Key Takeaways
1. Populism is not just anti-establishment; it's anti-pluralist.
In addition to being antielitist, populists are always antipluralist: populists claim that they, and they alone, represent the people.
Beyond anti-elite. While criticizing elites is a necessary condition for populism, it is not sufficient. Many legitimate political movements and figures criticize the status quo and those in power without being populist. The defining feature is the rejection of pluralism.
Rejecting diversity. Populists do not simply oppose specific policies or elites; they fundamentally deny the legitimacy of political opposition and the inherent diversity of a democratic society. They present a vision of a single, unified, morally pure "people" that they alone embody and represent.
Moral exclusion. This anti-pluralism is moralistic. Opponents are not just wrong; they are portrayed as corrupt, immoral, or not truly part of the "real people." This sets populism apart from other forms of political criticism or even authoritarianism, as it uses a moral claim to justify exclusion.
2. Populists claim exclusive moral representation of "the people."
The claim to exclusive representation is not an empirical one; it is always distinctly moral.
Sole voice of people. Populists assert that they, and only they, speak for the authentic, morally pure "people." This claim is not based on empirical evidence like election results or opinion polls, but on a moral assertion about who the "real" people are and what they inherently want.
Defining the 'real'. This moral claim implies that those who do not support the populist party or leader are somehow less than real, or not proper members of the political community. Examples include Nigel Farage calling Brexit voters "real people" or Donald Trump stating "the other people don’t mean anything."
Identity politics. Populism is inherently a form of identity politics, but one that seeks to define the entire political community's identity in a singular, exclusive way. It aims to "extract" a pure people from the messy reality of diverse citizens, dismissing any remainder as illegitimate.
3. Populists rely on a symbolic, not empirical, idea of the people.
For them, “the people themselves” is a fictional entity outside existing democratic procedures, a homogeneous and morally unified body whose alleged will can be played off against actual election results in democracies.
People as fiction. Populists invoke a mythical, homogeneous "people" that exists outside of actual democratic institutions and processes. This allows them to claim that their view represents the true popular will, even when empirical results like election outcomes contradict them.
Ignoring procedures. When populists lose elections or face institutional checks, they don't question their claim to represent the people; instead, they question the legitimacy of the institutions or procedures that produced the unfavorable outcome. This leads to charges of systems being "rigged" or parliaments being "fake."
Symbolic substance. Representation for populists is about embodying a symbolic "substance" or "spirit" of the people, rather than aggregating empirical interests or wills through democratic mechanisms. This symbolic connection is often channeled through a leader who claims direct insight into the people's true desires.
4. Populism in power colonizes the state and practices clientelism.
Populist governance exhibits three features: attempts to hijack the state apparatus, corruption and “mass clientelism” (trading material benefits or bureaucratic favors for political support by citizens who become the populists’ “clients”), and efforts systematically to suppress civil society.
State capture. Once in power, populists seek to control state institutions, including the civil service, judiciary, and media authorities, by installing loyalists. They justify this by claiming the state rightfully belongs to "the people" and should be wielded by their only legitimate representatives.
Rewarding loyalty. Mass clientelism is a key governing technique, openly exchanging state resources or favors for political support. This is justified by the populist logic that only the "real people" (their supporters) deserve the state's benefits, while opponents are excluded.
Open corruption. Populist leaders are often surprisingly resilient to corruption scandals. Their supporters may view corrupt acts not as self-enrichment but as actions taken "for us," the authentic people, against the illegitimate "them," reinforcing the moralistic us-vs-them framing.
5. Populists suppress civil society and use discriminatory legalism.
For them, opposition from within civil society creates a particular moral and symbolic problem: it potentially undermines their claim to exclusive moral representation of the people.
Silencing dissent. Populists in power view critical civil society organizations (NGOs, independent media) as threats to their claim of exclusive representation. They often try to discredit these groups by labeling them "foreign agents" or tools of the old, corrupt elite.
Targeting opponents. "Discriminatory legalism" is employed, meaning laws and state power are used to benefit friends and punish enemies. Those deemed not part of the "real people" or actively working against them face harsher treatment under the law.
Creating a compliant society. By suppressing independent voices and rewarding loyalists, populists attempt to shape society itself to match their image of a homogeneous, supportive "people." This can involve creating government-friendly proxy organizations to replace genuine civil society.
6. Populist constitutions aim to perpetuate partisan power.
Populists will seek to perpetuate what they regard as the proper image of the morally pure people (the proper constitutional identity, if you will) and then constitutionalize policies that supposedly conform to their image of the people.
Constitutional capture. Populists with sufficient power may rewrite constitutions not to establish neutral rules, but to entrench their partisan vision and secure their long-term hold on power. These are "exclusive constitutions" designed to disable pluralism and constrain future non-populist governments.
Moral identity enshrined. New constitutions under populist regimes often enshrine a specific, moralized image of the nation or people, as seen in Hungary's "National Creed." This justifies policies and institutional changes that favor the group identified as the "real people."
Disabling opposition. These constitutions weaken checks and balances, reduce the power of the judiciary, and make it harder for opposition parties to compete effectively or reverse populist policies, even if they win future elections. The goal is to make the populist vision permanent.
7. "Illiberal democracy" is a misleading term for populist rule.
Populists damage democracy as such, and the fact that they have won elections does not give their projects automatic democratic legitimacy (especially because they usually haven’t mentioned far-reaching constitutional changes in the campaigns that brought them to power).
Democracy itself is harmed. Labeling populist regimes as "illiberal democracies" is inaccurate and harmful. It suggests they are still democracies, just lacking liberal elements, when in fact they undermine the core principles of democracy itself, such as pluralism, minority rights, and accountability.
Political rights are democratic. Freedoms of speech, assembly, media pluralism, and protection of minorities are not merely "liberal" values; they are essential for a functioning democracy where citizens can be informed and hold power accountable. Attacking these attacks democracy.
Legitimizing authoritarians. The term allows leaders like Orbán and Kaczyński to claim they are still democrats, just non-liberal ones, while framing opposition as defending an alien, liberal agenda. This obscures the fact that they are rigging the democratic game in their favor.
8. Populism exploits democracy's unfulfilled promises and boundary problem.
The crucial promise, simply put, is that the people can rule.
Exploiting disillusionment. Populism thrives on the gap between democracy's ideal promise of popular rule and the complex reality where the "people" cannot rule directly and representation is always imperfect. Populists claim to fulfill this promise by embodying the people's will.
The boundary question. Populism exploits the fundamental "boundary problem" of democracy: who constitutes "the people" in the first place? By defining a morally pure "real people" and excluding others, populists offer a seemingly decisive, albeit undemocratic, answer to this complex question.
Crisis of representation. The rise of populism is linked to a perceived crisis of representation, where many citizens feel their interests and identities are not adequately reflected by traditional parties. Populists step into this void, claiming to be the only authentic voice.
9. Weak party systems and technocracy fuel populism.
Where previously coherent and entrenched party systems broke down, chances for populists clearly increased.
Parties as mediators. Traditional political parties historically mediated between diverse societal interests and the state, providing a framework for legitimate opposition and unity. The decline and weakening of party systems create space for populists who reject this mediation and claim direct connection to the people.
Technocracy's parallel. Technocracy, which claims there is only one correct policy solution based on expert knowledge, mirrors populism's claim of a single, authentic popular will. Both deny the need for democratic debate and can pave the way for each other by suggesting politics is not about disagreement but about finding a singular truth.
Convergence and void. When mainstream parties converge on similar policies (e.g., neoliberalism) and technocrats claim decision-making authority, it can create a void where citizens feel they have "elections without choice." Populists capitalize on this by offering a seemingly radical alternative and claiming to restore popular sovereignty.
10. Engaging populists requires addressing underlying representation failures.
One can take their political claims seriously without taking them at face value.
Don't just exclude. While populism is dangerous, simply excluding populists from debate or political life can backfire, reinforcing their narrative of being opposed by a corrupt elite cartel. Engagement is necessary, but it must be strategic.
Challenge the framing. Instead of accepting the populist framing of issues (e.g., immigrants stealing jobs), opponents should challenge these narratives with evidence and alternative explanations. This requires engaging with the substance of the problems populists raise, even while rejecting their solutions and rhetoric.
Address root causes. Effectively countering populism requires addressing the genuine failures of representation and inclusion that fuel it. This means grappling with economic inequality, cultural anxieties, and the feeling among some citizens that they are not seen or heard by the political system. It requires demonstrating that democracy can work for all the people, not just a select few.
Last updated:
FAQ
What is "What Is Populism?" by Jan-Werner Müller about?
- Defining Populism: The book seeks to clarify what populism is, distinguishing it from general anti-elitism or protest politics, and providing a precise conceptual framework.
- Populism vs. Democracy: Müller explores the relationship between populism and democracy, arguing that populism is a "shadow" of representative democracy and poses unique dangers to pluralism.
- Populism in Practice: The book examines how populists behave both in opposition and in power, including their strategies for governing and their impact on institutions.
- Responding to Populism: Müller offers guidance on how democrats and societies can respond to populist movements and leaders without undermining democratic values.
Why should I read "What Is Populism?" by Jan-Werner Müller?
- Timely Political Relevance: The book addresses the rise of populist leaders and movements worldwide, making it essential for understanding current political dynamics.
- Clear Conceptual Framework: Müller provides a rigorous, nuanced definition of populism, helping readers avoid common misconceptions and oversimplifications.
- Practical Insights: The book offers concrete advice on how to engage with and counter populist actors, both as citizens and policymakers.
- Broad Comparative Scope: By drawing on examples from the US, Europe, and Latin America, Müller situates populism in a global context.
What are the key takeaways from "What Is Populism?" by Jan-Werner Müller?
- Populism’s Core Features: Populism is both anti-elitist and anti-pluralist, claiming exclusive moral representation of "the people."
- Populism’s Dangers: Populism undermines democracy by denying the legitimacy of opposition and pluralism, often leading to exclusion and institutional damage.
- Populists in Power: Populists can govern as populists, engaging in state capture, clientelism, and suppression of civil society, often justifying these actions as fulfilling the will of the "real people."
- Engagement, Not Exclusion: The best response to populism is not to exclude or imitate it, but to engage critically, address failures of representation, and reaffirm democratic principles.
How does Jan-Werner Müller define populism in "What Is Populism?"?
- Anti-Elitism and Anti-Pluralism: Populists are not just critical of elites; they claim that only they represent the true, morally pure people, excluding all others as illegitimate.
- Exclusive Moral Representation: The core of populism is a moralized claim to exclusive representation, not just a style or set of policies.
- Identity Politics: Populism is a form of exclusionary identity politics, where the "real people" are defined in opposition to corrupt elites and outsiders.
- Not Just Protest: Populism is not simply protest or irresponsible policy-making; it is a distinct logic of political claim-making.
What distinguishes populism from other forms of political protest or anti-elitism according to Müller?
- Claim to Sole Representation: Unlike general protest movements, populists assert that only they authentically represent the people, delegitimizing all opposition.
- Moral, Not Empirical, Claims: Populist claims are moral and symbolic, not based on empirical evidence or policy content.
- Antipluralism: Populists reject the legitimacy of pluralism and diversity, seeing dissenters as enemies rather than fellow citizens.
- Not Defined by Policy or Class: Populism is not tied to specific policies, socioeconomic classes, or psychological traits like anger or resentment.
How do populists behave when they come to power, according to "What Is Populism?"?
- State Colonization: Populists seek to "occupy" the state, placing loyalists in key positions and undermining independent institutions.
- Clientelism and Corruption: They often engage in mass clientelism and corruption, justifying these practices as serving the "real people."
- Suppressing Civil Society: Populists attack and delegitimize NGOs and independent media, framing them as enemies or foreign agents.
- Partisan Constitutions: They may rewrite constitutions to entrench their power and exclude opposition, often under the guise of fulfilling the people's will.
What is the relationship between populism and democracy in "What Is Populism?"?
- Populism as Democracy’s Shadow: Populism arises within representative democracy, exploiting its mechanisms while undermining its pluralist foundations.
- Danger to Democracy: Populism damages democracy by denying the legitimacy of opposition and pluralism, leading to exclusion and potential authoritarianism.
- Not a Corrective: Contrary to some views, Müller argues that populism is not a useful corrective to democracy but a threat to its core values.
- Democracy Requires Pluralism: True democracy depends on recognizing diversity and the legitimacy of competing interests and opinions.
How does Müller suggest democrats should respond to populists and their supporters?
- Engage, Don’t Exclude: Democrats should engage with populists and their voters, not simply exclude or ignore them, as exclusion reinforces populist narratives.
- Address Representation Gaps: Recognize and address genuine failures of representation that populists exploit, both in interests and identity.
- Avoid Imitation: Mainstream actors should not imitate populist rhetoric or policies, as this legitimizes populist frames.
- Symbolic and Practical Inclusion: Offer both practical reforms and symbolic recognition to groups that feel excluded, without conceding to populist antipluralism.
What are the main misconceptions about populism that Müller addresses in "What Is Populism?"?
- Populism as Policy or Style: Populism is not defined by specific policies, economic classes, or a "bad manners" style.
- Populism as Participation: Populists are not inherently champions of direct democracy or increased participation; referenda are used to confirm, not generate, the leader’s will.
- Populism as Left or Right: Populism is not confined to the right or left; it is a logic that can be adopted across the spectrum.
- Populism as Protest: Populism is not just protest or anti-elitism; it is a claim to exclusive moral representation.
What is the significance of constitutions and institutions in the populist project, according to Müller?
- Not Anti-Institutional: Populists are not against institutions per se; they oppose only those that do not produce the "morally correct" outcomes.
- Partisan Constitutions: In power, populists may create "exclusive" or partisan constitutions to entrench their rule and exclude opposition.
- Instrumental Use of Law: Institutions and laws are reshaped to serve the populist vision of the "real people," often undermining checks and balances.
- Constitutional Conflict: Such changes often lead to severe constitutional conflicts and long-term damage to democratic frameworks.
How does Müller address the "boundary problem" and the issue of "the people" in "What Is Populism?"?
- Populist Exclusion: Populists define "the people" in narrow, moral terms, excluding dissenters and minorities as not truly belonging.
- Democratic Openness: Müller argues that democracy should keep the definition of "the people" open and contestable, allowing for ongoing inclusion.
- Boundary Problem: There is no simple democratic solution to who "the people" are; it should be a matter of ongoing debate and negotiation.
- Danger of Closure: Populists seek to close the chain of claim-making, asserting a final, exclusive definition of the people, which is antithetical to democracy.
What are the best quotes from "What Is Populism?" by Jan-Werner Müller and what do they mean?
- "Populism is the permanent shadow of representative politics."
- This means populism is always a potential within representative democracy, exploiting its mechanisms while threatening its foundations.
- "Populists do not claim 'We are the 99 percent.' What they imply instead is 'We are the 100 percent.'"
- Populists assert exclusive representation, denying the legitimacy of any opposition or dissent.
- "Populists can govern as populists."
- Contrary to the belief that populism is only protest, Müller shows that populists can and do implement their exclusionary logic in power.
- "Talking with populists is not the same as talking like populists."
- Engaging with populists is necessary, but one should not adopt their frames or rhetoric, which undermine democratic pluralism.
- "Democracy inaugurates the experience of an ungraspable, uncontrollable society in which the people will be said to be sovereign, of course, but whose identity will constantly be open to question, whose identity will remain forever latent."
- This quote, from Claude Lefort and cited by Müller, underscores the democratic necessity of keeping "the people" an open, contested concept, in contrast to populist closure.
Review Summary
What Is Populism? is praised for its concise yet insightful analysis of populism, offering clear definitions and examples from Europe and the Americas. Readers appreciate Müller's exploration of populism's anti-elitist and anti-pluralist nature, as well as its potential threats to democracy. The book is considered timely and accessible, though some note its focus on Western countries and desire for more solutions. Critics argue it oversimplifies populism and lacks depth in left-wing analysis. Overall, it's viewed as a valuable introduction to understanding populism in contemporary politics.
About the Author
Other books by Jan-Werner Müller
Download PDF
Download EPUB
.epub digital book format is ideal for reading ebooks on phones, tablets, and e-readers.
