São examinados cinco conjuntos normativos de demandas que têm a chance de reduzir o imenso hiato entre os representados e os representantes nas democracias modernas. Como um desses conjuntos, a accountability é mais facilmente entendida em relação aos outros.
INTRODUCTIONThe successes of populist movements and the politicization of religion in the 21 st century raise new questions about the relationship between civil society, populism, and religion. In consolidated western democracies, it is populists who are capitalizing on the critique of oligarchic, corrupt, and insufficiently democratic political establishments and their invocation of religious tropes is striking. So is the use by religious entrepreneurs of populist politics to further their own aims. This article addresses the paradoxical relationship of populist movements to civil society and to religion. We argue that while populist movements, and religious associations emerge and flourish in civil society, the logic of populism and of politicized religion is antithetical to the underlying principles of civil society and, ultimately, to democracy itself. It is important to address the dark side of civil society that these developments represent, in order to show how they undermine instead of realizing its open, plural, critical, inclusive, liberty-and democracy enhancing features.Populist movements excel in revealing democratic dysfunction, and remind us that legitimate political action is not limited to voting, or to professional politicians -it includes civil protests, gatherings, movements, self-organized groups, communications in civil society by ordinary people and civil disobedience (Cohen & Arato, 1992; Moffitt, 2016, p. 145). Religious associations, too, are part of a plural and diverse civil society and, alongside other autonomous voluntary associations, they can generate solidarities and ethical orientations. But the powerful political monistic thrust of populist movements and of politicized religion tend to eviscerate not only civil society's plurality, but also the distinctiveness of the logics of influence and power that undergird the differentiation of civil society and the state, and help maintain the former's autonomy. Thus, we argue that both populist movements and political religion are in but not necessarily of civil society. On their own, but especially when they merge or ally, populist and politicized religious identity politics pose serious challenges to constitutional democracy. But it is also important to grasp the tensions between them and to see that civil society is where alternative democratizing movements, resistance and opposition to oligarchy, to populism and to politicized religion can develop.In the first section of this article we discuss and update our conception of civil society. In the second part, we take up the relation of populism and civil society in order to show how populist movements tend to undermine the very terrain in which they emerge. We identify the specific logic of populism ideal typically, and analyze the difference between populist and other, self-limiting social movements. We then turn to the contemporary link between populism and religious identity politics. Not only do today's populists hijack religion for their own purposes but the reverse is also true...
This chapter considers the uneasy relationship of “populism and constitutionalism.” After defining constitutionalism, it considers the antagonism of populist logic to “liberal constitutionalism” and asks whether this means to constitutionalism as such. While on the level of logic the answer here is affirmative, we raise the empirical question of the interest of many populists in constitutions. This interest is manifested in efforts of constitutional replacement, amendment, and court packing projects, promoted by populist movements and parties, and undertaken by populists “in” government, in the process of becoming “the” government. The chapter considers four main theoretical attempts to explain the empirically obvious interest of populists in the constitution: political constitutionalism as the norm of populist attacks on liberal versions (Tushnet, Bugaric), instrumental majoritarian constitutionalism linked to “legal resentment” (Blokker), abusive constitutionalism (Landau and Dixon), and the constitutionalism of the constituent power (Colon Rios and Corias).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.