Skip to main content

Why is "populism" such a dirty word?

I really can't understand why "populism" is supposed to be such a dirty and dreadful word. Apparently, if a political party is "populist", it's a bad thing, and you should never vote for such a party. For some unspecified reason. It's bad because it is.

In politics, populism is doing what the people want. If a political party is populist, it's doing (or at the very least promising to do) what people want them to do. If people want something be done, they promise it will be done. If people don't like something, they promise to get rid of it.

Why do I fail to see the problem with this? Isn't this exactly what democracy should be about? Electing representatives who do what the people want?

To me it sounds like the opposite of populism would be aristocracy and oligarchy (in the disguise of democracy): A small minority ruling class doing things for their own benefit, even if it goes against the will of the people. A small elitistic group of people who think that they know best, and who disregard and disdain the lower classes, and consider them idiots who don't know what's best.

Given the two options, why exactly shouldn't I vote for the "populist" party? I don't really get it.

Comments