Should history change the way we think about populism?

Alan de Bromhead and Kevin O'Rourke

Economic History Review, 2024, vol. 77, issue 3, 1086-1109

Abstract: This paper asks whether history should change the way in which economists and economic historians think about populism. We use Müller's definition, according to which populism is ‘an exclusionary form of identity politics, which is why it poses a threat to democracy’. We make three historical arguments. First, late‐nineteenth‐century US Populists were not populist. Second, there is no necessary relationship between populism and anti‐globalization sentiment. Third, economists have sometimes been on the wrong side of important policy debates involving opponents rightly or wrongly described as populist. History encourages us to avoid an overly simplistic view of populism and its correlates.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/ehr.13300

Related works:
Working Paper: Should history change the way we think about populism? (2023)
Working Paper: Should History Change The Way We Think About Populism? (2023)
Working Paper: Should history change the way we think about populism? (2023)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ehsrev:v:77:y:2024:i:3:p:1086-1109

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0013-0117

Access Statistics for this article

Economic History Review is currently edited by Stephen Broadberry

More articles in Economic History Review from Economic History Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().