The Populist Zeitgeist

作者: Cas Mudde

DOI: 10.1111/J.1477-7053.2004.00135.X

关键词:

摘要: Since the 1980s rise of so-called ‘populist parties’ has given to thousands books, articles, columns and editorials. This article aims make a threefold contribution current debate on populism in liberal democracies. First, clear new definition is presented. Second, normal-pathology thesis rejected; instead it argued that today populist discourse become mainstream politics western Indeed, one can even speak Zeitgeist. Third, explanations reactions Zeitgeist are seriously flawed might actually strengthen rather than weaken it.

参考文章(31)
PIERO IGNAZI, The silent counter-revolution European Journal of Political Research. ,vol. 22, pp. 3- 34 ,(1992) , 10.1111/J.1475-6765.1992.TB00303.X
Torcuato S. Di Tella, Populism into the Twenty‐first Century Government and Opposition. ,vol. 32, pp. 187- 200 ,(1997) , 10.1111/J.1477-7053.1997.TB00157.X
Michael Freeden, Is Nationalism a Distinct Ideology Political Studies. ,vol. 46, pp. 748- 765 ,(1998) , 10.1111/1467-9248.00165
Tjitske Akkerman, Populism and Democracy: Challenge or Pathology? Acta Politica. ,vol. 38, pp. 147- 159 ,(2003) , 10.1057/PALGRAVE.AP.5500021
Benjamín Arditi, Populism as a Spectre of Democracy: A Response to Canovan Political Studies. ,vol. 52, pp. 135- 143 ,(2004) , 10.1111/J.1467-9248.2004.00468.X
Klaus Von Beyme, Party Leadership and Change in Party Systems: Towards a Postmodern Party State? Government and Opposition. ,vol. 31, pp. 135- 159 ,(1996) , 10.1111/J.1477-7053.1996.TB00601.X
Margaret Canovan, Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy Political Studies. ,vol. 47, pp. 2- 16 ,(1999) , 10.1111/1467-9248.00184