Abstract
Populism has been a rather marginalized notion in mainstream social sciences. In his ambitious work On Populist Reason, renowned theoretician Ernesto Laclau aimed to give the notion a more central role. However, the work is dominated by ungrounded theory. In this article I test the factors that the work identifies as conditions to explaining populism, against the backdrop of three historical cases the work analyzes. I add the case of Chávez and the Bolivarian revolution in Venezuela. From the comparison I conclude that the work innovates less than it claims when explaining populism. I propose that a hypothetical way to build on its contribution is by shifting the focus from its central notion of heterogeneity to coalitions, and from there to types of populisms as a way towards the construction of grounded, middle-range generalizations.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 38-55 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | Thesis Eleven |
| Volume | 140 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Jun 2017 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Bolivarian revolution
- Chávez
- historical-comparative
- Laclau
- populism
- Venezuela
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Explaining populism beyond Laclau: A historical-comparative assessment of on Populist Reason'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver