THE APPLICATION OF “POPULISM” CONCEPTS IN LATIN AMERICA

the need to classify, and not disqualifying

Abstract

Ever since authors such as Germani (1962), Di Tella (1969) and Ianni (1975) applied the notion of populism in Latin America, much has been written on the subject. The concept stretched out so much that it has served to define the most dissimilar politicians. In the absence of socioeconomic conditions described by classical formulations, the strategy adopted is to restrict the category to the political dimension. Such a procedure, however, is not capable of describing adequate particular attributes that populism would be a specific phenomenon. At the same time, the concept is so deeply embedded in our society that it is not feasible to abandon it. The proposed solution is to evaluate in which characteristics a politician reaches and moves away from the paradigmatic cases of the past. Thus, it can be populist in some respects and not in others. In such a procedure, we arrive at a classification in which a leader shows more or less attributes described by classical definitions, eliminating the need for constant reformulation of the concept to adapt it to new circumstances. Also, there would be less space to which the label of populist would continue to serve to disqualify Latin American politicians. The article discusses recent and classic settings applied to Latin America and assesses the empirical viability of focusing on the political dimension strategy.