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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Democratic theory (Brooklyn (New York, N.Y.)) N.Y.)), 2018-12, Vol.5 (2), p.vi-xxvi |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
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 |