What is populism?

If a single political label can simultaneously describe a socialist labor leader in Bolivia, a right-wing billionaire in Manhattan, and an anti-austerity movement in Greece, we must ask if the label conveys any information at all. The central weakness in the current discourse on **populism**—often defined as a "thin-centered ideology" pitting a "pure people" against a "corrupt elite"—is its profound lack of analytical precision. ## The Trap of Conceptual Stretching In political science, **conceptual stretching** occurs when a term is distorted to cover so many diverse cases that its specific meaning evaporates. By focusing on the *form* of political messaging rather than the *content* of political goals, the category of populism creates a false equivalence between radically different movements. 1. **The Erasure of Ideology:** Labeling both the [Podemos party](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podemos_(Spanish_political_party)) in Spain and the National Rally in France as "populist" ignores that one seeks to expand social services and multiculturalism while the other seeks to restrict them. 2. **The Pejorative Function:** Critics like Marco D'Eramo argue that "populism" has become a "conceptual wastebasket" or a sophisticated slur used by technocratic elites to pathologize any dissent against the neoliberal status quo. ## Populism as Political Logic, Not Pathology While mainstream scholars like [Jan-Werner Müller](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan-Werner_M%C3%BCller) argue that populists are inherently anti-pluralist, other thinkers suggest that what we call populism is actually the very essence of the political process. In his seminal work, *On Populist Reason*, the political theorist **Ernesto Laclau** argued that populism is not a set of beliefs but a "formal logic" of politics—the way a collective identity is constructed in any democracy. From this perspective, calling a movement "populist" is merely a way of saying it is effective at mobilizing a constituency. > "Populism is not a type of movement—identifiable with a special social base or a particular ideology—but a political logic. It is the way in which any political identity is constructed." > — Ernesto Laclau, [On Populist Reason](https://www.versobooks.com/books/2811-on-populist-reason) (2005) ## The Failure of the "Thin-Centered" Definition The most common definition of populism, championed by [Cas Mudde](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cas_Mudde), treats it as a "thin-centered" ideology that requires a "host" ideology (like socialism or nationalism) to function. However, this framework fails to explain why certain "populist" tactics are considered acceptable when used by centrists—such as "fighting for the middle class"—but "dangerous" when used by those on the margins. Ultimately, the obsession with defining populism masks a deeper anxiety about the **democratic deficit**. By focusing on the "irrationality" of the people, the term shifts the blame away from the failures of institutional elites and onto the rhetoric of those who challenge them. If the term is used to delegitimize all challenges to established power, it ceases to be a tool for analysis and becomes a tool for policing the boundaries of "acceptable" politics.