Talk:Populism

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Populism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Sociology High‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Social and political High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy

Politics High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Populism was copied or moved into Populism in Europe with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Section sizes

Section size for Populism (48 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	5,240	5,240
Etymology and terminology	6,273	12,769
Use in academia	6,496	6,496
Ideational definition	8,042	36,351
Right and left-wing	4,941	4,941
"The people"	7,206	7,206
"The elite"	9,918	9,918
General will	3,269	3,269
Versus elitism and pluralism	2,975	2,975
Other definitions	10,668	10,668
Demand-side factors	1,288	13,583
Economic grievance	4,949	4,949
Modernisation	2,147	2,147
Cultural backlash	4,022	4,022
Recent democratization	1,177	1,177
Supply-side factors	4,590	4,590
Voluntarism	3,292	3,292
Mobilisation	2,159	26,518
Leaders	2,210	18,931
Rhetorical styles	7,866	7,866
Media	6,625	6,625
Electoral systems	2,230	2,230
Political parties	2,572	2,572
Social movements	2,856	2,856
Other themes	17	23,616
Democracy	7,337	7,337
Mainstream responses	8,514	8,514
Authoritarianism	7,748	7,748
History	3,930	50,569
Europe	45	14,367
19th and 20th centuries	5,316	5,316
21st century	9,006	9,006
North America	11,251	11,251
Latin America	4,077	4,077
Oceania	4,288	4,288
Sub-Saharan Africa	1,676	1,676
Asia and the Arab world	2,075	2,075
Late 20th- and early 21st-century growth	8,905	8,905
See also	611	611
References	18	13,396
Notes	25	25
Bibliography	13,353	13,353
Further reading	21	14,209
General	7,052	7,052
Europe	2,601	2,601
Latin America	1,218	1,218
United States	3,317	3,317
External links	649	649
Total	216,061	216,061

Potential COI Declaration

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Communitarian703 (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

Diversifying references

It seems 50+% of the citations seem to refer to a single book by Mudde & Rovira Kaltwasser (which is itself extremely short). I noticed that somebody recently tried to change some of these citations to the original academic texts, and immediately got reverted. Having a wide range of sources is very important for verification, as well as by offering readers more directions for further research. So I think instead of shutting down such efforts, we should try and diversify the citations. Most the information in the aforementioned book is taken from existing research, so this should not be too hard. Keepcalmandchill (talk) 09:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Im surprised this hasn't gotten more attention, the amount of references to that book almost reads as an advert Johannes.Dickenson (talk) 03:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming section ‘mobilization’ to ‘supply-side mobilization’.

The terms ‘supply-side’ and ‘demand-side’ are used in the literature to refer to the mobilisation of populism by elite (leaders) and mass-level (supporters) actors, respectively (see for example Mudde, 2007). I suggest renaming the section so as to (1) be more accurate; and (2) allow the creation of a section for demand-side mobilization. Keepcalmandchill (talk) 10:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reversal of edits

@Beyond My Ken: Why have you reversed good faith edits without any explanation? Keepcalmandchill (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because you made extensive changes with no consensus to do so. Please see WP:BRD - you made a Bold edit, I Reverted it, now please Discuss your proposed changes here before making the changes. Re-inserting the information is not the proper next step. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, I'm talking of the reversal of edits by User:Meininger22. These do not strike to me as particularly bold, and many more bold edits have been done without discussion, as clear from the mostly empty talk page. It seems like WP:BITE to me, is all Keepcalmandchill (talk) 07:07, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially useful source

This 2019 secondary source "Political Theory of Populism" (open access) might be useful in improving this article. Elysia (AR) (talk) 16:24, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mudde and Kaltwasser

The words "Mudde" and "Kaltwasser" have been used 214 and 203 times in the article, respectively (plus one "Kaltwaasser"). This catastrophic over-reliance is probably unique throughout the whole WP in all languages and timespans. I suspect it has reached the point of copyright violation in a handful of cases.

Bad wiki

This whole page reads like a 60 year old Conservative wrote it, it's not very impartial. It describes every trait of populist thought as a generally disproven theory, not as an actual political movement/ideology. A Conservative Saudi (talk) 19:41, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Include definition(s) in the lead

Since the definition of the term "Populism" has been recently challenged, I think it makes sense to at least include it's original (post party) and most durable definition (and perhaps other, more recent attempts to extend or invert the definition). [1] Sparkie82 (t•c) 09:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recentism and revisionism

Dear editors, if you'd like to get a feel for how recent world events have dragged the term "populism" around, just look at this revision of this article [2].

(I had vague recollection of editing this article before and found this revision which I touched back in 2014.) Sparkie82 (t•c) 09:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfC of interest: Should the infobox of Sinn Féin list Left-wing populism as one of its ideologies?

A request for comment is taking place at Talk:Sinn Féin#RfC: Should the infobox of Sinn Féin list Left-wing populism as one of its ideologies? that may be of interest to watchers of this article. CeltBrowne (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Economic cost

"We identify 51 populist presidents and prime ministers from 1900 to 2020 and show that the economic cost of populism is high." [3] Benjamin (talk) 12:28, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extraordinary claim

populist figures like Italy's Beppe Grillo have been characterised as centrist and liberal

This is an extraordinary claim. Populism is not characterized by centrism, and looking at Grillo's biography page on Wikipedia, I don't see anything reflective of centrism. I believe the term may be used differently here and the sentence itself should be deleted as misleading. The secondary sources do not support the idea that Grillo is a centrist. Viriditas (talk) 22:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is much too long

WP:TOOBIG See the word guideline. This article has over 15K words. Anna (talk) 21:21, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

I think there should be a section on the impact of populism Kowal2701 (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperinflation?

As it stands this article is a form of propaganda. This, from the opening paragraph, is weaselly:

"Some economists have used the term in reference to governments which engage in substantial public spending financed by foreign loans, resulting in hyperinflation..."

There have been two or maximum three recorded examples of modern hyperinflation. As usual the Wiki stance on bad economics allows this to constantly pass through unchallenged and blocks editing. 'Some economists' (though we don't know who they are) might well have used 'populism' as a pejorative reference to fiscal policy, but the sentence above does one thing: it solidifies the neoliberal propagandist's aim of linking public spending with hyperinflation. By means of a invoking the 'foreign loans' aspect.

Daisne (talk) 13:59, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]