Grounding populism: Perspectives from the populist publics (original) (raw)

The spread of democracy across continents has been accompanied by a curious case of what have been called the “shadow” (Canovan 1999), “spectre” (Arditi 2004), “mirror” (Panizza 2005), and “internal periphery” (Arditi 2007) of democracy: populism. The surge of populism around the world has not only brought about populist leaders but also, what Curato (2017) calls, the “populist publics”. The rise of firebrand populist leaders like United States president Donald Trump, Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, and Venezuela ex-president Hugo Chavez are equally matched by the popularity of their energetic, passionate, and agitated supporters. However, it has all been too common for the populist publics to be represented in pejorative terms, even in the academic literature. They are perceived to possess archaic prejudicial views and exhibit incivilities aside from being gullible victims of populist demagoguery. Furthermore, while a thriving study of populism generated a variety of conceptual approaches, what is common among these is the absence of the populist publics in theorizing populism. As a result, presumptions on populist voting and populist attitudes thrive and is left unexamined. This thesis is an intervention in these conversations. In this study, I have explored how the populist voters themselves perceive, understand and respond to populism. Using a political ethnography of a community of supporters of populist Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte, this thesis offers a grounded re-conceptualization of populism in terms of the perceptions of the populist publics. To them, populism is understood as a political performance, characterized by an enmeshment of style, rhetoric and actions, perceived to give voice to the miserable, bring authenticity to politics, and reflect persistent political will.