Abstract

Resurgent populism – with crime as a core theme - is depicted as a dangerous perversion of liberal democracy. But by avoiding a definition of populism, critics tend to simply conflate populism with contemporary right-wing authoritarianism. Academic analysis, including criminological, is not free of such tendencies. After a brief consideration of criminology’s engagement with penal populism and the recent spread of a more far-reaching authoritarian political populism, the article argues for the need to more carefully conceptualise populism. Theoretical clarity is needed for assessing the character of contemporary populism; for grasping its drivers in, for example, neo-liberal globalization and what Crouch calls “post democracy”; and for discerning its possible future trajectories, progressive as well as regressive. It is also argued that simple denunciations of populism often reflect a complacent liberal mentality that contributes to political disaffection fuelling populist movements, and overlooks legitimate grievances, including the (often criminal) failings of liberal institutions. Rather than being a political aberration, populism, it is argued, should be seen as a “normal” dimension of democratic politics with implications for criminal policy (as well as politics at large).

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.