Populism and Late Liberalism

• Date: 01 September 2011
• DOI: 10.1177/0002716211406079
• Published date: 01 September 2011
• Author: Jean Comroff

ANNALS, AAPSS, 637, September 2011 99

“Populism,” a key trope of our times, is sometimes a

term of analysis and critique, but more often a label of

disparagement and blame. While many activists claim

to be “of the people” or “for the people,” most would

think twice about dubbing themselves “populist” as

such. Yet it is precisely the slipperiness of the term that

makes it so productive in political rhetoric. Why the

increasing appeal of the trope? Given its widespread,

contentious deployment, can it retain any usefulness as

a tool of analysis—even critical engagement? Drawing

on a range of current examples, the author argues (1)

that populism in some form is a necessary condition of

all antiestablishment movements, progressive or con-

servative; (2) that it is in itself never enough to fuel

sustained, politically constructive mobilization; and (3)

that in all these respects, populism seems to be taking

on particular, disquieting features in late modern times.

Keywords: liberalism; politics; populism

The Shifter

“Populism,” writes Ernesto Laclau (2005,

67), “is the royal road to understanding . . . the

ontological constitution of the political as such.”

Certainly, whatever else it may be, populism is

very much a trope of our times. Sometimes a

Populism and

Late

Liberalism:

A Special

Affinity?

By

JEAN COMAROFF

Jean Comaroff is the Bernard E. and Ellen C. Sunny

Distinguished Service Professor of Anthropology at the

University of Chicago and honorary professor at the

University of Cape Town. Recent publications (with

John L. Comaroff and others) include Law and Disorder

in the Postcolony (University of Chicago Press 2006);

Ethnicity, Inc. (University of Chicago Press 2009);

Zombies et Frontières à l’Ère Neoliberale (Les Prairies

Ordinaires 2010); and Theory from the South, or How

Europe Is Evolving toward Africa (Paradigm 2011).

NOTE: An earlier version of this article was presented

as an opening statement for a roundtable on populism,

held at WISER, the University of the Witwatersrand,

on July 6, 2009, as part of the Johannesburg School of

Theory of Criticism. This version was written at the

Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Study, whose gen-

erous support is gratefully acknowledged.

DOI: 10.1177/0002716211406079