Populism as a logic of political action

Abstract

This article offers a new understanding of populism. The argument unfolds as follows: first, the populist literature is reviewed and two main approaches are identified: ontic and logic-oriented, the more important of which is the Schmitt-Laclau logic of enmity. While the authors broadly agree with Laclau’s criticism of ontic approaches, they endorse neither his ontological understanding of enmity, nor his claim that populism is politics, and enmity is the logic of populism. Next, the origins of populism are located in a paradox at the heart of democracy. Democracy defines itself as a community of inclusion, yet exclusion is constitutive of inclusion, including therefore democratic inclusion. Then is discussed what the authors believe to be the true logic of populism: resentment. Unlike enmity, which functions in Laclau’s populist theory as an ontology of non-identity, resentment operates within a rivalrous framework, which presupposes identification between the parts and refers to a set of normative commitments. Finally, the article concludes by presenting an understanding of populism as a specific logic of political action.

New Right 2.0: Teacher populism on social media in England

“…Mudde and Kaltwasser (2018) characterise the motivations for populism as a result of a combination of economic anxiety, a cultural backlash (especially for the political right), a limited capacity for local and national politicians to respond to voters' needs in the context of globalised political economy and political polarisation. Others see populism as a consequence of the inherent contradictions of liberal democracy (da Silva and Vieira, 2019). Some consider populism as a threat to liberal democracy (e.g.…”

Affective economy of national-populist images: Investigating national and transnational online networks through visual big data

“…Many studies (e.g. Crociani-Windland and Hoggett, 2012; Da Silva and Vieira, 2018; Demertzis, 2006) have connected the success of populism to supporters’ feelings of resentment and ressentiment (on their differences, see Demertzis, 2006). For example, Capelos and Demertzis (2018) investigated how the fusion of anger, fear and hope in complex blends of resentful or ressentiment-ful affectivity leads to certain political actions, such as support for populist parties.…”

Cultivating Alternatives to Authoritarian Populism in Amazonia

“…In contrast, the majority of “the common people” are framed as unproductive, a drag on the state's resources who stifle Brazil's entrepreneurial spirit (Silva ). Here we have an exemplary case of populist reasoning whereby the claims of a minority group are framed as equivalent to the claims of “the people,” while the interests of most are rendered as antagonistic to those of the nation (da Silva and Vieira ; Laclau )…”

“…Here we have an exemplary case of populist reasoning whereby the claims of a minority group are framed as equivalent to the claims of "the people," while the interests of most are rendered as antagonistic to those of the nation (da Silva and Vieira 2018;Laclau 2005). 2 Fabio's words not only convey ideas regarding land and value that are peculiar to landholding elites in Brazil (Wolford 2010) but express the multispecies conditions of monoculture expansion.…”

“…“Populist” because these actions do not follow legal precedent or expert knowledge but rather reflect the will of leaders who claim to speak for “the people”—which is to say, not for the majority but for a particular group that is said to embody the true identity of the nation (Bosteels ; Brubaker ). “Authoritarian” to the extent that those who oppose the symbolic equivalence between the ruling coalition and “the people” are targeted as enemies of the nation and excluded by force from spaces of political deliberation (da Silva and Vieira ; on the broader issue of authoritarianism, see Kojève ; Levitsky and Way ).…”