Should history change the way we think about populism

Bibliographic Data

ID3602709
AuthorsAlan De Bromhead (0000-0003-4704-2331, University College Dublin), Kevin H O''Rourke (0000-0001-6272-2090, New York University – Abu Dhabi Campus, corresponding author), Kevin Hjortshøj O'Rourke
Year2024
Volume77
Issue3
Pages1086-1109
Publication date2024-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Economic History Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0013-0117 • E-ISSN: 1468-0289
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/ehr.13300
OpenAlexW4388398431
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited68

This paper asks whether history should change the way in which economists and economic historians think about populism. We use Müller's definition, according to which populism is 'an exclusionary form of identity politics, which is why it poses a threat to democracy'. We make three historical arguments. First, late-nineteenth-century US Populists were not populist. Second, there is no necessary relationship between populism and anti-globalization sentiment. Third, economists have sometimes been on the wrong side of important policy debates involving opponents rightly or wrongly described as populist. History encourages us to avoid an overly simplistic view of populism and its correlates

Aesthetics · Democracy · Economics · Globalization · Identity (music) · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Populism · Positive economics · Sociology · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Media Influence and Politics · Philosophy · Populism, Right-Wing Movements

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access