Abstract
This chapter introduces Latin American populism in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. In the first section we examine economic, political, and critical approaches to populism’s relationship with liberal democracy, a common concern throughout the literature on the topic. These approaches, we argue, explicitly or implicitly carry a teleological and ultimately Eurocentric bias of “democratization” that understands populism as a pathological condition of underdeveloped peoples and places. Among other problematic attributes, these accounts miss the interdependencies between populism and extractivist state formations. Extractivist states, we argue, better explain the sort of democratic accountability gaps that engender populist reactions. In the second section, we explore in greater detail how ostensibly populist sequences relate to political and ecological accountability. The chapter concludes with a call for rethinking populism along several dimensions and as nested within the broader context of extractivism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
There were of course predecessors. Aníbal Quijano (1998) traces the historical origins of the term populism to the nineteenth century Populist party in the United States, a predominantly agrarian organization and movement that fought fluctuations in crop prices, and the Russian narodniki of the nineteenth century. In the US, ‘populism’ was conceptually elaborated as early as 1894 by Thorstein Veblen (1894) to describe the politics of “an intellectually undisciplined populace” susceptible to demagogic manipulation (459). The narodniki, a peasant movement of the 1860s and 1870s that briefly drew the loyalties of a young Leon Trotsky, responded to Russia’s tortured transition from feudal society to more fully consolidated capitalist logics of ownership and production. Knowledgeable of and known to socialist and anarchist thought of the day, the narodniki conceived of the peasantry as a truly revolutionary class, capable of propelling Russia to socialism without passing through the ‘stages’ of economic and political development (Quijano 1998: 174–176). These nineteenth century populisms illustrate two important ways in which the term has always been loaded with normative meaning, long before its incorporation into conceptual and theoretical arsenals of contemporary social sciences. In Veblen’s case, populism betrays a fear of the unwashed masses, ‘the people’—a rather common preoccupation of his age. Just one year later (and first translated into English in 1896), Gustave Le Bon’s (2002) highly influential The Crowd was published in Paris, a study that articulated the growing anxieties and preoccupations of emerging ‘mass psychology.’ Le Bon’s basic thesis, that when combined in a mass, individuals (no matter how critical, learned, or dispassionate they may be in isolation) de-evolve from civilization to barbarism, is also seen in Veblen’s concern of the two-sided deterioration of the US polity expressed in his entry on populism. This aspect—fear or distrust of the (often newly enfranchised or mobilized) masses, without the mediating, mitigating, and disciplining power of established institutions—informs most subsequent and contemporary theorizations of populism in Latin American politics.
- 2.
- 3.
For more on Carlos Andrés Pérez and neoliberalization in Venezuela, see the following chapter.
References
Acosta, A. (2016). Post-Extractivismo: Entre el Discuro y la Praxis: Algunas Reflexiones Gruesas para la Acción. Ciencia Política, 11(21), 287–332.
Antias, P. (2018). Limits to decolonization: Indigeneity, territory, and hydrocarbon politics in the Bolivian Chaco. Cornell University Press.
Arditi, B. (2007). Politics on the edges of liberalism: Difference, Populism, revolution, agitation. Edinburgh University Press.
Ashford, J. (2019, October 3). What is eco-fascism? The Week UK. https://www.theweek.co.uk/103616/what-is-eco-fascism. Accessed 18 December 2020.
Barr, R. (2003). The persistence of neopopulism in Peru: From Fujimori to Toledo. Third World Quarterly, 24(6), 1161–1178.
Beasley-Murray, J. (2010). Posthegemony: Political theory and Latin America. University of Minnesota Press.
Becker, M. (2013). The stormy relations between Rafael Correa and social movements in Ecuador. Latin American Perspectives, 40(3), 43–62.
Berrios, R., Marak, A., & Morgenstern, S. (2011). Explaining hydrocarbon nationalization in Latin America: Economics and political ideology. Review of International Political Economy, 18(5), 673–697.
Brienen, M. (2017). A populism of indignities: Bolivian populism under Evo Morales. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 23, 77–92.
Brown, M. B. (2014). Climate science, populism, and the democracy of rejection. In D. A. Crow & M. T. Boykoff (Eds.), Culture, politics and climate change (pp. 129–145). Routledge.
Bury, J. (2005). Mining mountains: Neoliberalism, land tenure, livelihoods, and the new Peruvian mining industry in Cajamarca. Environment and Planning A, 37, 221–239.
Canovan, M. (1999). Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies, 47(1), 2–16.
Castañeda, J. (2006). Latin America’s left turn. Foreign Affairs, 85(3), 28–43.
Conniff, M. (1999). Populism in Latin America. University of Alabama Press.
Corrales, J., & Penfold, M. (2015). Dragon in the tropics: Venezuela and the legacy of Hugo Chávez. Brookings Institution.
Dahl, R. A. (1978). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. Yale University Press.
De la Torre, C. (2010). Populist seduction in Latin America. Ohio State University Press.
De la Torre, C. (2013). Latin America’s authoritarian drift: Technocratic populism in Ecuador. Journal of Democracy, 24(3), 33–46.
De la Torre, C., & Ortiz Lemos, A. (2016). Populist polarization and the slow death of democracy in Ecuador. Democratization, 23(2), 221–241.
DiTella, T. S. (1965). Populismo y reforma en América Latina. Desarrollo Económico, 6, 391–425.
Dussel, E. (2006). 20 tesis de política. Siglo XXI.
Ehrlich, P. (1971). The population bomb. Ballentine Books.
Ehrlich, P., & Ehrlich, A. (2009). The population bomb: Revisited. The Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development, 1(3), 5–13.
Eisenstadt, T., & West, J. K. (2019). Who speaks for nature? Indigenous movements, public opinion, and the petro state in Ecuador. Oxford University Press.
Ellner, S. (2002). The tenuous credtials of Latin American democracy in the age of neoliberalism. Rethinking Marxism, 14(3), 76–93.
Escobar, A. (2010). Latin America at a crossroads: Alternative modernizations, post-liberalism, or post-development. Cultural Studies, 24(1), 1–65.
Forchtner, B., & Kølvraa, C. (2015). The nature of nationalism: Populist radical right parties on countryside and climate. Nature and Culture, 10(2), 199–224.
García-Guadilla, M. P. (2009). Ecosocialismo del siglo XXI y modelo de desarrollo bolivariano: los mitos de la sustentabilidad ambiental y de la democracia participativa en venezuela. Revista Venezolana de Economía y Ciencias Sociales, 15(1), 187–223.
Germani, G. (1973). Populismo y contradicciones de clase en Latinoamérica. SA Mexico.
Gudynas, E. (2010). The new extractivism of the 21st century: Ten urgent theses about extractivism in relation to current South American progressivism. Americas Program Report. https://www.americas.org/6615/.
Gudynas, E. (2015). Extractivismos: ecología, economía y política de un modo de entender el desarrollo y la naturaleza. Centro de Documentación e Información Bolívia.
Kenney-Lazar, M. (2019). Neoliberalizing authoritarian environmental governance in (post)socialist Laos. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(2), 338–348.
Kingsbury, D. V. (2015). Populism as post-politics: Ernesto Laclau, hegemony, and the limits of democracy. Radical Philosophy Review, 19, 569–591.
Kingsbury, D. V. (2016). Oil’s colonial residues: Geopolitics, identity, and resistance in Venezuela. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 35(4), 423–436.
Knight, A. (1998). Populism and neopopulism in Latin America, especially Mexico. Journal of Latin American Studies, 40(2), 223–248.
Kojola, E. (2018). Bringing back the mines and a way of life: Populism and the politics of extraction. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(2), 371–381.
Laclau, E. (2005). On populist reason. Verso.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. Verso Trade.
Le Bon, G. (2002 [1896]). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. Dover.
Levitsky, S., & Loxton, J. (2013). Populism and competitive authoritarianism in the Andes. Democratization, 20(1), 107–136.
Lockwood, M. (2018). Right-wing populism and the climate change agenda: Exploring the linkages. Environmental Politics, 27(4), 712–732.
Lyall, A., & Valdivia, G. (2019). The speculative petro-state: Volatile oil prices and resource populism in Ecuador. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(2), 349–360.
Malm, A. (2016). Fossil capital: The rise of steam power and the roots of global warming. Verso Books.
Mann, G., & Wainright, J. (2018). Climate Leviathan: A political theory of our planetary future. Verso.
Matsen, E., Natvik, G. J., & Torvik, R. (2016). Petro populism. Journal of Development Economics, 118, 1–12.
Mazzuca, S. L. (2013). Lessons from Latin America: The rise of rentier populism. Journal of Democracy, 24(2), 108–122.
Middeldorp, N., & Le Billon, P. (2019). Deadly environmental governance: Authoritarianism, eco-populism, and the repression of environmental land defenders. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(2), 324–337.
Moreano, H., & Donoso, C. (2006). Populismo y Neopopulismo en Ecuador. Revista Opera, 6(6), 117–140.
O’Donnell, G. (1994). The state, democratization, and some conceptual problems (a Latin American view with glances at some post-communist countries). In W. C. Smith, C. H. Acuña, & E. A. Gamarra (Eds.), Latin American political economy in the age of neoliberal reform. Theoretical and comparative perspectives for the 1990s (pp. 157–180). North-South Center Press.
Panizza, F., & Miorelli, R. (2009). Populism and democracy in Latin America. Ethics & International Affairs, 23(1), 39–46.
Philip, G. (1982). Oil and politics in Latin America: Nationalist movements and state companies (Vol. 40). Cambridge University Press.
Quijano, A. (1998). La Economía Popular y Sus Caminos En América Latina. Mosca Azul Editores.
Saguin, K. (2019). Return the lake to the people: Populist political rhetoric and the fate of a resource frontier in the Philippines. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 109(2), 434–442.
Sayare, S., & De La Baume, M. (2010, December 16). In France, civil unions gain favor over marriage. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/europe/16france.html.
Svampa, M. (2015). Commodities consensus: Neoextractivism and enclosure of the commons in Latin America. South Atlantic Quarterly, 114(1), 65–82.
Terán Mantovani, E. (2014). El Fantasma de la Gran Venezuela: Un Estudio del mito y los dilemas del petro-Estado en la Revolución Bolivariana. Centro de Estudios Latinoamericanos Rómulo Gallegos.
Tsfaros, N. E. (2007). Big oil and big talk: Resource populism in international politics. SAIS Review, 27(1), 147–157.
Veblen, T. B. (1894). The Army of the Commonweal. Journal of Political Economy, 2(3), 456–461.
Weyland, K. (1996). Neopopulism and neoliberalism in Latin America: Unexpected affinities. Studies in Comparative International Development, 31(3), 3–31.
Weyland, K. (2003). Neopopulism and neoliberalism in Latin America: How much affinity? Third World Quarterly, 24, 1095–1115.
Weyland, K. (2013). Latin America’s authoritarian drift: The threat from the populist Left. Journal of Democracy, 24(3), 18–32.
Wilson, J. (2019, March 19). Eco-fascism is undergoing a revival in the fetid culture of the extreme right. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2019/mar/20/eco-fascism-is-undergoing-a-revival-in-the-fetid-culture-of-the-extreme-right.
Zimmerman, M. E. (2004). Ecofascism: An enduring temptation. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology, 4, 1–30.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kramarz, T., Kingsbury, D. (2021). The Limits of Populism as Causal Explanation. In: Populist Moments and Extractivist States in Venezuela and Ecuador. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70963-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70963-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-70962-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-70963-1
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)