Introduction: The Performative and Discursive Approach to Populism

2017

The word populism has been associated to (very) different meanings in the last years. The " populist " label is still used to describe parties, leaders, movements, attitudes and political regimes, too. Moreover, the adjective " populist " is used in a normative fashion in the public debate to denigrate those movements or parties which contrast the mainstream views. The aim of this paper is twofold: on the one hand, I conduct a non-normative analysis to avoid a biased vision of the concept. On the other hand, I advocate the understanding of populism as a thin-centered ideology, according to which it is based on two necessary features, namely, (a) an anti-elite(s) mindset and (b) the criticism of representative politics. Resumen El término populismo ha sido asociado a significados muy diferentes en los últimos años. La eti-queta de populista se sigue utilizando para describir partidos, líderes, movimientos, actitudes y regímenes políticos. Además, el adjetivo populista se utiliza también con una inclinación norma-tiva en el debate público para denigrar a esos movimientos o partidos que contrastan con las ideo-logías dominantes. Este artículo tienes dos objetivos principales: por un lado, desarrollo un análisis conceptual no normativo para evitar una visión sesgada del concepto. Por otra parte, abogo por una consideración del populismo como una ideología débil, según la cual se basa en dos caracte-rísticas necesarias, a saber, (a) el anti-elitismo y (b) la crítica de la política representativa. Palabras clave: populismo, política comparada, análisis conceptual, ideología débil.

Estudios Políticos, 2017

This article offers a historical and conceptual examination of the category of populism in the work of Ernesto Laclau, tracing its development from his early Marxist-influenced writings to his mature post-Marxist theory. Laclau's political theory of populism constitutes one of the most sophisticated and contentious responses to the question of the category's origins. The study presented here underscores both the analytical potential of the concept for political inquiry and the theoretical challenges it must address in order to establish itself within a world continually reconfiguring its criteria for political, economic, and social organisation and participation.

Partecipazione e Conflitto, 2020

The article presents the relational, socio-cultural approach to populism, also referred to by some as "performative". The approach claims phenomenological validity cross-regionally and is complex enough to provide a theory of populism and its subjective logic, while minimal enough to be used handily by other scholars. Populism is not a set of decontesting ideas or "ideology", but a way of being and acting in politics, embodying in discourse and praxis the culturally popular and "from here", in an antagonistic and mobilizational way against its opposite, together with personalism as a concrete mode of authority. Defined in the most synthetic way, populism is the flaunting of what I typologically call the "low". I also argue that civilizational projects of different kinds create a distasteful "unpresentable other"; populists then claim that this Other is nothing less than the true Self of the nation, its "authentic" people, d...

Journal of World-Systems Research, 2018

The unpredicted success of the numerous candidates, parties, and movements colloquially labeled as 'populist' has reignited both academic and popular interest in the broader concept of populism itself. Noting the proximately concurrent rise of these various characters and movements, many Abstract While conventional studies of electoral populism acknowledge that such mobilizations are linked to significant economic crises, their preoccupation with defining what exactly populism is often leads them to downplay the unified structural roots of different sorts of populist mobilizations. This essay presents the beginnings of an alternative framework for the study of electoral populism that draws on the neo-Gramscian theory of political articulation that links studies of global economic crises with conventional theories of populism. While crises are an endemic feature of global capitalism, their political manifestation is shaped by the varied institutional structures and legacies in which they are translated.

2018

Laclau’s conception of populism is the strongest available and the charges against him, and against populism in general from many quarters is unwarranted. But there is still things to think more about in Laclau’s theory. Ontologically I don’t accept the idea of populism being placed on an ontological level. Normatively, even though there is no necessary link between populism and authoritarianism, neither is there a coincidence between the two. We therefore have to be able to specify which dimensions could be used in order to evaluate to which extent actual populists movements are democratic. In the paper I suggest Inclusion, Participation or active citizenship, pluralism. And go into deeper analysis of Lefort’s concept of the empty place of power and the concomitant idea of incarnation in political representation. Keeping the place of power empty is something democratic populisms must consciously recognise and limit themselves in relation to. Analysis of actual populisms should addr...

Scenari , 2019

This article examines Ernesto Laclau’s deconstructive account of populism. Such an account is premised on the notion that politics entails the institution of the “social”. In other words, politics stabilizes in a provisional and temporary way, the inherently heterogenous, infinitely deferring and differing logic of the social space. The article argues that Laclau over-emphasizes such heterogeneity and this becomes particularly evident when we consider the momentous challenges faced by populist parties in power such as that of Syriza in its confrontation with the Troika in the aftermath of the 2015 Referendum.

Populism, 2024

This article outlines three provocations to shake up the comfort zone of populism studies. These are: that populism may have become an anachronism and we should think about moving on; that populism may work better as a term of derision, as democracy was for the ancient Greeks; that we should describe it as a historical phenomenon, something that happened in the mid-twentieth century but is no longer current. So, my suggestion to populism scholars is to drop the term, use it to disqualify opponents, or refer to it as something that happened some time ago.

Polity, volume 54, number 3, July 2022, 2022

In this article I argue that populism needs to be considered as a more complex and fluid phenomenon. Instead of addressing a category of actors, scholars should pay attention to the particular way of “doing politics” and to the political dimensions affected by populism. In addition, populism should be treated as a matter of degree and analyzed accordingly with regard to at least three political dimensions: (1) the ideological, (2) the communicative, and (3) the organizational.

Annual Review of Sociology, 2021

Studies of populism have shifted from substantive to discursive/performative and institutional perspectives in recent decades. This shift resolved some long-standing problems but insulated the analysis of populism from theoretical and methodological debates in the social sciences. Theoretical restrictions have gone hand in hand with geographical neglect: The near-exclusive focus on the United States, Europe, and Latin America reinforces the blind spots of these existing approaches. An integration of overlooked regions holds the potential for theoretical reconstruction, even though such comparative broadening could as well simply reproduce the persistent impasses. Moreover, post-2016 developments have induced a return to substantive issues, throwing into sharp relief what populism studies have been missing during the past decades. The main challenge today is synthesizing socioeconomic analyses with institutionalist and discourse-theoretical advances without falling into eclecticism. Breaking away from the entrenched regional orientations to embrace a more global-historical methodology could help such an endeavor.

Sociologia, 2019

In this short essay, I will try to define contemporary populism in a “neutral” fashion; and to explore its virtues, as well as its (much better known) vices. To conclude, I shall attempt to draw up a balance sheet between its contrasting contributions to contemporary political life in Europe. To accomplish this, I will have to speak “generically” and, therefore, to ignore or set aside the traits populism has had and the outcomes it has produced in specific cases. I begin with the (hazardous) position that it can be good or bad for democracy… depending. And I will finally try to address the issue of the conditions under which it is more likely to harm or benefit the polity in which it has emerged.