Populism in Europe and Latin America Compared
C. Mudde2011
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
While populism is a hotly debated topic around the world, most scholarship suffers from conceptual confusion and regional singularity. This paper compares European and Latin American populism, on the basis of a clear minimum definition, along three dimensions that dominate the scholarly literature on the topic: 1) economy vs. identity; 2) left-wing vs. rightwing; and 3) inclusion vs. exclusion. Empirically, our particular focus is on four prototypical cases of the predominant type of populism in these regions in the 1990-2010 period: Jörg Haider and the Freitheitliche Partei Österreichs (Austrian Freedom Party, FPÖ) and Jean-Marie Le Pen of the French Front National (National Front, FN) in Europe, and Bolivian President Evo Morales and his Movimiento al Socialismo (Movement for Socialism, MAS) and Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and his Movimiento V [Quinta] República (Fifth Republic Movement, MVR) in Latin America. While our findings confirm some generally held beliefs, they also challenge and clarify some others. Among the more notable conclusions are: 1) populism in Latin America is more ethnic than populism in Europe; 2) the difference between "right-wing" populists in Europe and "left-wing" populists in Latin American is mainly a consequence of their affiliated ideologies, not their populism; 3) in material, political, and symbolic terms European populism is primarily exclusionary, while Latin American populism is predominantly inclusionary; and 4) populism is more important in Latin America than in Europe in electoral, political, and ideological terms.
Figures (1)
Related papers
Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America
Government and Opposition, 2013
Left-Wing Populists in Latin America?
Albeit usual in Social Sciences, the concept of populism has multiple meanings despite no strictness in its applicability. Scholars have been sighting to improve its concept in order to apply it in the present context of numerous left wing governments in Latin America. There seems to be a consensus among these scholars that some governments are populists such as Venezuela and Bolivia, but the concept of populism continues without a single definition. Most criteria, however, if applied to European Governments labeled as Social Democratic, would also leave them to be seen as populists. This paper appraises their most institution-centered criteria to the formulation of a concept of a populist government. From the formulation of a common concept to the one used by these authors, we analyze Hugo Chávez's and Evo Morales' experiences in Venezuela and Bolivia. From the angle of their relation with the institutions, it becomes clear that both Chávez and Morales represent distinct phenomena, and that only the former could be considered a populist according to the adopted definition of the concept.
The Resurgence of Radical Populism in Latin America
Constellations, 2007
A specter is haunting Latin America: radical populism. Former presidents such as Fernando Henrique Cardoso and respectable media analysts have cautioned us about the dangers of charismatic and plebiscitary domination for democracy. They have warned us of the risks of irresponsible economic policies. A holy alliance is trying to exorcize the ghost of populism that periodically reappears even though its death has been constantly announced and predicted. 1 In contrast to the apocalyptic warnings of the media analysts and politicians we have an accumulated knowledge of populism that can help us arrive to more nuanced conclusions about its relationships to democracy. Over the last three decades we have seen a renaissance of studies. If previous scholarship based on modernization and dependency theories tied populism to specific economic and social forces, 2 this new wave of research has uncoupled politics from what were understood as deeper structural determinants. Scholars have shown that populism is not necessarily linked to the transition to modernity or to import-substitution industrialization. The unexpected affinities between populism and neoliberalism stimulated research on the politics of structural adjustment under neo-populist leadership. 3 More recently, the nationalist and anti-imperialist rhetoric of Presidents Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, Evo Morales of Bolivia, and Rafael Correa of Ecuador have provoked passionate debates on whether or not we are experiencing a rebirth of radical-national populism. 4 Unsurprisingly, scholars have tended to reproduce the cleavages produced by populist leaders. What for some are authentic forms of expression of the popular will by leaders who empowered those previously disenfranchised, for others are forms of charismatic, authoritarian, and messianic domination. Behind the smoke screen provoked by the praise for national populism or its condemnation we can identify important debates over the meanings and interpretations of democracy. Instead of arguing that populism is the negation or the essence of democracy this article draws on current experiences to explore the uneasy and ambiguous relations between populism and liberal democracy. Populism has been an important democratizing force that has mobilized those previously excluded. It has incorporated common people into the political community. However, the distinctiveness of these processes of inclusion and democratization needs to be specified. What are the forms of political participation and representation privileged by populism? How is democracy understood by the friends and foes of populism? What are the effects of populist rhetoric for the democratization of society? Why do common folk continue to support populist leaders?
Understanding Contemporary Populism Through the Latin American Experience
AARMS, 2022
This paper discusses how the Latin American experience can help us understand contemporary populism and its management. This topic starts from the assumption that structural change and social contexts help us explain the evolution of populism in the same way they helped explain the evolution of violence and management. To do so, we look at the state of the literature on populism, its relation to the Latin American experience, the evolution of the approach to populism, and the conclusions we can draw from these different perspectives. We conclude that contemporary populism is also limited in the same way the contextual approach to Latin American populism was limited. This also helps us understand why we still do not have a shared definition of populism. Overall, we lack the balance between generalisable and local definitions to help leaders manage the contemporary violence of populism.
Populism Revived: Donald Trump and the Latin American Leftist Populists
The Americas, 2018
The twenty-first century could well become known as the populist century. No longer confined to Latin America or to the margins of European politics, populism has spread to Africa, Asia, and, with Donald Trump's election, to the cradle of liberal democracy. Even though it is uncertain what impact Trump's populism will have on American democracy, it is worth learning from Latin America, where populists have been in power from the 1930s and 1940s to the present. Even as Latin American populists like Juan Perón and Hugo Chávez included the poor and the nonwhite in the political community, they moved toward authoritarianism by undermining democracy from within. Are the foundations of American democracy and the institutions of civil society strong enough to resist US president Donald Trump's right-wing populism?
Understanding Latin American anti-populism
Paper presented in June 11 at the Populism Specialist Group 5th annual workshop ’Populism - New perspectives- 9-11 June 2021., 2021
Anti-populism is antagonistic opposition to what it names-pejoratively-as "populism", going beyond criticism of aspects of a perceived populist movement or government to become a radical antagonist to it. The anti-populist field is capable of including right wing, liberal and left sectors, even though right wing and liberal sectors will tend to have predominance over left wing ones there. In Latin America even though it tends to present itself as a defense of liberal democracy it has supported or paved the way for anti-democratic coups against perceived "populist" governments. Classist, racist and neoliberal economic discourses are historically prominent in Latin American antipopulism. This shows historic socio-political forms and narratives linked to economic, social, and ethnic cleavages of the region manifesting in political conflict around discourse about "populism". An overview of the phenomenon of anti-populism is provided, then an analysis with it of the 3 historical waves of "populism" in Latin America.
Do Economic and Identity Cleavages Account For the Differences Between Left and Right Populism? Hungary, Venezuela, and the United States
2024
Left and right wing populism are widely used concepts, but lack a developed theoretical framework. In this paper I describe a new model of right and left wing populism based on economic and identity cleavages developed by Mukand and Rodrik and give two examples-Fidesz in Hungary and the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV)-that fit the model empirically. I use a classic computer generated content analysis of these cases to test the model. Initially I analyze the speeches of left (Hugo Chavéz) and right (Victor Orbán) populist leaders and find support for the model. For c comparative scope, I look for evidence of populism in the speeches of Barack Obama and Donald Trump. I find that Obama has no populist leanings but that Donald Trump has clear right populist tendencies. I conclude that the cleavage model shows promising results and present thoughts about how an analysis based on the model advances our understanding of left and right populism.
Populism and hegemony: the Latin American lesson to Europe
The growing seduction exerted within the Left by the prospect of creating a 'people' suggests an ever wider recognition of the primacy of the political, intended as the moment in which new political identifications are forged out of a number of available popular demands and signifiers that emerge in contemporary societies amid economic and social dislocations that loosen previous political investments. Creating a 'people' is, then, an explicit acknowledgement that political identities are not a given, a reflection of sociological trends, but the product of dynamics of political articulation.
Related papers
Radical, Nativist, Authoritarian-Or All of These? Assessing Recent Cases of Right-Wing Populism in Latin America
Journal of Politics in Latin America, 2022
In the light of a series of right-wing populist successes, some observers concluded that there is a kind of populist contagion going on and that the global wave of radical right populism (RRP) has finally reached Latin America. Yet, a premature categorization based on outward similarities eventually leads to omitting important differences. The aim of this article is a typological assessment of four recent cases of right-wing populism in Latin America-Jair Bolsonaro (Brazil), José António Kast (Chile), Guido Manini Ríos (Uruguay), and Javier Milei (Argentina)-to clarify their correspondence with Cas Mudde's concept of RRP. The questions to be addressed are the following: Are these four leaders and their parties radically right? Are they right-wing in cultural terms (nativist and authoritarian)? Are they populist? And do they have sufficient features in common to speak of a right-wing populist wave?
Seeing and Not Seeing Populism in Latin America (A Contra Corriente, Fall 2019)
A Contra Corriente, 2019
To understand the current global surge of populist governments, scholars and commentators have pointed to the harms of neoliberalism, the breakdown of democratic norms (Levitsky and Ziblatt 2018), the characteristics of populism and how they differ from fascism (Finchelstein 2017)), and the affects and experiences that drive support for nationalist leaders (Mazzarrella 2019). I suggest a different, if complementary approach to understanding populism by turning to the specificity and complexity of Latin American politics in the 20 th and 21 st century histories. First, I view populism in the context of Latin American nations'
Critical Debates Populism in Latin America: Past, Present, and Future
Populism in Latin America: Past, Present and Future, 2019
Although populism has been growing in prominence in intellectual circles, the phenomenon is not new. Some academics assert that populism began with the People’s Party in the United States, the narodniki movement in Russia, or Boulangism in France (Judis 2016; Rovira Kaltwasser et al. 2017). Others trace its roots to Peronism in Argentina (Germani [1978] 2003; Finchelstein 2017) and populist mobilization in Peru (Jansen 2017). Although in Europe and the United States populism is normally viewed as a recent phenomenon associated with the radical right and postmaterialism (Inglehart and Norris 2017; Mudde 2014), in Latin America, populism has had a long, varied history. Literature on the subject has identified three populist waves in the region: classic populism (1930‒1950), characterized by a strong, charismatic leader and working-class mobilization (Di Tella 1965; Germani [1978] 2003); neopopulism in the 1990s, which saw a paradoxical alliance between populism and neoliberalism (Weyland 1996, 2001); and early twenty-first-century populism, linked with the appearance of a radical left (Collins 2014; Ellner 2003). As this brief survey suggests, analyzing Latin American populism is a complex task. Given the quantity and variety of populisms Latin America has experienced over its history (de la Torre 2017), studying the contemporary intellectual debate surrounding populism is particularly important. Therefore, this essay takes up the study of populism in Latin America, divided in three parts. First, it describes the principal theoretical approaches to populism; namely, the structural, discursive, political-strategic, ideational, and sociocultural approaches. Second, it briefly examines four recent books on populism in Latin America, written by a political scientist (Barr), a communications scholar (Block), a historian (Finchelstein), and a sociologist (Jansen). Third, it proposes some considerations for future research based on the four works reviewed and our own ideas, drawn from recent trends in the international literature on populism.
CONTEMPORARY LEFT-WING POPULISM AND RIGHT-WING POPULISM, AND INCLUSIONS AND EXCLUSIONS: FROM EUROPE, LATIN AMERICA, TO THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA
Book Chapter in: "Populism Reloaded?", Edition: ISBN - 9781915312082, Revistia Publishing and Research, London, UK, 2023
From a comparative perspective, the study examines current left-wing and right-wing political behavior and inclusionary and exclusionary practices in MENA (Middle East and North Africa), Latin America, and Europe and their effects on political developments and changes. This study investigates the evolution and transition of contemporary rightism and leftism in these dissimilar Regions and the diverse degrees of inclusionary and inclusionary populism features of the political parties. First, it questions political conditions, behavioralism, and transitions of populism. Second, it questions forms of inclusions and exclusions: does populism arrive on the political scene? The focus is on the latest decade from the cross-continental and cross-regional perspective. Although there is scholarly debate about contemporary populism (and corporatism) in the European Continent (in general) and, lately, some in Latin America and MENA, cross-continental and regional research is lacking. Various research suggests that populism differs. Some are tasks of regeneration or democratization; others are movements that would weaken democracy by promoting the rebirth of nationalism and politics of exclusion (fascism, xenophobia, racism, radical nationalism). Thus, the former is left-wing populism, while the latter is right-wing populism. The facts are the rise of exclusionary radical populism in Europe and inclusionary populism in Latin America. Regardless, some exceptions exist, including inclusionary radical left populism - e.g., Greece, or exclusionary left-wing populism - e.g., B&H, social-democratic by name and by position center and simultaneously left-wing and right-wing). In MENA, populism varies between right-wing and left-wing, with a category of security populism in Israel and Islamic Populism in much of the Islamic world. Populism processes in MENA, a region within (semi) democratic or authoritarian regimes, between parliamentary or presidential systems and enforced by external geopolitical agents and aspirations, are broader and part of a complex global geopolitical context. The politics in the postcolonialism conditions (Latin America) more often contain populism. It sees populism as a contemporary and collective political response to the global crisis of nation-state approaches due to globalization and the stronghold of capitalism. The world is becoming increasingly characterized by populism, inclusionary or exclusionary. Common sense voting behavior worldwide is under populistic invasion, left and right-wing. The motivating force and practice of the populists are the (self-proclaimed) protection of (ethnic) national identities, socio-cultural values, or religion. Populist often builds their programs on the suppression and denial of analytical facts and various exclusions (more nominal inclusions) by resurrecting the socio-political concepts and ideals of outdated nationwide sovereignty. Keywords: MENA, Latin America, Europe, Populism, Left-wing, Right-wing, Inclusions, Exclusions, Political Behaviour
Transformations of populism in Europe and the Americas: history and recent tendencies
European Review of History: Revue européenne d'histoire, 2017
The book Transformations of Populism in Europe and Americas: History and Recent Trends came as a product of the 'Transformations of Populism in Europe and the U.S.: History, Theories and Recent Tendencies' conference which was organized in 2011 at Buffalo State College. As stated by the authors, the volume presented here is 'the first trans-continental comparative historical study of populism' (p. xiii) since the book Populism: Its Meanings and National Characteristics was published by Ernst Gellner and Ghita Ionescu in 1969. Transformations of Populism is divided into three main parts: New Historical Perspectives on Populism; Historical Theories of Populism; and Recent Tendencies in Populist Movements in Latin America, Europe, and the United States. In their Introduction, the editors of the volume engaged, in short, into the examination and reassessment of populism as such. Based on the articles published in this volume the editors wished to provide answers to some of the questions raised by the authors. They engaged in the question of whether there can be such a thing as an ideal type of 'populist minimum' and their conviction 'that it is useful analytically to construct a "populist minimum", because there are a number of characteristics that nearly all populist movements share in common' (p. xiii). For this, they provide a set of characteristics shared by all or most populist movements, as well as a 10-point table of comparison between what they defined, progressive or reactionary populism.
Populism: A Struggle for Hegemony. An Approach to the Latin American Left Strategies Countering the Right-Wing Populist Discourse
Populism: A Struggle for Hegemony. An Approach to the Latin American Left Strategies Countering the Right-Wing Populist Discourse, 2022
In recent years, the right-wing populist discourse, characterised as antagonistic and exclusionary, has proliferated in Latin America. This discourse has materialised in regressive actions that undermine democracy. Fortunately, leftist projects have tried to counter it by developing various strategies. Considering this context, this study addresses the research question: In what ways are the Latin American Left, including those in political parties, countering the populist discourses, including racism and anti-communism, emerging from the right and far-right in Latin America? Consequently, this dissertation aims to contribute to helping narrow an existing gap in the social sciences and communications fields regarding counterstrategies to right-wing populism in the region. This study uses concepts such as discourse, ideology, hegemony, populism, counterhegemony and counterdiscourse to provide a solid theoretical framework for the topic. Seven left party members and three scholars from Latin American countries were interviewed to learn about their organisations and individual experiences in countering right-wing populism. Their information was examined through thematic analysis to construct themes. The findings, presented through cross-case analysis, integrate the literature review and new literature in a dialogue with the data collected. The results show that the right-wing discourse varies and has particularities. Also, they evidence that the left has revindicated historical claims and demands such as gender equality and the defence of women's sexual and reproductive rights. However, new strategies have been necessary. The main finding of this study is that left populism has proven effective in fighting right populism. The study concludes that the Latin American left has made significant efforts to fight the right and far-right discourse, but substantial challenges persist in making the left ideas hegemonic and part of common sense. Keywords: Populism, discourse, right-wing, far-right, ideology, hegemony, counterhegemony, counterdiscourse, left-wing, Latin America.
Populism and Democracy in Latin America
Ethics and International Affairs, 2009
Paraphrasing Karl Marx, a specter is haunting Latin America—the specter of ‘‘populism.’’ This label has been attached to a wave of radical left leaders in the region, including Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia, and Rafael Correa in Ecuador. The term is normatively charged. The Mexican politician and scholar Jorge Castañeda contrasts radical populist leaders (such as Chávez and Morales), whom he characterizes as less convinced of the intrinsic value of democracy and human rights, with moderate left-wingers (such as Michelle Bachelet in Chile, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil, and Tabaré Vázquez in Uruguay), who embrace representative democracy and respect human rights. This division of the Latin American left between ‘‘good’’ social democrats and ‘‘bad’’ populists is open to challenge.
New wine in old bottles? Old and New Populism in Latin America
Bulletin of Latin American Research, 2000
The resurgence of populism in Latin America
Bulletin of Latin American Research, 2000
Contemporary manifestations of`neopopulisma are situated in an analysis of the role of political institutions in capitalist societies, and the idea of structural and institutional crisis. It is argued that`populista and`neopopulista discourse alike must be understood in terms of their relationship to speci"c conjunctural projects for the reorientation of capitalist reproduction. This approach directs attention back to the contrasting conjunctures in which classical populist and contemporary neopopulist political projects were launched. It also provides a basis on which contemporary projects which adopt elements of populist strategy and discourse can be compared and evaluated. : S 0 2 6 1 -3 0 5 0 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 7 6 -5
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.