Populisms Between Illiberalism, Anti-Liberalism and Post-Liberalism

Over the last two decades, a great deal of scholarship has attempted to apprehend the 'chameleonic' populist phenomenon (Taggart, 2000; Norris and Inglehart, 2018) by exploring its relation with democracy and 'democratic backsliding' (see, Moffitt, 2020; Mouffe, 2018; Mudde and Rovira Kaltwasser, 2013). This Section casts a fresh light on populist parties, movements and regimes by exploring an equally pressing issue: How is populism related to the other building block of democracy – political liberalism? While the tension between (democratic) popular sovereignty and (liberal) limitations on its exercise is far from new, this question has taken on increasing practical significance, as assaults against institutions and values at the heart of political liberalism – the rule of law, separation of powers, judicial independence, rights, pluralism, etc. – have become a hallmark of populist movements across the world – in Europe, Brazil, India, or the US. It is thus fundamental to understand the exact nature of the contemporary populist challenge to liberal democracies, and how it could be addressed. Yet, empirically as well as conceptually, the relations between populism and liberalism remain rather understudied, in at least two respects. On the one hand, to be sure, in recent years important outlets for the study of illiberalism have emerged (e.g. Illiberalism Studies program, at George Washington University, https://www.illiberalism.org/) and the literature on the topic is also growing (Sajó et al. 2021; Laruelle 2022; Pirro & Stanley 2022). However, as underlined by Laruelle (2022), surprising confusion surrounds the issue of illiberalism. Its conceptual boundaries with 'anti-liberalism' (Coman et al., 2021) and 'post-liberalism' (Wolff, 2013) are often ill-defined (Canihac, 2022). Even some of the most renowned scholars use 'illiberalism' and 'anti-liberalism' interchangeably (e.g. Zielonka & Rupnik 2020). This conceptual proliferation adds to the confusion, all the more since it often ignores more theoretical works on liberalism and its challengers. On the other hand, existing analyses of the relation between populism and liberalism have often been rather ahistorical (as happens also for the relation with democracy, Corduwener 2017). Populist movements are often treated as exceptional cases emerging in a specific contemporary context; therefore, their relation to political liberalism is rarely historicized (Gosewinkel 2015; Baldini et al. 2022). As a result, the possible transformations, over time, of the meaning and relation of both populism and political liberalism are left unattended. Hence, what populism implies in relation to political liberalism requires further investigation, not least because the traditional contested nature of populism as a concept has recently been framed also in terms of a possible 'populist hype' (De Cleen et al. 2018). Against this background, the primary scope of this Section is to bring together scholars from different subdisciplines to assess the relation between populism and political liberalism and, by extension, the link between populism and democracy. Profile of participants and type of Papers expected This Section will address the above issues by embracing empirical, methodological and theoretical pluralism. It aims at bringing into dialogue works on different contemporary or past cases from different regions of the world that often remain separate from each other. It also would like to stimulate exchanges between empirical works and conceptual research, for the haze surrounding the relation between populism and liberalism is as detrimental to political theorists trying to specify the ideological coordinates of populism, as to empirical researchers. Preference will be given to Panels that reflect the diversity of the ECPR research community in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, rank and regional specialization. We especially invite Panels and Papers exploring one or several of the following cluster of issues: ▪️ Individuals’ attitudes towards liberalism This first cluster explores the micro-foundations of the relation between populism and liberalism. What are the attitudes of individuals who support populist leaders and movements regarding traditional features of liberalism (e.g. pluralism, judicial independence, etc.)? How do they compare in different historical and geographical settings and with voters of more traditional parties? ▪️ Populist discourses about liberalism How do populist leaders, parties and movements frame their relation to political liberalism, in public speeches or party manifestos? How do they communicate on this relation while campaigning or while governing? Do they explicitly depart from liberalism, or do they instead adopt more nuanced stances? Does it vary along left-right lines? And how do these discourses evolve over time and in different contexts? For instance, Papers could empirically analyze the uses of the term illiberalism, popularized in a speech by Viktor Orbán and reused many times since, or of related, concepts. ▪️ Anti-liberal principles and values The label 'illiberalism' has the effect of playing down the tensions between populism and liberalism. Yet, populist politics have often been described as 'anti-liberal', because they contradict basic liberal principles and values more directly than the 'illiberal' label suggests. How do these tensions play out over time and in different contexts? Which liberal principles and values are specifically targeted by populists? And on which set of ideas or intellectual traditions, if any, do populist leaders rely on to attack liberalism? ▪️ Post-liberal strategies and practices When analyzing the relations between populism and political liberalism, we should consider that populist regimes, to some extent at least, make use of liberal institutions and practices to achieve their goals. For instance, rather than simply refusing the authority of courts, they often try to use them in support of their claims – through rewriting the rules of procedures, or simply by packing them. With a view to left-wing movements in Latin America, this phenomenon has sometimes been analyzed as signalling a turn towards 'post-liberalism'. In this regard, this Panel welcomes Papers analyzing such strategies of using liberal institutions and practices. ▪️ Methodological and conceptual challenges This Panel invites reflections on the methodologies, and categories, used to analyze populism. How can the relation between populist politics and political liberalism be conceptualized and empirically analyzed anew? How to allow for better empirical and theoretical cooperation on these issues? What about the role of comparison in studying populist movements?