Populism, the Left, and Democracy: Formative Experiences and Trajectories

• In Event: Latin American Populism in between Democracy and Authoritarianism

Abstract

Although Latin America’s “left turn” in the early 21st century included widely varying parties, movements, and governments, scholars routinely noted a basic distinction between the regional left’s “populist” and “social democratic” currents. These currents helped crystallize a central tension in democratic theory—one that was recognized in Dahl’s classic work on polyarchy—between democracy conceived in terms of popular sovereignty (an understanding with roots among classical Greek theorists) and democracy conceived as a form of institutionalized pluralism (a more “modern” understanding with roots in the liberal/Madisonian tradition). These alternative conceptualizations reflected, in part, the very different formative experiences of the two leftist currents. Lefts that had experienced severe repression under bureaucratic authoritarian rule and prolonged struggles to restore basic democratic liberties tended to embrace institutionalized pluralism as a means to reconcile conflicting interests (in particular, the lefts in Chile, Brazil, and Uruguay). By contrast, “new” lefts that were spawned by mass rebellions against democratic regimes and their neoliberal policies were more inclined toward populist conceptions of mass empowerment or popular sovereignty (Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador). The latter, unsurprisingly, fell prey to populism’s autocratic pretensions, and in so doing violated essential features of democracy-as-institutionalized-pluralism—in particular, minority political rights and horizontal checks and balances (i.e., constraints on executive power). Over time, these violations of liberal democratic norms proved to be major sources of instability, as they created highly polarized, binary political divides that strengthened opposition coalitions against leftist rule.

Author

• Kenneth M. Roberts, Cornell University