The Western liberal definition of democracy emphasizes procedural and institutional features (representation, division of powers) and individual human rights. Populist conceptualizations of democracy, as exemplified by the first and second waves of Latin American populism, emphasize the understanding of democracy mostly as people’s sovereignty. This definition is more atone with the etymological and historical meaning of the term, but in present times the populist definition of the demos carries the danger of xenophobia and exclusion (as in European radical right populism). Post-structuralist and post-Marxist conceptions of radical democracy (such as Laclau’s, Ranciere’s or Negri and Hardt’s) attempt to provide definitions of the demos capable of overcoming the danger of exclusion, or propose definitions of the political community that replace the idea of the people (such as Negri and Hardt’s multitude). The present paper critically analyzes the limitations of the abovementioned post-structuralist and post-Marxist conceptions of democracy, and, based on some of the Latin American experiences, investigates alternative ways in which the demos is constituted, ways that allow for a non-exclusionary understanding of democracy as popular sovereignty.
