A balance sheet of the vices and virtues of 'populisms'.

• Author: Schmitter, Philippe C.
• Position: Essay

Abstract: Politicians and political scientists invariably use the term 'populism' to designate persons or movements they do not like or would not like to have come to power. To be called a 'populist' is to be insulted and, if possible, excluded from 'respectable' liberal democratic practice. This short essay tries to define populism in a 'neutral' fashion and to explore its virtues, as well as its (much better known) vices. It also attempts to draw up a balance sheet between the contrasting contributions of populism to contemporary political life in Europe.

Keywords: vicious populism, virtuous populism, political parties, decisionism, charisma.

Introduction

In this short essay, I will try the impossible: (1) to define populism in a 'neutral' fashion; and (2) 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. (1) I alas, I have no comprehensive theory to offer for determining why and when it will emerge. I, however, will try to say something about whether, in a given instance, it is more likely to harm or benefit the polity in which it has emerged.

A definition

Populism is a political movement that draws its support across or with disregard for the lines of cleavage that are embodied in existing political formations and does so by focusing on the person of its leader who claims to be able to resolve a package of issues previously believed to be unattainable, incompatible or excluded. This definition implies the following:

1. Since the lines of cleavage differ from polity to polity, so will the social bases and political programs of populism. Hence, it is more accurate to refer to populisms in the plural than to treat it as a single, more or less uniform, phenomenon. (2)

2. Since the focus is upon the person or personality of its leader, so will the fortune and effect of the movement depend on that person's political acumen (virtu). Here, the obvious theoretical link is to the literature on charisma and its historical role.

3. Since the tactic is to combine disparate issues that have been underplayed or ignored, so will its 'ideology' be incoherent or inarticulate. Hence, when compared to established groups, its promises and payoffs will seem unrealizable or unpredictable and, hence, likely to produce unforeseeable consequences.

4. Since our focus here is upon populisms in contemporary Europe, so can it be presumed that, at least initially, the regime will be liberal democratic. Therefore, the political movement in question will be focused to some degree upon winning fair elections through a competitive party system.

   Now, let us look schematically at what populisms can accomplish:

   Virtues:

1. Populisms deconsolidate sclerotic partisan loyalties and dissolve collusive party systems opening them up for the entry of new political formations.

2. Populisms recruit persons who were previously apathetic & passive citizens and mobilize them to participate in the electoral process.

3. Populisms encourage the articulation of suppressed cleavages and expectations by raising and combining disparate and/or ignored political issues.

4. Populisms challenge "accepted" external constraints and call into question existing and often-exploitive dependencies upon foreign powers.

5. Populisms replace out-fashioned and formulistic party programs and ideologies and replace them with appeal based on the personality...