Populism and Civil Society

Abstract

Populism and Civil Society: The Challenge to Constitutional Democracy is a theoretical work that draws on extensive secondary literature as well as comparative analysis of cases. The aim is to assess the significance of what is now a global phenomenon—the populist challenge to constitutional democracy. After defining populism using the methods of immanent criticism and ideal typic construction, the book proceeds to examine the challenge in terms of its four main organizational forms: movement mobilization, political party, government, and regime. It considers the important questions: “why populism?” and “why now?” Without presupposing the authoritarian logic of the phenomenon in the definition, the book seeks to demonstrate this logic through the reconstruction of the main elements used by advocates to identify populism. It shows that authoritarian logic is not fully realized in every empirical form of populism and considers why this is so for many movement and party forms, and even populists “in” government vs. populism as “the” government. We identify the historical examples of the latter as “hybrid” regimes blending authoritarian elements and residual democratic forms. The book then proceeds to consider the uneasy relationship of populism to constitutionalism and presents populism as a form of abusive or instrumental “constitutionalism” often relying on the alleged permanence of the quasi-revolutionary constituent power. It concludes by outlining a non- and anti-populist project of democratization and social justice, distinguishing between the “popular” and the “populist,” and outlining a program based on the plurality of democracies and the rescue of some of left populism’s “host ideologies.”

Beyond the Myth of Legality? Framing Effects and Public Reactions to High Court Decisions in Europe

“…On the other hand, the fact that framing matters, even if mostly for "winners," calls attention to how media and elites aligned with the "losing" side may undermine support for high courts by resorting to a partisan rhetoric about judicial decision-making. In the current context of growing illiberal threats to the role of courts (Arato & Cohen, 2021;Bugarič & Ginsburg, 2016), one of the strategies employed by populist leaders to diminish resistance to court-packing and institutional changes designed to neuter high courts is to operate at the symbolic level, portraying themselves as victims of partisan and politicized judicial institutions (de Ghantuz Cubbe, 2022, pp. 54-55).…”

Rethinking hybrid regimes: The American case

“…Weakening the freedom and fairness of electoral competition goes with the populist claim to be the sole embodiment of the authentic people. Tactics range from redesigning the electoral system to secure opposition failure, subtle and not so subtle efforts to disenfranchise population segments unsupportive of populist politicians, and “discriminatory legalism”—using existing law and formal legal authority discriminatorily (and arbitrarily) to favor supporters, to diminish opponents’ rights including those of autonomous actors in civil society, to disempower and silence minorities, and to pressure and intimidate independent media thereby undermining the rule of law (Arato & Cohen, 2022, chapters 3 and 4).…”

“…Unlike fascists, populists do not openly aim at regime change. They locate themselves in the democratic imaginary and embrace more or less competitive elections to get and keep power, but I argue that contemporary populism has an authoritarian logic that fosters regime change once populists are in power (Arato & Cohen, 2022). This article focuses on populism in power, distinguishing between populists in government and populism as “the government.” Once they enter government, populist politicians subtly alter democratic regimes, in three stages.…”

Reclaiming Populism: How Economic Fairness Can Win Back Disenchanted Voters Eric Protzer and Paul Summerville, Cambridge: Polity Press, 2022, pp. 213 (paperback)

“…Is Islamophobia to be dismissed as mere scapegoating when it is systemic and involves elites and mass publics (Lean, 2017;Sajoo, 2020;Zine, 2022)? Subversion of democratic checks and balances, as well as of minority rights, is endemic to populism, not incidental (Waldron, 2020;Arato and Cohen, 2021).…”