Epilogue: In defense of disruptive democracy-A critique of anti-populism

40Citations
Citations of this article
45Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

"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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Howse, R. (2019). Epilogue: In defense of disruptive democracy-A critique of anti-populism. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 17(2), 641–660. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moz051

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free