THE POPULIST TWIST

The word “twist” indicates a turn movement occasioning change but also distortion or perversion. Populism twists democratic representation. It claims for more popular power and accountability, reinforcing democratic demands. But it also stresses leadership and represses the same claim for more accountability, when it comes to the populist leader.  

In doing so, the populist twist explores the intrinsic tensions within democratic representation: the tension between representation and popular sovereignty and between horizontality and verticality between the representative and the represented. Democratic representatives are equal to the citizens (horizontal relationship) but also decide for the people (vertical relationship).  

By operating within this tension, populist leaders present themselves as “one of the people” while simultaneously claiming to guide the people. The popular twist radicalizes and suppresses the democratic tension. Radicalization is generated by the demand for more popular power (horizontality), eclipsing by the promotion of strong leadership (verticality).  

A legitimizing element of the populist twist is the supposed similarity between the leader and the people. The leader “belongs” to the people and shares their will and thoughts. This legitimizes unquestioned trust, obscuring any tension between horizontality and verticality. Following the populist logic, if leaders and followers share a mimetic relationship, and the people trust the leader without question, why must the people demand transparency and accountability?    

The populist twist has consequences for democratic representation. It obfuscates democratic accountability, strengthening verticality. Notice that populism does not destroy accountability as authoritarianism and totalitarianism do. However, if the balance shifts too much towards the authorization side and becomes too vertical, authoritarian and totalitarian forms of leadership can ensue. 

Arditi, Benjamin. 2005. “Populism as an Internal Periphery of Democratic Politics.” In Populism and the Mirror of Democracy, edited by Francisco Panizza. London: Verso, pp. 72–89. 

Borowiak, Craig T. 2011 Accountability and Democracy. The Pitfalls and Promise of Popular Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Canovan, Margaret. 1999 “‘Trust the People!’ Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy”. In: Political Studies, XLVII: 2-16. 

de la Torre, Carlos 2013. “The People, Populism, and The Leader’s Semi-Embodied Power”; Rubrica Contemporanea, Vol. 2, Nr. 3: 5-20. 

Paula Diehl. 2018. Twisting Representation; in: Carlos de la Torre (Hrsg.): Handbook of Global Populism. Routledge, pp. 129-143. 

Paula Diehl. 2019. The Populist Twist. The Relationship Between the Leader and the People in Populism; In: Johannes Pollak/ Dario Castiglione (ed.): Making Present. Theorizing the new Politics of Representation, University of Chicago Press, pp. 110-137. 

Diehl, Paula. 2021. The Body in Populism. In: Heinisch, Reinhard/ Holtz-Bacha. Christine/ Mazzoleni, Oscar (eds.): Political Populism: A Handbook. Nomos/Bloomsbury, pp. 515-526. 

Diehl, Paula & Bargetz, Brigitte (ed.). 2024. The Complexity of Populism: New Approaches and Methods. Routledge. 

Manin, Bernard. 1997. The principles of representative government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Meny, Yves & Surel, Yves. 2000. Par le peuple, pour le peuple. Le populisme et les démocraties. Fayard. 

O’Donnell, Guillermo. 1994. “Delegative Democracy.” Journal of Democracy 5 (1): 55–69. 

Panizza, Francisco (ed.). 2005. Populism and the Mirror of Democracy. London: Verso. 

Pitkin, Hanna F. 1972. The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press. 

Schedler, Andreas. 1999. “Conceptualizing Accountability.” In The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies, edited by Andreas Schedler, Larry Diamon, and Marc F. Plattner, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, pp- 13–27. 

Urbinati, Nadia. 1998. “Democracy and Populism.” Constellations 5 (1): 110–24.