Seventeenth Global Studies Conference

Abstract

Dominant depictions, commercial media framing, and academic formulations of populism have tended to critique all populist social projects as anti-democratic discourse led by authoritarian leaders. Obân in Hungary, Modi in India, Bolsonaro in Brazil, and Trump in the US became both targets for criticism and exemplars of populism in most commercial media framing and some scholarship. Meanwhile, social movements are painted with the same “populist is authoritarian” interpretation, casting Hugo Chavez, Nicolas Maduro, Daniel Ortega, and Evo Morales as authoritarians overreaching traditional government practices. Thus, populism has become an epithet labeling all social movements, including those committed to expanding citizen participation and democracy. Coups against democratically elected presidents Rousseff in Brazil (2016), Morales in Bolivia (2020), and Castillo in Peru, have amplified right-wing populist hate speech. Collapsing “populism” to a derogatory evaluation of both reactionary movements and movements for social justice obscures the interests and goals of populisms organized by different social classes and groups. This study reviews theories of populism and civil society to unpack and evaluate the socio-cultural contributions made by progressive populist movements in Egypt, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Bolivia. Components of participatory democracy, collective decision-making, and class solidarity are identified as essential for radically progressive populism. These ingredients are also presented as keys for communicating and organizing effective actions championing democracy. Thus, this contribution recovers both theories and practices of participatory democratic populism advocating social change on behalf of working people, the poor, and humanity.