Direct Democracy Under Populism Rule: The Proof is in the Practice

In the face of contemporary democratic challenges, the worldview that divides society into two opposing and homogenous groups —a virtuous "people" and a corrupt "elite"—has gained significant traction. This set of ideas, known as populism, has achieved global prominence with the rise of politicians who adopt a critical stance on representation, advocating instead for mechanisms of citizen participation as a means of expressing the general will. In this context, direct democracy emerges as a compelling tool for populist leaders, resonating with a citizenry disillusioned with existing democratic systems and eager for change. While there is broad scholarly consensus that populists frequently criticise democratic institutions and promote rhetoric advocating an alternative democratic model, it remains unclear how such rhetorical preferences are translated into practice when populists attain power. This paper contributes to this debate by examining the relationship between populism in power and the activation of mechanisms of direct democracy (MDDs) at the national level in Latin America and Europe. Drawing on the ideational approach, we hypothesise that the activation of MDDs is more likely under populist rule than non-populist rule, reflecting populism's core emphasis on popular sovereignty and adherence to the general will. Additionally, we posit that the use of MDDs is contingent upon a set of structural and ideological factors, including the political system, the type of mechanism employed, the issues subject to direct vote, and the leader's ideological orientation. To test these arguments, we employ a quantitative methodology and utilise a newly compiled dataset based on secondary sources, covering Latin American and European countries from 1990 to 2023.