When Hope Breaks Through Fear: A Weberian Reinterpretation of Charisma in Populist Times

This paper advances a revised interpretation of charisma in order to clarify its analytical utility for understanding contemporary political authority in an era marked by personalisation, disintermediation and the growing prominence of populist leaders. Returning to Weber’s conceptualisation, the analysis treats charisma as a relational and emotionally inflected process that takes shape in moments of uncertainty, when citizens seek orientation, meaning and credible agents of renewal. In contemporary democracies, characterised by value fragmentation and intensified affective tensions, these conditions have heightened the demand for leaders capable of articulating new political horizons. At the same time, the proliferation of personalised and populist leadership has blurred the distinction between forms of authority that foster democratic regeneration and forms that merely imitate charismatic appeal. The hypothesis advanced in the paper is that charisma, when compatible with democratic life, is intrinsically connected to the politics of hope. It entails an affective orientation that sustains imagination, anticipation and a shared sense of possibility. Populist strategies grounded in the politics of fear represent a fundamentally different configuration. They mobilise resentment, anger and threat perceptions, and deploy personalisation in ways that diverge markedly from the Weberian understanding of charisma as an exceptional and future-oriented response to crisis. Rather than opening new normative or symbolic pathways, these modes of leadership harness emotional energies that intensify division and insecurity. By integrating Weberian insights with contemporary developments, the paper contends that charisma remains a valuable analytical tool for distinguishing democratic forms of authority from populist modes of personalisation. The analysis elucidates the tension between hope and fear that underpins the dynamics of leadership and legitimacy in contemporary democracies.