THE RISE OF POPULISM IN EUROPE

Populism is the most important political phenomenon of our times. Particularly in Europe, populism has produced relevant effects on institutions and on social and political approaches to contemporary challenges.The ‘popular proliferation’ of the populist cultural vision of society clearly denotes that the populist approach is ‘hegemonic’ in today 's societies.

The theoretical and academic debate about the populist phenomenon is related to the correct categorisation of this political factor. With reference to the pure textual data, the first impression is that of a political phenomenon that places the people at the centre of its own ideological approach. In this way, in a well-known 1966 essay, the Italian academic scholar Giovanni Sartori was the first to argue the thesis of the ‘anti-system party’, understood as a political and social force organised in a political party that places itself in a radical antagonism to the national and supranational economic, social and political framework (i.e. political order).

However, in recent times, a classic academic definition of populism (that has become a usual analytical starting point among the scholars) is advanced by Cas Mudde, according to which populism must be identified as ’ an ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, “the pure people” versus “the corrupt elite”, and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will) of the people ‘. We are talking about a real one ’ barrier axiom ‘, based on a rigid (Manichean) division between ‘us’ and ‘them’, demos and ruling elites, right and wrong, democratic and antidemocratic. The ‘barrier axiom’ is a fundamental pillar in the populist rhetoric. Populists need an enemy to attack – a political and social antagonist that has triggered the difficulties of society – and populists therefore propose themselves as the only political alternative which is legitimised by the people and capable of solving social issues. The only popular and political alternative, legitimised by the popular consensus.

In this framework, the academic debate has also focused on the relationship between the democratic form of government and populism, qualifying it in terms of ‘democratic pathology’ ( liberal approach), the ‘essential element of democracy’ (radical approach) and the ‘democratic ambivalence’ (minimal approach).