Populism: A Very Short Introduction

This is a highly informed and relevant account of a certain dubious species of political actor, the populist. I've read a number of books in the VSI series, and this is best I've seen so far. The text is lucid and engaging, so packed with useful information and descriptions that I found myself highlighting about a third of it and scribbling all over the margins. Though Trumpian politics feel entirely novel to many of us, this book gives us (Americans) a much-needed perspective on leaders of his typology who have cropped up all over the world in the last 40 years. A particularly helpful discussion concerned where populism fits within the broader landscape of liberal democracy, including the contexts in which populism has a de-democratizing effect by destabilizing liberal institutions such as the judiciary and the press. Finally, there is also analysis of the dynamics of the (relatively) leaderless grassroots populism movements including the American Tea Party and Occupy movements, and how such movements differ from leader-driven populism. This is essential reading for understanding our times.

Populism is an informative and thorough introduction to its topic. The authors are steeped in populism and display their erudition in an accessible manner. Mudde’s and Rovira Kaltwasser’s ability to provide adroit, concrete examples by maneuvering around the world in search of the best illustrations is impressive. Given that kind of broad coverage, the book—as far as its real world examples go—has great scope. The approach of the book isn’t to analyze populism by way of one or three case studies; therefore, it does not leave the reader with a deep understanding of populism in any one country or region. The authors are particularly knowledgeable about Latin America, Europe, and the United States, but they touch on other countries as well. Readers coming to the book looking for an expose on Donald Trump’s place in populism will be disappointed; the shape-shifting reactionary, who at least campaigned as a right-wing populist, and as president at least treats the press as the authors argue populists do, only gets a brief mention as the book appears to have been written early in the primaries.Having a textbook quality, the book possesses that category’s strengths and weaknesses. It is extremely well-organized and straightforward. The book is not dumbed down, but it attempts to diagram its points for an inexpert audience. Although it is well-written, clear, and polished, the book lacks personality and style, which is not to say it lacks a point of view. The absence of bold flavor does not make it a chore to read; on the other hand it doesn’t quicken one’s pulse either. However, this is not a failure of execution, merely an outcome of the book’s method and objective—an objective the book satisfies.One comment on the substance of the text. First of all I find the authors arguments very convincing, and I appreciate their distinction of populist supply (leaders) and demand (people, the masses). The latter shows how populism is not simply a stratagem or means to arouse a base but also a way of thinking. This accords with my belief that conspiracy theories and their acceptance are a form of populist epistemology.

The election of Donald Trump makes this book timely and mandatory reading by all those who think Trump is a populist. This is a lucid account of the essence of populism that I would highly recommend to anyone civically engaged. The book confirmed me in my belief that Trump is a pragmatist not a populist or any form of ideologue.

Extremely insightful and up to date. The authors allowto better understand the forces that prompt populism worldwide. The last chapter on how to deal with populism is a must read

I started to study this book with eager expectation, but the more I read the more disturbed I became. The proposed conception of “populism” is not convincing; limiting treatment mainly to liberal democracies is unjustified; there are doubtful statements and misinterpretations; and modern developments radically changing the dynamics of populism are not adequately recognized.The authors define populism as a “thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogenous and antagonistic camps, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite’, and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will) of the people” (page 6).I agree that populism often involves “some kind of appeal to ‘the people’ and denunciation of ‘the elite… a critique of the establishment” (page 5), though I think that often “adulation of the common people” (page 5) is more of a façade than a deeply held belief. But this does not justify the concept package of the book.There is an ideology (not “thin” and not in need of “host-ideologies) as described above, which can be called “populicism,” that deserves more attention. And there is “populism” as a modality of appealing for action and support. Those two sometimes overlap, but are not identical. Some believers in populicism may follow a revolutionary cadre strategy, without populistic appeals. And many who seek support use populism as a stratagem, without really believing in the masses. Thus, in liberal democracies most candidates use some populist slogans to market themselves, often without trusting the “wisdom of the many” or thinking they should rule.Therefore I think the “ideational approach” developed by the authors (pp. 5-9) is original and worthy of attention – but fundamentally wrong.Limiting most of the treatment to liberal democracies makes the text irrelevant to large parts of the world. It is not true that the “world … is dominated by democracy and liberalism” (p. 116). What about China, Russia, Indonesia and so on? Nor is it preordained that liberal democracy will expand, given the likelihood of harsh crises caused by climate change and emerging technologies.There are many statements which are doubtful and also wrong. It misunderstands Nazi ideology which emphasized the “Volk” (with racial purity necessary to protect it from “pollution”). The comments on Turkey and Israel are misleading. The often crucial role of religions in “populism,” as demonstrated in the paradigmatic case of Ayatollah Khomeini, is ignored. And the recommendations for coping with the tensions between responsiveness and responsibility (pp. 101-102), such as “being honest about this tension” (pp. 102, 112), and trust “civic education” (p. 112), make me wonder in which alternative world the authors are living.My wondering is reinforced by lack of serious treatment of the radical changes in the dynamics of populism caused by Internet and especially social media. These are mentioned in passing (e.g., pp. 103, 104, 114), including their role in the Arab Spring (p. 104). But the phase-leap in populist modalities they cause requires much more attention throughout the book and at least a chapter of its own.Professor Yehezkel DrorThe Hebrew University of Jerusalem

it is really a post-graduate paper than a book but it is fast and easy to read.