Populism versus democracy
Populism versus democracy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1467-9248.2007.00657.x
复制
发表时间：
2007-06-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Rummens, Stefan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Abts, Koen;Rummens, Stefan
本文对民粹主义逻辑和（宪政）民主逻辑进行了概念上的比较分析。民粹主义被定义为一种薄中心的意识形态，主张人民作为一个同质体的主权统治。这种意识形态的逻辑在卡尔·施密特的工作中得到了进一步的发展，并被证明产生了民粹主义的所有特征。民主的逻辑是在克劳德·勒福特（Claude Lefort）的著作的基础上进行分析的，并将其定义为一种权力中心仍然是空的政权。这种分析取代了宪政民主的普遍模式，它是宪法和民主支柱的矛盾结合。这种双支柱模式未能理解（宪政）民主逻辑的内在一致性和一些主要特征。因此，双支柱方法使人们对民粹主义的理解与宪政民主的民主承诺是持续的。相反，我们的分析将民粹主义解释为关闭民主的空白之地。这凸显了民粹主义逻辑与民主逻辑之间的对抗性不连续性。
This article provides a comparative conceptual analysis of the logic of populism and the logic of (constitutional) democracy. Populism is defined as a thin-centered ideology which advocates the sovereign rule of the people as a homogeneous body. The logic of this ideology is further developed in reference to the work of Carl Schmitt and is shown to generate all the characteristics typically ascribed to populism. The logic of democracy is analyzed on the basis of the work of Claude Lefort and defined as a regime in which the locus of power remains an empty place. This analysis replaces the widespread model of constitutional democracy as a paradoxical combination of a constitutional and a democratic pillar. This two-pillar model fails to appreciate the internal coherence and some of the main features of the (constitutional) democratic logic. Thereby, the two-pillar approach gives rise to an understanding of populism as continuous with the democratic promise of constitutional democracy. In contrast, our analysis explains populism as the closure of the empty place of democracy. This highlights the antagonistic discontinuity between the logic of populism and the logic of democracy.