Populism and Western democracy-paper代写

留学生paper代写精选范文：“Populism and Western democracy”，这篇论文讨论了民粹主义与西方民主。其实大家对民粹主义的理解都不一样，相同的只有民粹主义都对精英阶层和主流的政治充满了敌意。在亚洲，基本上已经看不到民粹主义的影子了，但在欧洲，民粹主义正在稳步发展。归根结底，其实民粹主义是西方民主自身机制的结果。

Populism and democratic relationship that concerns both the populist social and political causes for the development of understanding, but also relates to the traditional understanding of the mechanism and the development of democratic politics in Europe. On this issue, mainstream political parties, the media and the academic community's position is different. Mainstream society resorting to a democracy defending Europe's mainstream values and resist populist at the same time, ignoring the reflection on the existing democratic system.

In recent years, European populism, in particular the strong rise of the right-wing populist political forces challenging the established political order in Europe, in order to cast a shadow on the future of the European Union. Mainstream political discourse in Europe becomes more and more prominent populist threat to European democracy. But in the relationship between populism and democracy on this core issue, mainstream political parties and the media discussion, many of the ambiguities. This ambiguity limits the European mainstream society's understanding of their traditional institutional crisis, which also limits mainstream political parties to address the challenges of a populist political space.

The past 20 years, along with some political force is classified as a populist political party's rise and rapid development of the European Community the sense of threat from populism is also growing strongly. But populism is a generic term used to refer to any existing system or arrangement of political behavior. In Europe, people tend to associate all kinds of anti-globalisation, anti-EU advocates of all classified as populist. Indeed, populism in Europe not only includes the alleged right-wing populism, but also a lot of populism from the left-wing radical faction. Their political demand varies greatly.

It also makes populist and democratic relationship that issue has become more complicated. For the actors of the political movement, populist and democratic relations in different, even very different evaluations is mainly decided by the political stance. Famous contemporary liberal scholars darenduofu puts it, "to one person is a populist, is democracy for another, and vice versa." Similarly, scholars of cognitive dissonance is often caused by different perspective.

The mainstream media as well as politicians in the language of populism is often labelled a clear anti-democratic political labels. Defenders of mainstream political party or conservatives, populist politics is not only a threat to the established political order, a challenge to the traditional European principles of democracy. Its anti-establishment, anti-elitist are put in against representative democracy. Its political leanings, intransigent political polarization, as well as violations against vulnerable minority groups, are contrary to the established mainstream values, is a threat to democracy. It is not hard to understand, mainstream European social and mainstream media populism is the main crusade. Public calls for strengthening the unity of democratic forces to resist populist when even it is identical to the history of fascism.

But the tabbed view ignores a populist supporter of their discourse appeal, ignore the diversity reflects populist demands posed by differences also ignores the current European right-wing populist with a history of extreme populism is different. In populist discourse, "elite", formed, national, institutional, often lead to crisis, the root causes of corruption and dysfunction. Hostile to political parties and organizations are requested as far as possible the power in the hands of citizens. To its supporters, the populism of oligarchs the bureaucratic politics, most of the democratic public institutions a response to the lack of democratic legitimacy. But under the common forms of anti-establishment, the populism of the left and right tend to express different political demands. As for anti-globalisation, anti-EU, right-wing populist appeal to a nativism with a narrow nationalism, it will non-native populations classified as native "people" opposed to "the other" and the left-wing populist neo-liberal system is aimed at the EU. Some left-wing populist political party in Europe's economic crisis are also in development under the banner of anti-austerity. Its aspirations of popular sovereignty requires broader, more direct democratic participation. Experience also shows that the Eurosceptic left-wing populism in Europe greater emphasis on democratic participation, with particular emphasis on people's right to petition, and the right-wing populism is not.

These views and also through some academic language. There are two main views. A more negative view of the populist and democratic relationships. This is mainly based on populism as a thought and behavior of a kind of political understanding. As an ideology, populism "fundamentally divided into two homogeneous society and opposition groups, namely the ' innocent people ' on ' corrupt elite ', and that politics should be the expression of the General will of the people. "This dualistic world view – which is a kind of monism worldview-is is incompatible with the modern democratic pluralism promised by the West. And as a form of politics, populism often resort to some method of demagogue. In order to strengthen people's sense of identity, populist appeal and would often rely on a popular language, which is characterized by coarse, extremely simplistic and exaggerated words and deeds. Some political science textbooks, or even directly define populism as a demagogic political way, which resorted to those who feel themselves to be rich and power exploitation and oppression, prejudice and emotion. And this is against the so-called democratic political culture.

Another relatively neutral point of view, populism itself is neither democracy nor democracy-the different forms of social movements can claim to represent the people and appeal to direct forms of participation – but at least it is compatible with democracy. Tantamount to incitement of populism is too simple, because to use smart technologies, using flattery and promises to attract voters, this is common practice in contemporary democracies. Despite the populist and there are big differences between the liberal view, but this does not necessarily lead to populism and confrontation of liberal democracy. Populism is evident distrust of representation, but it does not necessarily translate into denying democratic. It said the need for participatory democracy, which is both representative democracy cannot meet. Problem is that the populist movement of charismatic leaders or "strongman" dependence may contribute to the potentially authoritarian tendencies, especially in a democratic system under the environment of weak.

European populism and democracy involves the relation of a theoretical framework to explain the problem. In Europe, about populism, especially interpretation of right-wing populism long known as "normal sickness," the dominant paradigm. According to this theory, right-wing populism is an anomaly in modern democracies of Western Europe. In "normal" circumstances, democratic Western countries only very few people believe that the right-wing populist political requirements. Certain social changes-such as globalization, risk society-led to a "winner" and "loser" between the divisions, which often irrational vote for populist political party way to express anger and protest. According to this understanding, the populist residue of a morbid, is deviated from the mainstream ideology.

But this frame cannot explain why more and more people in Europe-they are no longer just small part of the population – in the community may accept and recognize those with obvious biased characteristic populist ideas. Some scholars also investigated by means of a series of social survey data public positions, indicating normal sickness theory does not agree with the analysis. Of the populist radical right-wing thought and does not deviate from the mainstream ideology of Western democracy, populist right-wing attitudes are not owned by minorities in Europe. Hence proposed a new understanding of the populist interpretation, that is right-wing populism can best be understood as a "pathological to normal", it connected with the concept of mainstreaming, to a large extent consistent with public attitudes and policy positions.

Morbid theory is not necessarily normal to say that radical right-wing populism is part of the mainstream of contemporary democratic society, but rather, from ideologies and from public view, it reflected the mainstream ideas of radicalization. Experience has shown that the populist radical right-wing ideology has also been shared by mainstream society, albeit in a milder form. This paradigm shift to understanding the populist radical right relationship between Western democracy and meaningful. The key difference between the two is not a fundamental opposition, but of degree, meaning that the same concept of the difference between moderate and radical. Moreover, populist radical right-wing attitudes and perceptions are not marginalized. They are fairly common, than the populist radical right-wing parties expressed more moderate. In fact, as the representative of this theory, the Dutch scholar Kasi·mude raises an important concept as early as 2004, that populism has become a kind of Zeitgeist, and it's not just limited to a handful of marginalized groups, the discourse and concept has in varying degrees, to mainstream society, including mainstream parties absorb and express.

Another problem associated with this theoretical framework are established under the framework of democracy, populism is an inevitable phenomenon? In this regard, the British scholar magelite·kanawan from another angle, that is the two faces of Western democracy presented reasonable explanations in terms of. In her view, democracy has two faces. A card belonging to the salvation of, another is practicality. The former can easily lead to a democratic deficit, which can easily lead to deviant behaviour. Democratic fracture and there is a tension between these two. Easy populism appears here. This fault and tension provides the soil for breeding ground for populist. Populism is a reaction to the asymmetry caused by the two. In all these cases, a populist inspired Democratic Salvation side of intervention, to corrections caused by the pragmatism of deviant behavior. When the democratic aura and dirty political deal between the fracture is too large when the populist tends to be developed to fill the vacuum, and its commitment to democratic reform to replace the dirty world of political parties. Populist claims authorized for those charming leader, because they promise to break the bureaucracy and politics to a more personalized way.

In other words, populism is an inevitable result of Western democracy mechanism. Was this sense, Cana believes, "is a projection of the same democratic populism" that democracy is "associated with it from the" remade the democratic populism, despite being his special perspective distortion characteristics.

As emphasized by some scholars in Europe, populism, the researcher's role was not to refute populism and its idealistic, but critical thinking in Europe populist forms of discontent against the background of democratic and anti-democratic after. Admit that populism is a reaction to the elitist democratic deficit, need to further review the problems with Europe's democratic system. And this is mainstream in Europe using tabbed by assertions of anti-democratic populism to ignore. Such an effort requires at least the following three aspects of work.

First address both vulnerabilities of the institutional arrangements of a democratic system, especially political party system and the problems it is very difficult to actually meet the needs of people's participation in politics. European representative democracy shown by the populist suspicion is based on the existing system and effect of discontent. This is reflected in the mainstream political parties as the core on the dissatisfaction of party politics. Originally, as an important modern democratic system of political parties expressed different political functions, including their representative functions, functions and governance functions. But under the existing electoral system, mainstream parties on the one hand increasing the party's governance capability and diluted the traditional representative and expressive functions, on the other hand in the growing convergence on major policy issues. Population of pluralistic interests through both political parties structures and institutional arrangements to express, it was anti-establishment populism an important motivation for an alternative choice for voters. European mainstream if not effectively meet the expanding opportunities for people's participation in politics and the effectiveness of its efforts to impede the development of political populism is doubtful.

Secondly, the cleaning up of neo-liberal politics of hegemony. In the past decades, the political logic of neo-liberalism eroded the Western democratic system functions, has led to serious social imbalances, its hegemony and its infiltration by way of institutionalization in the European countries and the EU's institutional construction. In this procedure, a de facto "there's no other way" mindset leading countries and the EU's political process, it also contains a negative trend of democratic pluralistic choice. But in the EU on the issue, mainstream political parties can't seem to find a clean path to the effects of neo-liberal hegemony. This is by far the EU's mainstream political parties the most awkward place. Both the political and policy the lack of real choice of policies to meet the values of pluralism, which helped the spread of populist sentiment.

Third, resist the populist negative effects but also the democratic reconstruction. Populism for some people, no matter how obnoxious, representative democracy must coexist against elitism and populism. For the current mainstream European society, with some populist political parties taking part in or even leading the ruling, only just resisted populist manner is not enough, we need research on populist political party in power brought or could bring problems. Itself mean the reconstruction of a democratic, or it will lead to mainstream politics in response to the lead of the populist roots of democratic reconstruction? Once these forces into the Government of anti-establishment appeal, they also could retain its anti-establishment stance? In addition, those who oppose the populist party of the ruling coalition also uses populist language, and the resulting "democratic populism" spiral? Does this mean that a new political culture? In other words, the refactoring is not just limited to traditional democratic democratic theory and system paradigm requires constructive sense into some reasonable demands of populism in the reconstruction process. Meanwhile, no matter what form reconstruction of democracy, its core is and give people alternative options.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创留学生作业代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务assignment代写、essay代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的论文代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多，paper代写范文 提供美国作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。-ZR