Foreword Editor‐in‐Chief

• Date: 01 May 2019
• Author: Clifford W. Cobb
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12284
• Published date: 01 May 2019

Foreword

Editor-in-Ch ief

By Clifford W. Cobb

I have learned a great deal from a careful reading of the articles in

this issue. Populism is a confusing topic. No single author has fully

comprehended it. So, it is genuinely helpful to have a number of

perspectives on it from the disciplines represented here. Historians,

ethnographers, political scientists, sociologists, and economists all

have something to contribute to an understanding of this phenome-

non. Alexandra Lough has skillfully edited the articles into a usable

compilation, but readers will still have to take responsibility for weav-

ing them together into a unified narrative, if that is possible.

Populism is necessarily a modern phenomenon. It is antagonistic

toward the existing party system in any country. There can be no pop-

ulism where there are no dominant political parties because populism

inevitably reacts against the perceived failure of mainstream parties.

The leadership of dominant political parties puts obstacles to change

in place, and populists seek to overcome those obstacles. Populism is

thus inherently disruptive, regardless of the ideology of any populist

group. It challenges the politics of equilibrium with the politics of

disequilibrium. People who feel secure with the status quo inevitably

oppose populist movements.

The fundamental problem that all forms of populism encounter is

the “iron law of oligarchy,” an expression first formulated by Robert

Michels ([1915] 2001: 224–235). By that expression, Michels meant

that the decisions of any group will be largely determined by a small

minority of its members, however hard the group strives to be demo-

cratic and transparent. For extended periods, the membership or the

populace tolerates this situation and allows the oligarchs to govern

without hindrance. But, from time to time, conditions arise that are

intolerable, and the populace rises up in anger, topples the existing

order, and creates a new order. This new order imagines itself to

be truly democratic, until a new group of leaders gains power and

repeats the old story.

American Jour nal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 78, No. 3 (May, 2 019).

DOI: 10 .1111/ajes.122 84

© 2019 American Journa l of Economics and Sociology, Inc.