What is populism? Who is the populist?: A state of the field review (2008-2018)

Both “populism” and “populist” have long been considered ill-defined terms, and therefore are regularly misapplied in both scholarly and popular discourses.1 This definitional difficulty is exacerbated by the Babelian confusion of voices on populism, where the term’s meaning differs within and betwe...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.)) N.Y.)), 2018-12, Vol.5 (2), p.vi-xxvi
Hauptverfasser: Gagnon, Jean-Paul, Beausoleil, Emily, Son, Kyong-Min, Arguelles, Cleve, Chalaye, Pierrick, Johnston, Callum N.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page xxvi
container_issue 2
container_start_page vi
container_title Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.))
container_volume 5
creator Gagnon, Jean-Paul
Beausoleil, Emily
Son, Kyong-Min
Arguelles, Cleve
Chalaye, Pierrick
Johnston, Callum N.
description Both “populism” and “populist” have long been considered ill-defined terms, and therefore are regularly misapplied in both scholarly and popular discourses.1 This definitional difficulty is exacerbated by the Babelian confusion of voices on populism, where the term’s meaning differs within and between global regions (e.g. Latin America versus Western Europe); time periods (e.g. 1930s versus the present), and classifications (e.g. left/ right, authoritarian/libertarian, pluralist/antipluralist, as well as strains that muddy these distinctions such as homonationalism, xenophobic feminism and multicultural neonationalism). While useful efforts have been made to navigate the vast and heterogeneous conceptual terrain of populism,2 they rarely engage with each other. The result is a dizzying proliferation of different definitions unaccompanied by an understanding as to how they might speak to each other. And this conceptual fragmentation reinforces, and is reinforced by, diverging assessments of populism which tend to cast it as either “good” or “bad” for democracy (e.g. Dzur and Hendriks 2018; Müller 2015).
doi_str_mv 10.3167/dt.2018.050201
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>berghahn</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_berghahn_primary_10_3167_dt_2018_050201</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10.3167/dt.2018.050201</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-berghahn_primary_10_3167_dt_2018_0502013</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqdjkELgjAcxUcUJOW1s6du2n9Oc548RNEHCDyOxWYzZg43ob59iXns0un3eLwHP4Q2GCKC99lOuCgGTCNI4cMZ8mJC4pDmQOdTpnmyRL61dwDAJIE0yz20LRV3QW0D05pe17YpglK1Q-GUnEpXrNGi4tpK_8sVik7Hy-EcXmV3U1w9mOnqhncvhoENQkw4NgixUYj8cQh_HIQbJ8yIilW91k4-HXkDFDlLsg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Enrichment Source</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>What is populism? Who is the populist?: A state of the field review (2008-2018)</title><source>EBSCOhost Political Science Complete</source><creator>Gagnon, Jean-Paul ; Beausoleil, Emily ; Son, Kyong-Min ; Arguelles, Cleve ; Chalaye, Pierrick ; Johnston, Callum N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gagnon, Jean-Paul ; Beausoleil, Emily ; Son, Kyong-Min ; Arguelles, Cleve ; Chalaye, Pierrick ; Johnston, Callum N.</creatorcontrib><description>Both “populism” and “populist” have long been considered ill-defined terms, and therefore are regularly misapplied in both scholarly and popular discourses.1 This definitional difficulty is exacerbated by the Babelian confusion of voices on populism, where the term’s meaning differs within and between global regions (e.g. Latin America versus Western Europe); time periods (e.g. 1930s versus the present), and classifications (e.g. left/ right, authoritarian/libertarian, pluralist/antipluralist, as well as strains that muddy these distinctions such as homonationalism, xenophobic feminism and multicultural neonationalism). While useful efforts have been made to navigate the vast and heterogeneous conceptual terrain of populism,2 they rarely engage with each other. The result is a dizzying proliferation of different definitions unaccompanied by an understanding as to how they might speak to each other. And this conceptual fragmentation reinforces, and is reinforced by, diverging assessments of populism which tend to cast it as either “good” or “bad” for democracy (e.g. Dzur and Hendriks 2018; Müller 2015).</description><identifier>ISSN: 2332-8894</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2332-8908</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3167/dt.2018.050201</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berghahn Journals</publisher><ispartof>Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.)), 2018-12, Vol.5 (2), p.vi-xxvi</ispartof><rights>Berghahn Books</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gagnon, Jean-Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beausoleil, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Son, Kyong-Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arguelles, Cleve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chalaye, Pierrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnston, Callum N.</creatorcontrib><title>What is populism? Who is the populist?: A state of the field review (2008-2018)</title><title>Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.))</title><description>Both “populism” and “populist” have long been considered ill-defined terms, and therefore are regularly misapplied in both scholarly and popular discourses.1 This definitional difficulty is exacerbated by the Babelian confusion of voices on populism, where the term’s meaning differs within and between global regions (e.g. Latin America versus Western Europe); time periods (e.g. 1930s versus the present), and classifications (e.g. left/ right, authoritarian/libertarian, pluralist/antipluralist, as well as strains that muddy these distinctions such as homonationalism, xenophobic feminism and multicultural neonationalism). While useful efforts have been made to navigate the vast and heterogeneous conceptual terrain of populism,2 they rarely engage with each other. The result is a dizzying proliferation of different definitions unaccompanied by an understanding as to how they might speak to each other. And this conceptual fragmentation reinforces, and is reinforced by, diverging assessments of populism which tend to cast it as either “good” or “bad” for democracy (e.g. Dzur and Hendriks 2018; Müller 2015).</description><issn>2332-8894</issn><issn>2332-8908</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqdjkELgjAcxUcUJOW1s6du2n9Oc548RNEHCDyOxWYzZg43ob59iXns0un3eLwHP4Q2GCKC99lOuCgGTCNI4cMZ8mJC4pDmQOdTpnmyRL61dwDAJIE0yz20LRV3QW0D05pe17YpglK1Q-GUnEpXrNGi4tpK_8sVik7Hy-EcXmV3U1w9mOnqhncvhoENQkw4NgixUYj8cQh_HIQbJ8yIilW91k4-HXkDFDlLsg</recordid><startdate>20181201</startdate><enddate>20181201</enddate><creator>Gagnon, Jean-Paul</creator><creator>Beausoleil, Emily</creator><creator>Son, Kyong-Min</creator><creator>Arguelles, Cleve</creator><creator>Chalaye, Pierrick</creator><creator>Johnston, Callum N.</creator><general>Berghahn Journals</general><scope>BBEMB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181201</creationdate><title>What is populism? Who is the populist?</title><author>Gagnon, Jean-Paul ; Beausoleil, Emily ; Son, Kyong-Min ; Arguelles, Cleve ; Chalaye, Pierrick ; Johnston, Callum N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-berghahn_primary_10_3167_dt_2018_0502013</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gagnon, Jean-Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beausoleil, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Son, Kyong-Min</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arguelles, Cleve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chalaye, Pierrick</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnston, Callum N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Berghahn Journals Open Access</collection><jtitle>Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.))</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gagnon, Jean-Paul</au><au>Beausoleil, Emily</au><au>Son, Kyong-Min</au><au>Arguelles, Cleve</au><au>Chalaye, Pierrick</au><au>Johnston, Callum N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What is populism? Who is the populist?: A state of the field review (2008-2018)</atitle><jtitle>Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.))</jtitle><date>2018-12-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>vi</spage><epage>xxvi</epage><pages>vi-xxvi</pages><issn>2332-8894</issn><eissn>2332-8908</eissn><abstract>Both “populism” and “populist” have long been considered ill-defined terms, and therefore are regularly misapplied in both scholarly and popular discourses.1 This definitional difficulty is exacerbated by the Babelian confusion of voices on populism, where the term’s meaning differs within and between global regions (e.g. Latin America versus Western Europe); time periods (e.g. 1930s versus the present), and classifications (e.g. left/ right, authoritarian/libertarian, pluralist/antipluralist, as well as strains that muddy these distinctions such as homonationalism, xenophobic feminism and multicultural neonationalism). While useful efforts have been made to navigate the vast and heterogeneous conceptual terrain of populism,2 they rarely engage with each other. The result is a dizzying proliferation of different definitions unaccompanied by an understanding as to how they might speak to each other. And this conceptual fragmentation reinforces, and is reinforced by, diverging assessments of populism which tend to cast it as either “good” or “bad” for democracy (e.g. Dzur and Hendriks 2018; Müller 2015).</abstract><pub>Berghahn Journals</pub><doi>10.3167/dt.2018.050201</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2332-8894
ispartof Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.)), 2018-12, Vol.5 (2), p.vi-xxvi
issn 2332-8894
2332-8908
language eng
recordid cdi_berghahn_primary_10_3167_dt_2018_050201
source EBSCOhost Political Science Complete
title What is populism? Who is the populist?: A state of the field review (2008-2018)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T00%3A10%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-berghahn&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20is%20populism?%20Who%20is%20the%20populist?:%20A%20state%20of%20the%20field%20review%20(2008-2018)&rft.jtitle=Democratic%20theory%20(Brooklyn%20(New%20York,%20N.Y.))&rft.au=Gagnon,%20Jean-Paul&rft.date=2018-12-01&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=vi&rft.epage=xxvi&rft.pages=vi-xxvi&rft.issn=2332-8894&rft.eissn=2332-8908&rft_id=info:doi/10.3167/dt.2018.050201&rft_dat=%3Cberghahn%3E10.3167/dt.2018.050201%3C/berghahn%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true