<div>In spite of analytical differences, populism originates from the general
discomfort with the inability of liberal democracies to fulfill their
promises. It is paradigmatic, in fact, that the recent wave of populist
electoral success can be traced back to 2007/2008, years in which a
major economic crisis violently rocked the Western economies. When
income stops growing and even starts to decline, when unemployment,
especially among the youth, increases, and when poverty expands while at
the same time income inequalities enlarge, it is not surprising that
losers will search for somebody else to represent their interests. It
happened in the 1930s. It is happening again. Moreover, dominant
political parties have so far been unable to listen and act, and the
link between rulers and ruled is broken. This inevitably attracts new
entrants.</div><div></div><div>Still, until now, within Western Europe, democratic institutions have
proven robust enough to prevent populist attitudes from growing into
authoritarian regimes. And it seems that citizens do not really wish to
change constitutional rules. The populist vote could also be interpreted
as a sort of “menace card” that citizens insert into the ballot box to
achieve better responsiveness from incumbent political parties. However,
even if the recourse to populist parties is instrumental and carried out
within the boundaries of democratic rules, their existence is already
hurting the quality of democracy. Many populist political programs, in
fact, are soaked with nationalistic and xenophobic rhetoric that so far
has eroded but not destroyed democratic institutions. Right-wing
populism is often associated with rallies and political provocations
against migrants, minorities, gypsies, or LGBTQ citizens; this decreases
civil liberties and security, and therefore corrodes political life.</div><div></div><div>Emerging new political movements in Europe and elsewhere are difficult
to classify and they seem to be unified only by their antagonism to
traditional governments, political parties, and institutions. The
comprehensive label “populism” is used more and more, but its meaning
is not yet clear. In the series that we launch with this essay, we will
try to identify some of the problems that the populist challenge puts on
the current agenda, and we invite colleagues to discuss such questions
as:</div><div></div><ul><li>Is there a convincing definition of populism able to classify new
political players? Do we need to distinguish among right-wing,
left-wing, and anti-systemic forms of populism?</li><li>What is the evidence that populist forces are really threatening
democracy?</li><li>What are the nation-specific characteristics of populist movements?</li><li>We suggest conceptualizing populism in terms of differences between
“incumbents” and “new entrants” in the political arena. Is such a
definition useful?</li><li>To what extent is the upsurge of populist parties meant to punish the
incumbent political forces or to express a genuine wish to elect the
new forces into government?</li><li>Are there new forms of participation that could reinforce the current
democratic practice and challenge populist claims about the unfitness
of liberal representative democracy?</li><li>Where does the political traction for such reformist moves come from
given the constellation of present anti-democratic forces and
structures?</li><li>If the current populism is also due to an uncontrolled economic
globalization that has disadvantaged the weak, what policies should be
adopted?</li></ul><div>Besides the need to understand populism more specifically, democrats
must respond to the challenges it poses. The response to populism cannot
be outside of the democratic framework, but should rather fully enhance
it. Radical changes should be introduced in policy-making, changes that,
so far, no government or political force has been willing to introduce.
Democracy does require new entrants, and it is fine if they come to the
fore not only as a leading force in established political parties but
also as new political parties. The basic problem is to guarantee that
political turbulence is kept within the rule of law and that it is not
detrimental to civil liberties.</div>