Epilogue: In defense of disruptive democracy—A critique of anti-populism
Author(s) -
Robert Howse
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
international journal of constitutional law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.493
H-Index - 33
eISSN - 1474-2659
pISSN - 1474-2640
DOI - 10.1093/icon/moz051
Subject(s) - populism , elite , democracy , psychological nativism , politics , authoritarianism , xenophobia , liberalism , political science , pluralism (philosophy) , political economy , liberal democracy , law , sociology , philosophy , epistemology
“Populism” is usually and pejoratively defined by the anti-populist elites to imply nativism, anti-liberalism, and anti-pluralism. This has little to do with many of today’s powerful critiques of and challenges to elite liberal democratic politics. Defenders of elite or “centrist” liberal democratic politics present a false choice between restoration or renewal of elite politics and a populist slide into authoritarianism and xenophobia. There is an important agenda of democratic reform disrupting elite liberal democratic politics, and anti-populism is not an authentic response to it. Radical democrats and democratic reformers, such as US congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are not apostles of mob rule, contrary to the frequent caricature proposed by centrist liberal democrats in their “anti-populist” pose. They see an appropriate role for institutions such as independent courts as well as for experts in a stronger democracy.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom