politics
•a way to address the voters, not (necessarily) part of the identity of the party (Laclau`s
approach)
•Drawbacks?
•
•
•
•

POPULISM AS AN IDEOLOGY
•Ideology:
•
•total, closed and cohesive view of human beings in society / a systematic body of concepts  / a
comprehensive normative vision / the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a
sociopolitical program
•
•Is populism an ideology?
•
•Populism is usually not regarded as a full-blown ideology (such as socialism, liberalism etc.)
9

POPULISM AS A THIN-CENTERED IDEOLOGY
•Cas Mudde:
•“populism as an ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous
and antagonistic groups, ‘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 ideology – does not cover all aspects of life, only specific political questions
•can be combined with other thin-centered of full blown ideologies – ‘a receptive partner for full
ideologies’ (Stanley 2008), ‘colourless’(Jagers, Walgrave, 2007) – East-Central European
experience, M5S,
•Criticism of the approach
•
10

ANALYTICAL CORE OF POPULISM
•Deconstruction of the definition (see also Deiwiks 2009, Stanley 2008):
•
1.The people as a homogeneous group – the people and the elite
2.
2.Denigration of the elites
3.
3.The antagonistic relationship between the elites and the people
4.
4.The idea of (restoration) of popular sovereignty
•
11

THE ‘PEOPLE’ AS A HOMOGENEOUS GROUP
•Crucial importance for populism
•Refusal of division of society into different groups (against pluralism – next lecture)
•How the people is defined?
•As the sovereign – demos, against principles of liberal and representative democracy
•As a nation – ethnos, populism = nationalism (?), vs. foreigners, immigrants etc.
•As a class – ‘working people’, the ‘99 per cent’ vs. ‘the rich’, the ‘1 per cent’, exploitation
the lower class
•Taggart: heartland, Mudde: constructed subset of population
•
12

DENIGRATION OF THE ELITES…
•Establishment/elites as a collective, monolithic entity
•Criticism targeting all the established actors
•Political parties, businessmen, ‘the rich’, oligarchy, the ‘1 per cent’, … •Particular interests
which are in opposition to the interests of the people •Sabotaging the interests and democratic
rights of the people
•
13

THE ANTAGONISTIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PEOPLE AND THE ELITE
•Manichaean view (moral dimension, normative outlook)
•The good (‘pure’) people and the bad elite
•People betrayed by the corrupt elite
•Alienation of the elite, people exploited by the elite
•P. speak in the name of the ‘oppressed people’
•The chief social divide between the governing and the governed – denial of the old cleavages
•Aggresive and/or mocking rhetoric (‘political class’, ‘dinosaurs’, ‘robber barons’, ‘thieves’,
‘oligarchy’, ‘godfathers’…)
•Emphasis on the proclaimed crisis (elites blamed for it) - political, cultural, social, economic
•
•
14

THE IDEA OF POPULAR SOVEREIGNTY
•
•Sovereignty taken away from the people by the elite - against the representative democracy (next
lecture) •Often proponents of direct democracy (not a defining characteristic of p.) •Renewal of
the ‘distorted’ relationship between the elites and the people •People are fully formed and
self-aware (no need for incompetent political elites) •‘common sense’ as the leading principle
(‘votes for us are votes for common sense’ – R. John (VV))
•All representatives have to do is to listen to the vox populi
•
•
15

Typology of populism (based on Pauwels 2014; Havlík, Stanley 2015; modified)
Social populism
Radical right-wing populism
Neoliberal populism
Non-ideological populism
Construction of the people
Working class, the opressed, 99%, the exploited
(Pure) nation, ethnos
Hard-working taxpayers, entrepreneurs
Ordinary people, citizens
Depiction of the elites/enemies
Capitalists, imperialists, bankers, exploiters
Immigrants, foreigners, multiculturalism, feminism
Bureaucratic elites/states, interventionist state
Corrupt incompetent politicians
Host ideology
Socialism
Nativism
Economic liberalism
Not clear
Examples
PDS, Syriza, SP
NF, VB, Ataka
LPF, ALP, ANO (SVK)
ANO (CZ), NDSV, M5S
16

Populism and extremism
•
•The relationship to democracy:
•
•Populism is not against democracy per se („democratic illiberalism“ – Pappas, see next lecture)
•
•Extremism defined by its anti-democratic/antisystemic approach
•
17

POPULISM AND XENOPHOBIA
•Definition:
•
• “the dislike of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange“
•
•Often combined with prejudices
•
•Can be combined with populism as a part of a host ideology (nativism) but it is populism per se
•
•
18

POPULISM AND DEMAGOGY
•Demagogy, demagoguery (IS NOT POPULISM):
•
•the use of distorted and simplified arguments appealing mainly to the emotions and prejudices,
used to influence individuals and groups
•thinking that offers appealing, simple, and straightforward solutions to complex problems,
regardless of if the solutions are realistic, right etc.
• Mudde: politics of the pub, directed at the “gut feeling” of the people, the intuitive
understanding of the world
•But used (also) by populist parties/leaders
-
19

POPULISM AND OPPORTUNISM
•similar to demagogy (difference in the intent of the politician) •opportunistic policies – aiming
at pleasing the people and voters and to buy their support (Mudde, 2004), rather than rationally
looking for the best option •PROBLEM: How do you tell if the politician is honest / opportunistic
or not?
•
ØDemag./opport. and populism usually interchangeable outside of scholarly discussion… unfortunately
Øcan be and often are connected x distinct phenomena
•
•
20

other concepts…
•Populist rage - discernible public feeling that the few are unjustly profiting at the expense of
the many  (e.g. Occupy Wall Street)
•doubled-wage populism
•tax populism
•
21
populist-rage
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/economy/ig/Economic-Cartoons/Populist-Rage.05Ko.htm

Conclusion
•populism as a contested concept X agreement on the analytical/definitional core: the people and
the elite as homogeneous groups, antagonistic relationship between the two, popular sovereignty,
positive valorisation of the people and denigration of the elite •Several approaches (faces of
populism) – ideology, strategy, communication
•Populism and democracy (next lecture)
•Populism and demagoguery and/or opportunism
•Vague use of the term in the media/popular discourse X a precisely defined in political science
(and in this course)
22

Thank you for your attention.
23