Is populism democracy without liberalism? – week 10
Populism is a difficult work to unpack. And its connotations have probably changed significantly over time. I believe that populism is intrinsically connected to a broad public or mass attraction. As such, it might defy traditional conservative perspectives on politics as exclusionary and being relegated to a certain political class. Populism can be construed as dangerous much as social movements can be (originally analyzed by political scientists as destructive “mob” mentalities). There is definitely a paternalism from political elite when deeming these populist movements as negative or “unfit” to the “reality” of politics.
Nevertheless, populism also shines light on the weaknesses of democracy. In a consideration of its bare bones as electoral representativeness, democracy can be absolutely destructive (Aristotle’s tyranny of the majority). As such, counter-majoritarian institutions should be in place to ensure that minorities and politically marginalized groups are not downtrodden by popularly backed movements. It is interesting to see counter-majoritarian forces referred to as undemocratic by populist leaders (notably the current US President Trump) – considering the liberal component to Western democracies that have developed those blocks to populist or majoritarian domination.
In current political speak, populism is definitely considered an insult. Yet it is fundamental to understand why this is, as it can answer questions on how we consider democracy, liberal democracy and politics in general.
the title of your blog poses a really interesting question-one that I don’t have an answer to. However, I can speculate. If populist leaders generally have wide spread support, then there is one major characteristic of democracy. Another question is how they came to power? if it is someone like Juan Peron, then they are legitimately elected in a competitive electoral system. can it how, however, be argued that populist can support liberalism. at least in the sense of individual rights? Peron increased the rights of many while in power.
I often wonder if the term populist is used to sway people the other way, as you mentioned, considering it an insult. I was watching coverage of Trudeau visiting Vietnam (to be honest, I am now not 100% sure of which South East Asian country he was in because I just read something about him in Myanmar). I noticed that his coat was off (I suppose the heat was getting to him) and his shirt sleeves were rolled up, rather like Jon pointed out, how Juan Perón used to do, to more or less fit in with the masses.
I think popularity is one thing. Populism is something completely different. To me, it seems that populism is simply another way of saying the blind leading the blind.
I enjoyed reading your post and thought you brought up some interesting questions. The term populist as you define it seems to be inherently embedded in the political sphere, as there is always someone vying for the control over the masses. I agree with you that it is easy to see why the connotations of populism are often negative and looked down upon by more traditional democratic forms of politics.